In 2026, South Korea's industrial sector faces a significant challenge. The strike by the Samsung Electronics labor union and the debate over performance bonuses have expanded beyond mere labor disputes, raising critical questions about the structure of South Korean industrial capitalism, future competitiveness, and the new distribution order in the age of artificial intelligence (AI).
Recently, Samsung Electronics reached a final agreement in labor negotiations, which included wage increases, adjustments to performance bonuses, expanded welfare benefits, and improvements in certain working conditions, temporarily averting a major conflict. However, this issue is not confined to a single company. The labor issues at Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, two of the world's largest memory semiconductor manufacturers, are directly linked to global supply chains, international capital markets, national industrial strategies, and the overall trust in the South Korean economy.
The world is currently in the midst of a fierce competition for dominance in AI semiconductors. Companies like Nvidia and AMD from the United States, TSMC from Taiwan, state-led semiconductor initiatives from China, and Japan's semiconductor revival strategy are all in a full-scale battle. Semiconductors are no longer just electronic components; they are now a strategic industry connected to military, security, AI, data centers, automotive, aerospace, and quantum computing.
In this context, news of the Samsung strike has sent shockwaves through global financial markets and among supply chain investors. Foreign capital is particularly sensitive to questions such as, “Is South Korea's advanced industrial supply chain stable?” and “Can key companies in the AI era maintain long-term predictability?”
Indeed, global capital markets prioritize stability and predictability. The semiconductor industry requires long-term investments amounting to tens of trillions of won. Samsung's Pyeongtaek campus, the Taylor factory in Texas, and the expansion of next-generation HBM and AI memory lines involve astronomical capital investments, with recovery periods spanning several years to over a decade. This industry cannot be swayed by political slogans or short-term sentiments.
At the same time, the role of labor has changed dramatically. The semiconductor industry in the AI era is not merely about assembly work. Processes like extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography, HBM design, AI packaging, and ultra-fine process operations cannot be accomplished without a highly skilled workforce of top engineers and technicians. Today, labor is not just a cost item; it is a core strategic asset.
Therefore, the labor dispute at Samsung Electronics should not be approached as a matter of winning or losing for either side. Labor must be respected for its contribution to corporate sustainability, and companies must acknowledge the dignity and contributions of labor. Both sides must operate within global rules. Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix are not only South Korean companies but also global enterprises. Labor relations must now be managed according to international standards and investor confidence.
During this debate, the concept of 'residual claimant' gained particular attention. This raises the question, “Why do only shareholders have residual claims?” This issue touches on the fundamental structure of modern corporate governance.
Corporations are fundamentally built on a symmetrical structure of risk and reward. Creditors receive agreed-upon interest in exchange for relinquishing excess profits. Workers gain agreed-upon wages and job security in exchange for limiting their exposure to risk. The state recoups the cost of providing social infrastructure through taxation. Ultimately, it is the shareholders who bear the residual profits and losses.
This is why shareholders are referred to as 'residual claimants.' When a company generates substantial profits, they receive the last remaining share, but conversely, when a company collapses or its stock price plummets, they are the first to absorb the losses.
In 2023, during the semiconductor downturn, Samsung Electronics' operating profit plummeted. However, employee wages were not significantly cut, and payments to partner companies were largely maintained. Yet, the market capitalization dropped sharply, leading to losses for numerous individual investors and the national pension fund. In capitalism, the entity that ultimately absorbs risk is revealed in such moments.
Nevertheless, the contributions of labor cannot be overlooked. In fact, in the AI era, human creativity and collective knowledge are becoming central to corporate value. Today, the value of semiconductor companies does not stem merely from factory buildings but from research and development capabilities, design skills, production experience, and long-accumulated organizational culture.
Thus, the issue is not “who will take it all?” but rather “how can we share it sustainably?” This is why global companies are strengthening stock options, long-term performance bonuses, employee stock ownership plans, and performance-linked compensation systems. Workers are not just costs; they are partners in corporate growth.
However, labor must also confront the harsh realities of the global capital market. Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix do not compete against domestic companies; they are up against national strategic industries from the United States, Taiwan, China, and Japan. Notably, China is mobilizing state capital to achieve semiconductor self-sufficiency, while the U.S. is pouring substantial subsidies into its semiconductor industry. Taiwan's entire economy revolves around the TSMC ecosystem.
If South Korean industries continue to engage in internal conflicts, the damage will ultimately affect both labor and companies. A decline in industrial competitiveness will lead to fewer jobs and undermine the foundation of the national economy in the long run.
Here, it is essential to understand the concepts of CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) and OPEX (Operational Expenditure). CAPEX refers to capital expenditures for the future, including factory expansions, semiconductor equipment investments, next-generation technology development, and AI infrastructure building. In contrast, OPEX includes operational costs such as labor, maintenance, utilities, and management expenses.
The semiconductor industry is CAPEX-centric. Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix invest tens of trillions of won each year in future facilities. The price of a single state-of-the-art EUV machine can reach hundreds of billions of won. Building advanced packaging and AI memory lines requires astronomical capital.
The problem arises here. If demands for short-term performance distribution excessively increase the burden of OPEX, companies will reduce future CAPEX. This will ultimately lead to a decline in long-term competitiveness. The semiconductor industry is not about sharing today's profits; it is about reinvesting in the present to secure technological dominance for the next decade.
In fact, one of the significant reasons for the decline of the Japanese semiconductor industry was the collapse of its long-term investment structure. Conversely, Taiwan's TSMC has maintained a near-religious commitment to CAPEX, growing into the world's leading foundry company. Nvidia has also sustained decades of reinvestment in research and development and the AI ecosystem to achieve its current massive market capitalization.
Therefore, the labor issues at Samsung Electronics should not be approached merely as a short-term wage conflict. Labor must understand the future investment structure of companies, and companies must design performance sharing more intricately. The key is to create a structure where all members share in the fruits of growth while maintaining future competitiveness.
Recent remarks by President Lee Jae-myung during a cabinet meeting offer significant insights. The president did not deny the rights of labor. Instead, he clearly stated that labor rights are constitutional protections for the socially vulnerable. However, he also emphasized that exercising these rights must come with solidarity and responsibility.
The attention surrounding President Lee's remarks stems not only from his policy message but also from his background as a former child laborer. He experienced the realities of labor firsthand in factories during his youth and has embodied the hardships and imbalances of the labor landscape in industrialized South Korea. This makes him a politician who understands both the urgency of laborers and the realities of corporate environments.
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who recently visited South Korea, is also a globally recognized labor movement leader. Lula grew up in a poor labor class and factory environment. Despite standing on different continents, both leaders share a common understanding of the labor experiences during the industrial era.
Interestingly, both have not confined themselves to mere ideological labor movements. Since taking office, President Lula has pursued industrial development, investment attraction, and export expansion in Brazil. He has sought to balance labor protection with industrial competitiveness.
President Lee Jae-myung, too, emphasized “solidarity and responsibility without crossing the line” during the current labor dispute at Samsung Electronics. This is a very pragmatic approach. Ultimately, the president's core message can be summarized in three points:
- First, labor rights are constitutional rights and must be respected.
- Second, the sustainability of companies and national industrial competitiveness must also be protected.
- Third, exercising rights must come with responsibility and restraint toward the community.
This could serve as an important guideline for the future of labor relations in South Korea. While past labor relations in South Korea have been centered on conflict and confrontation, labor relations in the AI era must evolve toward mutual growth and shared responsibility.
In the future, AI will dramatically enhance productivity while fundamentally changing the structure of human labor. Some jobs will disappear, while others will be restructured into high-value-added areas. In such an era, simple wage struggles will not yield sustainable solutions.
Instead, new forms of social consensus will be necessary. Workers must consider structures that allow them to participate in the long-term performance of corporate growth rather than just wages. Companies must create human-centered innovation systems rather than merely focusing on cost reduction. The state must mitigate the shocks of industrial transition through taxation, welfare, education, and retraining systems.
Ultimately, the key to the AI era is a 'harmonious productivity revolution.' When labor and capital view each other as adversaries, industries decline. Conversely, when they recognize each other as partners in growth, innovation continues.
South Korea stands at a critical crossroads. Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix are not just companies; they are strategic assets at the forefront of South Korea's industrial civilization. What collapses here is not merely the profit of a single company but the future industrial order and national competitiveness of South Korea itself.
Thus, what is needed now is neither incitement nor emotion. What is required is a sober recognition of reality and mature social wisdom. Both labor and companies must take responsibility, as must the state. Freedom without responsibility cannot endure, just as an industry without hope will lose its future.
The philosophy of 'solidarity and responsibility' emphasized by President Lee Jae-myung is likely to become a key keyword in the future model of labor relations in South Korea. The most important task for labor relations in the AI era is to create an order of innovation and coexistence rather than one of conflict and destruction.
Industries do not grow solely through struggle. They do not grow through capital alone. Civilization advances only when technology and labor, investment and innovation, responsibility and trust move together. What South Korea needs now is not a winner-takes-all logic but a mature philosophy of an industrial community that can grow together while competing with the world.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.