Anxious Samsung Biologics... Three-Party Talks Remain Deadlocked

New Proposals Exchanged at Three-Party Meeting on May 19
Differences Remain; No Common Ground Found

While Samsung Electronics narrowly avoided a general strike, Samsung Biologics and its labor union have yet to find a way out, repeatedly confirming only their differences. There are growing concerns that the dispute may spiral into a protracted conflict, as complex challenges such as wages, workforce management, and union involvement in management remain unresolved.

According to industry sources on May 21, Samsung Biologics and its labor union held a three-party meeting mediated by the Ministry of Employment and Labor on May 19 and exchanged new proposals, but were unable to reach any common ground. As a result, the follow-up meeting scheduled for May 20 was canceled, with no future dates set. The management stated, "We have continuously presented the best possible proposals, but unfortunately, we could not reach an agreement," adding, "We will continue to communicate with the union and the government and do our utmost to complete the negotiations."

The Samsung Biologics labor union has been engaged in a partial strike since April 28. This was followed by the first general strike from May 1 to 5, and since May 6, the union has been carrying out an indefinite work-to-rule campaign by refusing to work overtime or on holidays. The possibility of a second general strike remains on the table.

Analysts say that the labor negotiations at Samsung Biologics have taken a distinctly different and far more complex turn than those at Samsung Electronics. While the negotiations at Samsung Electronics centered mainly on performance bonuses, the discussions at Samsung Biologics are strongly tied not only to wages but also to workforce management and collective bargaining agreements, encompassing a wide range of management issues. Jaeseong Park, head of the Samsung Biologics Win-Win Branch of the Samsung Group Super-Enterprise Labor Union, told reporters that "the negotiations are more difficult and will therefore take more time."

The union is demanding a 14.3% increase in base pay, a flat increase of 3.5 million won, a settlement bonus of 30 million won per person, and a distribution of 20% of operating profit as performance bonuses. The union also insists that workforce levels be determined jointly by labor and management based on data, and that the results be reflected in next year's hiring plans. In addition, the union is maintaining its position that the collective agreement should include requirements such as notification to the union when executives are appointed, union consent for workforce assignments and profit distribution, and union deliberation and approval in the event of company division or outsourcing.

The management is countering with a proposal to raise wages by 6.2% and pay a lump sum of 6 million won. The company maintains that demands outside of wages and performance bonuses pertain to management's exclusive authority and cannot be accepted.

Legal disputes are also contributing to the escalation of the conflict. The management has filed criminal complaints against six members of the union leadership, including branch head Park, and one union member, on charges of obstruction of business. The reason cited is that the union pressed ahead with the strike even after a court restricted industrial action in the final process to prevent deterioration or contamination. The management estimates that the first general strike disrupted the production of some products, including anticancer drugs, resulting in losses exceeding 150 billion won. In response, the union has filed counter-charges against certain management personnel for unfair labor practices.

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