SEOUL, May 22 (AJP) - Samsung Electronics by March has reclaimed the top position in the global memory oligopoly after falling behind local rival SK hynix in the early race for artificial intelligence infrastructure chips, particularly high bandwidth memory (HBM).
But whether the Korean tech giant can maintain that lead during the rest of AI supercycle is becoming increasingly uncertain as the company sinks deeper into internal wage conflict and spiraling compensation costs.
At a moment when the global semiconductor war demands unprecedented unity and investment discipline, Samsung instead finds itself pulled apart by a widening internal divide between winners and losers of the AI boom.
The contrast with its global rivals is becoming difficult to ignore.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company and Micron Technology are aggressively channeling resources into massive capital expenditure plans aimed at dominating the next generation of AI chips, advanced packaging and memory production. Samsung, by comparison, is increasingly consumed by operational expenditure disputes, labor unrest and a rare collapse of solidarity inside one of Asia’s most tightly managed corporate empires.
At the center of the tension lies an extraordinary compensation gap emerging inside the company itself.
Industry estimates suggest employees in Samsung’s semiconductor Device Solutions (DS) division — now the company’s profit engine amid the AI boom — could receive as much as 600 million won ($438,000) this year in combined bonuses and incentives. Meanwhile, workers in the Device eXperience (DX) division, which oversees smartphones and home appliances, are expected to receive roughly 6 million won.
A 100-fold disparity inside the same corporation has triggered deep resentment across the company.
The fallout is already reshaping Samsung’s labor landscape. More than 4,000 employees from the DX division reportedly left the National Samsung Electronics Union over the past month, with many joining the rival Donghaeng union, whose membership has surged from around 2,600 to over 12,000 as non-memory workers seek more aggressive representation.
“I don’t understand why there is such an extreme divide and discrimination within the same company,” a DX division official familiar with the matter told AJP on condition of anonymity. “We have to do whatever we can on our end to protect our interests.”
What once functioned as a unified corporate system is beginning to fracture under the pressures of the AI economy.
For decades, Samsung operated under a model where stronger divisions effectively subsidized weaker ones, allowing the conglomerate to incubate new businesses, preserve employment stability and maintain cohesion across sprawling operations. That model worked during the industrial manufacturing era when long investment cycles and centralized management rewarded internal discipline.
But artificial intelligence is changing the economics of the semiconductor business.
The AI boom disproportionately rewards a narrow set of high-margin technologies — especially HBM memory, advanced foundry processes and AI packaging — while leaving slower-growing consumer electronics divisions struggling to justify equal compensation structures. Silicon Valley-style winner-takes-all capitalism is colliding head-on with Samsung’s traditional top-down manufacturing culture.
And the financial consequences could become severe.
Foreign investors and analysts increasingly warn that Samsung’s internal fragmentation is becoming a strategic vulnerability rather than simply a labor-management dispute.
According to a recent J.P. Morgan analysis, fully accommodating union demands could add as much as 39 trillion won in labor costs. Analysts estimate that such surging operational expenditures could reduce Samsung’s operating profit by up to 12 percent, potentially cannibalizing the capital expenditures needed to maintain technological leadership in extreme ultraviolet lithography, HBM production and advanced packaging.
That tradeoff — between rewarding labor and funding future technology — may become one of the defining corporate dilemmas of the AI era.
Unlike previous semiconductor cycles, the current AI arms race requires relentless investment speed. Delays in securing advanced equipment, expanding clean-room capacity or building next-generation packaging infrastructure can quickly translate into lost market share.
Samsung’s rivals are moving aggressively precisely because they recognize the narrowness of the window.
TSMC recently sold an 8.1 percent stake in Vanguard International Semiconductor to secure approximately 1.2 trillion won ($870 million) in additional funding for advanced AI packaging facilities. Micron Technology, meanwhile, is pushing ahead with a $20 billion capital expenditure plan this year largely free from labor friction or internal political constraints.
The contrast is stark: although Samsung outpaced its rivals with massive first-quarter capital expenditures to reclaim its memory lead, the company increasingly finds itself debating wealth allocation while competitors remain focused on capital allocation.
That distinction matters because investors ultimately reward technological dominance, not internal compromise.
The danger for Samsung is not merely higher wage costs themselves. It is the possibility that internal distrust begins eroding the organizational cohesion required to compete in a capital-intensive industry where speed, secrecy and long-term strategic coordination are critical.
Semiconductor leadership has historically depended not only on engineering excellence, but also on corporate unity during periods of enormous financial stress. Taiwan’s semiconductor ecosystem operates with near-national strategic alignment. U.S. chipmakers benefit from deep capital markets and shareholder tolerance for aggressive reinvestment. Samsung now risks becoming trapped between both systems — pressured simultaneously by shareholders demanding profitability and employees demanding redistribution of AI windfalls.
Experts say the company may ultimately be forced to rethink its entire structure.
“There appears to be significant internal dissatisfaction, but resolving it is difficult since the company cannot distribute bonuses to everyone,” said Kim Duk-ki, a professor at Sejong University. “This is a structural characteristic of Samsung. In the past, cross-subsidizing loss-making divisions helped the company continuously incubate new businesses, but looking ahead, they might have to consider spinning off divisions.”
Such discussions would once have been almost unthinkable inside Samsung.
But the AI era is beginning to challenge assumptions that defined the conglomerate for decades: centralized hierarchy, lifetime-style loyalty and broad internal redistribution. The more profits become concentrated in a handful of AI-related businesses, the harder it becomes to preserve cohesion across divisions moving at vastly different speeds.
In many ways, Samsung’s internal conflict mirrors a broader transformation now unfolding across the global economy.
Artificial intelligence is generating extraordinary wealth — but unevenly. Companies, sectors and workers directly tied to AI infrastructure are capturing disproportionate rewards, while others struggle to keep pace. That imbalance is beginning to reshape labor expectations, compensation systems and even corporate identity itself.
For Samsung, the stakes are particularly high because the company sits at the center of South Korea’s economic model. Its ability to sustain investment leadership in semiconductors affects not only shareholders and employees, but also the country’s exports, currency stability and technological competitiveness.
The question is no longer whether Samsung can generate profits from AI.
It is whether the company can remain institutionally unified long enough to deploy those profits effectively in the global chip war.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.