The labor union of Samsung Electronics has announced its second-ever strike in the company's history, demanding a change in the standards for calculating performance-based bonuses. However, concerns are mounting in the legal and industrial sectors regarding the legitimacy of the collective action, as bonuses are legally classified as non-wage benefits.
Members of the Samsung Electronics Union Joint Struggle Committee walk to the rally site during the "April 23 Struggle Resolution Rally" at the Samsung Electronics Pyeongtaek Campus in Godeok-dong, Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, April 23. / IT CHOSUN DB
Critics point out that a strike over the distribution of management profits, rather than wages, could constitute an "excessive labor dispute" that exceeds the original purpose of the three labor rights, potentially causing immense damage to the national economy.
According to industry sources on the 24th, the Supreme Court recently clarified the non-wage nature of performance bonuses in a lawsuit filed by Samsung Electronics retirees. The court ruled that Overall Performance Incentives (OPI) do not constitute "average wages," which serve as the basis for calculating severance pay. This legally confirmed that performance bonuses are a "post-settlement distribution of management results" rather than a "post-settlement of labor performance."
The Supreme Court maintains that performance bonuses are determined by external factors beyond the control of workers—such as capital costs, market conditions, and management decisions—and therefore have no direct relevance to the provision of labor. In subsequent rulings in February and April 2026 involving SK Hynix, the court repeatedly held that "management performance bonuses are not wages," suggesting a lack of legal grounds for making them a subject of labor disputes.
Legal experts emphasize that labor disputes must aim to maintain or improve working conditions. Stopping production lines to change the "rules of profit distribution" rather than wages is difficult to justify. Furthermore, paralyzing the semiconductor process—a national strategic industry—amid a global competition for hegemony is being criticized as an irresponsible move.
Banners featuring the photos of Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Jae-yong, Vice Chairman and CEO Jun Young-hyun, and President Roh Tae-moon lie on the ground during the "April 23 Struggle Resolution Rally" at the Samsung Electronics Pyeongtaek Campus in Godeok-dong, Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, April 23. / IT CHOSUN DB
The semiconductor industry’s structural characteristics also weaken the union's justification. In the semiconductor sector, where nano-scale (㎚) ultra-fine processes are key, productivity is determined by process technology and equipment scale rather than labor input. The facility investment per person reaches 666 million won. Given that equipment lifespans are only about five years, the generated profits must be prioritized for reinvestment in next-generation technology over performance bonuses.
The specific impact on the national economy is also substantial. With semiconductor exports accounting for 38.1% of the total, a strike could lead to an estimated loss of 30 trillion won. This would also result in a corporate tax revenue deficit of up to 2.5 trillion won, dealing a significant blow to the management of national finances.
Skepticism is also rising from within the company. Some point out that the union is launching an unreasonable struggle by leveraging the dissatisfaction of certain departments that did not receive bonuses. This has raised questions about internal solidarity and the social legitimacy of this second-ever strike attempt.
Management argues that business performance must be appropriately allocated among shareholder dividends, future facility investment, and job retention. They expressed concern that actions threatening the national economy simply to demand a larger share for the union could trigger public outcry.
On the 23rd, the Samsung Electronics Union Joint Struggle Committee held a rally at the Pyeongtaek campus with approximately 40,000 members and declared a strike for 18 days starting May 21. The union is demanding the removal of the bonus cap and the utilization of 15% of operating profit as the resource for bonuses, asserting that this struggle is a fight to set the future of Samsung Electronics straight.
However, controversy is expected to continue over the use of extreme measures that risk national economic loss to demand changes in the distribution standards of management performance, which are not even legal wages. Industry observers are offering cold assessments of the union’s behavior in using production disruptions as a bargaining chip during a period of global supply chain instability.
"A company's profit should be the starting point for new investments to protect future competitiveness," said an official from the semiconductor industry. "We must coolly evaluate whether it is appropriate to shake the global supply chain by demanding an excessive share without a legal basis."
Another industry insider predicted, "If the Samsung Electronics union goes ahead with the strike, it will be difficult for them to avoid legal and ethical responsibility in the future for choosing the extreme option of production disruption over performance bonuses, rather than wages."
댓글
0