The Samsung Electronics labor union's demands have gone too far. The claim that 15% of operating profit should be paid out as bonuses far exceeds the bounds of common sense. Assuming annual operating profit of 250 trillion won for the Device Solutions (DS) division, the bonus pool would reach 37.5 trillion won ($27.5 billion). This is equivalent to last year's research and development investment of 37.7 trillion won. Even based on an annual salary of 80 million won, each memory division employee would receive 560 million won. This is tantamount to demanding that investment resources crucial to the company's future be entirely consumed in a "bonus feast."
An excessive performance compensation system linked to operating profit can undermine a company's sustainable growth potential. The top priority for corporate profits is investment. Missing the right timing for new businesses and facility expansion leaves companies unable to respond to market volatility, leading to their elimination from competition. The semiconductor industry in particular cannot survive without preemptive investment. Samsung Electronics was able to ride today's super cycle precisely because it poured more than 50 trillion won into capital expenditure even during past downturns. If the union's demands for a bonus bonanza were met, Samsung Electronics would lose more than four opportunities for big deals like the Harman acquisition (9.3 trillion won), and securing leadership in next-generation markets such as High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) could be delayed.
The union's behavior in rejecting even management's special reward proposal equivalent to 13% of operating profit is not negotiation but pressure, not dialogue but unilateral coercion. Moreover, a bonus structure heavily skewed toward the semiconductor division risks fostering a sense of deprivation among employees in other divisions and inciting labor-labor conflict. This is "double self-harm" that destroys internal cohesion while weakening corporate competitiveness. Given Korea's challenging economic reality, where a "war supplementary budget" has been required, the union's behavior is not merely irresponsible but approaches a complete lack of awareness of reality.
The semiconductor super cycle cannot last forever. American pressure is becoming increasingly overt, and China's pursuit is fierce. This is no time to be intoxicated by boom times and indulge in a "bonus feast." What is needed now is not a wasteful confrontation over distribution, but opening a path toward labor-management coexistence that secures Samsung Electronics' stable future competitiveness. The union should immediately withdraw its unreasonable demands and strike pressure, and return to the negotiating table.
