Conflict Between Remicon Company and Jiip Truck Owners... Construction Delays at Yeonggwang-gun Site

Company Side and Jiip Vehicle Owner Side Disagree, Early Compromise Uncertain, Urgent Measures Needed

Allegations of Collusion Raised... Authorities' Guidance and Inspection Required

Members of the Gwangju Ready-Mixed Concrete Branch of the Construction Workers' Union, subcontracted truck owners, are protesting in front of Company A in Yeonggwang County.

[Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters reporters Kim Chunsu and Ijeonseong] As conflicts between ready-mixed concrete (remicon) companies and subcontracted truck owners in Yeonggwang-gun, Jeollanam-do escalate, concerns are rising over disruptions in construction site schedules, including flood recovery, due to unstable remicon supply.

In particular, since flood recovery sites in Yeonggwang-gun from last year are in their final stages, there are calls for urgent measures ahead of the upcoming rainy season.

On the 31st, according to construction industry insiders in Yeonggwang-gun, disruptions in remicon shipments occurred due to disputes over transportation fee rates between remicon companies and subcontracted truck owners in the area.

Six remicon manufacturers in the Yeonggwang area, including Company A, sent notices via text or mail on the 18th to 33 subcontracted truck workers informing them of contract termination, effectively dismissing 4 to 7 workers per company.

This collective dismissal occurred amid negotiations between subcontracted truck owners and companies over increasing transportation fees.

Since January, subcontracted truck owners have joined the Construction Workers' Union Gwangju Remicon Branch Yeonggwang Chapter and held six rounds of negotiations with management regarding labor conditions and transportation fees.

Subcontracted truck representatives stated, “Although the remicon slab price in Yeonggwang is 480,000 KRW per 6㎥, the transportation fee is only 37,000 KRW per trip, so to increase income, we work 10 hours a day, six days a week,” and demanded “an 8-hour workday and a guaranteed transportation fee of 48,000 KRW.”

To resolve this, six rounds of negotiations continued, but three days before the seventh round on the 17th, sharp confrontations reportedly broke out between labor and management.

During this process, the union held a press conference on the afternoon of the 17th, warning of a strike, stating, “The company increased the number of trucks from 7 to 12 and secured 10 additional trucks from nearby areas in preparation for the dispute.”

In response, management took a hard stance, saying, “Workers left their posts without permission by attending the afternoon press conference after working only the morning shift on the 17th,” and declared, “We will terminate contracts due to lack of sincere transportation.”

Amid this conflict, Yeonggwang-gun began mediation efforts on the 21st, but friction expanded over whether special employment workers can establish a union.

Eventually, from the 24th, the union blocked external shipments of remicon in front of Company A, demanding the withdrawal of collective dismissals.

The problem is that this situation has escalated into an extreme confrontation between management and labor, showing no signs of early resolution.

Moreover, suspicions have openly circulated that the six remicon companies in Yeonggwang are colluding on prices for profit, and unverified rumors claim a 300 million KRW compensation if remicon is brought in from other regions.

In fact, the local construction industry in Yeonggwang-gun reportedly attempted to procure urgent remicon supplies from nearby Hampyeong and Gochang areas, but this has also proven difficult.

Given these circumstances, a construction company official pointed out, “It is true that remicon prices in Yeonggwang-gun are somewhat higher compared to other cities and counties,” and added, “When requesting estimates for subcontracted prices, the six companies consistently calculate them similarly, raising suspicions of collusion.”

He further argued, “Administrative authorities should step in to allow urgent remicon supplies to be procured from neighboring regions, and guidance and inspection are necessary regarding the suspected collusion among the six remicon companies.”

Regarding these claims, the CEO of Company A, which manufactures remicon, denied, stating, “The collusion suspicions are not true, and there has been no regulation or obstruction of remicon imports from other regions.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.