[The Editors' Verdict] Challenges Left by the Strike: Kang Seokhoon Must Solve Them

The 800 Billion Won Compensation Lawsuit Should Only Be Imposed on Workers Responsible for the Strike
The Privatization Issue Requires Government and KDB's Resolution Despite Criticism

The strike is over, and now it is time to work. Resolving the challenges left by the Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSME) subcontractor labor union strike requires the wisdom and determination of multiple groups. These include improving the subcontracting structure, normalizing management, and reconsidering the government's balanced perspective on labor-management conflicts.

First, let us reflect on two remarks made during the strike. On the 19th, President Yoon Suk-yeol said, "I think both the public and the government have waited long enough," and on the 21st, Kang Seok-hoon, Chairman of KDB Industrial Bank, stated, "We cannot provide even one won of additional taxpayer support and will devise drastic measures."

Through this strike, we confirmed the harsh reality and negligible bargaining power of subcontractor workers. Their demand to recover the 30% wage cuts over five years ultimately shrank to 4.5%. The union’s retreat was likely sealed by President Yoon’s suggestion of deploying public authority. The conflict with the DSME regular workers’ union revealed the harsh reality that no one in society cares about the survival of subcontractor workers. For those barely surviving on minimum wage levels, hoping for "as much as they used to get" was nothing but a luxury.

The question of whether to demand the union compensate for the 800 billion won loss caused by the strike remains a contentious issue. This would unfairly place full responsibility for the strike on the workers alone. The structural problems in the shipbuilding labor market, the management’s incompetence characterized by extravagance and corruption despite receiving public funds for 20 years, and the major shareholder Industrial Bank’s passive attitude are also causes of the strike. Holding only the union accountable is unjust.

The situation where the union must worry about the possibility of public authority intervention during the strike and compensation claims afterward creates a severely unfavorable playing field for them. The so-called Yellow Envelope Act, which prohibits compensation claims against striking workers, is currently pending in the National Assembly. Finding a clever solution that prevents the balance of power from tipping excessively toward either labor or management is a task assigned to the political sphere.

Of course, unconditionally defending the union with a sympathetic view and warm heart is far from a fundamental solution. This is a point we must be cautious about amid the controversy surrounding the privatization of DSME. The drastic measures mentioned by Chairman Kang appear to imply bankruptcy through rehabilitation procedures. Considering DSME’s size and poor condition, it will not be easy to find domestic or foreign companies willing to purchase it outright. Allowing the defense sector to fall into foreign hands is also unacceptable. Ultimately, separation and sale is the only option. Employees, partner companies, and the local community must acknowledge this reality and take a proactive stance.

Since President Yoon has emphasized that DSME must meet a capable owner, the mission assigned to Chairman Kang, the president’s “economic tutor,” is clear. The privatization process, excluding political logic, must accelerate now that the strike has ended. The ones who have waited long enough are not President Yoon but the public who have witnessed chronic deficits, accounting fraud, and embezzlement. Both the issue of compensation claims and the preparation of management normalization plans, including sale, require President Yoon’s decisive leadership and Chairman Kang’s execution capability.

Shin Beom-su, Industry Managing Editor

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