SEOUL, May 21 (AJP) - The chip lines at Samsung Electronics ran uninterrupted Thursday morning.
What had been dreaded as the opening day of an unprecedented 18-day walkout instead turned into relief rally on the market after labor and management reached a last-minute settlement shortly before midnight.
Samsung shares surged as much as 7 percent during trading and closed at a fresh record high as markets priced out the immediate risk of production disruption at the world’s largest memory-chip maker.
But not all existing shareholders were pleased.
Two separate shareholder advocacy groups staged demonstrations in Seoul on Thursday, arguing that the tentative wage agreement could severely undermine future shareholder returns and destabilize Samsung’s long-term financial structure if institutionalized.
At the center of the controversy is the newly agreed compensation framework for semiconductor employees. Under the tentative deal, the union secured a structure that effectively allocates bonuses equivalent to 12 percent of operating profit — consisting of a 1.5 percent Overall Performance Incentive (OPI) and a 10.5 percent special management bonus for chipmaking divisions.
According to consensus estimates compiled by FnGuide, Samsung Electronics is projected to post operating profit of around 348 trillion won ($252 billion) in 2026 amid the continuing global AI semiconductor boom.
If the company executes the agreed formula in full, more than 41 trillion won could be recognized as labor compensation in a single year.
For shareholders, the issue is not simply the size of the payout but its collision with Samsung’s existing capital return framework.
Samsung previously pledged to return 50 percent of free cash flow generated between 2024 and 2026 to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks. But if tens of trillions of won are absorbed into operating expenses before profits flow into free cash generation, shareholder distributions could shrink sharply. Activist groups estimate the reduction in shareholder return capacity could exceed 15 trillion won.
Industry experts note that while such a payout structuralizes financial risks, management faced an unavoidable dilemma regarding human capital. "From a financial perspective, 41 trillion won is an astronomical sum, equivalent to the capital required to build a massive, state-of-the-art semiconductor fabrication line," said Lee Jong-hwan, a professor of system semiconductor engineering at Sangmyung University. "However, Samsung's biggest fear right now is a 'domino-effect' drain of its core talent to SK Hynix or foreign competitors. From management's perspective, securing talent retention was likely deemed a safer, more urgent path for long-term survival than immediate infrastructure expansion."
A small delegation from the “Korea Shareholder Movement Headquarters” gathered near the residence of Lee Jae-yong on Thursday, condemning what they described as an excessive inward transfer of corporate profits.
Min Kyung-kwon, head of the organization, argued that the structure may violate Article 462 of South Korea’s Commercial Act governing dividend calculations.
The group contends that distributing large-scale bonuses directly tied to pre-tax operating profit without shareholder approval amounts to what it called a “disguised illegal dividend.”
The activists also questioned the sustainability of the formula during the semiconductor industry’s notoriously volatile downcycles.
“Semiconductors are not a permanently booming industry,” one protester said during the rally. “If operating profit collapses during the next downturn, how can the company survive while structurally locked into massive payouts?”
The group further criticized what it described as a widening disconnect between management, labor and shareholders, arguing that top executives themselves could indirectly benefit from profit-linked compensation structures while ordinary shareholders absorb the dilution in corporate value.
Using ACT, an online minority shareholder platform reportedly containing around 13,000 verified Samsung shareholders, the activists are now preparing a potential nationwide class-action campaign.
If Samsung’s board formally approves the tentative agreement, they say they plan to pursue breach-of-trust complaints against consenting directors and seek legal action to invalidate the board resolution.
Elsewhere in Seoul, another shareholder organization calling itself the “Samsung Electronics Shareholder Action Practice Headquarters” held a parallel rally near Hangangjin Station in Yongsan District.
That group framed the dispute less as a legal issue than a broader social and economic imbalance.
Its members argued that highly paid workers in the semiconductor sector were demanding disproportionate rewards while many ordinary workers across South Korea continue to earn annual salaries below 30 million to 40 million won.
The organization also renewed calls for the government to invoke emergency adjustment powers — a rarely used legal mechanism allowing authorities to suspend strikes temporarily in industries deemed vital to the national economy.
The group argued that semiconductors should effectively be treated as strategic national infrastructure similar to police, electricity or transportation systems because of their central role in exports, employment and supply chains.
Some members called for permanent legal restrictions on strikes within the semiconductor industry altogether, warning that prolonged labor instability could damage South Korea’s global competitiveness during a critical phase of the AI race.
Furthermore, observers warn that the settlement could set a precedent that fundamentally alters the labor landscape across South Korean industries. "This deal could open the floodgates," Professor Lee warned. "Not only will non-memory units and other Samsung affiliates demand identical transparent, profit-linked bonus structures, but major automotive giants and their supply chain networks will face immense pressure from unions to replicate this formula. It triggers a nationwide structural shift in corporate profit distribution."
For now, the immediate crisis has passed.
Production remains stable. Markets have calmed. The feared supply-chain disruption that had alarmed investors, policymakers and global technology customers alike has been avoided.
Yet the settlement appears to have exposed a deeper structural fault line inside corporate South Korea.
The conflict is no longer confined to labor versus management. It is increasingly evolving into a three-way confrontation between labor, capital and shareholders over who ultimately owns the gains generated by the AI-era semiconductor boom.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.