In "The End of Work," published in 1995, American sociologist Jeremy Rifkin predicted that digital technology and machines would replace most human labor by the middle of the 21st century. At a time when even the word "internet" was unfamiliar, he forecast that the most important issue would be how the "age of access" would shake the roots of society and redefine the opportunities and responsibilities of workers. He advised that the value created by digital society must be distributed socially, and that the cooperation and trust of the community should become the central theme. Now, 30 years later, that diagnosis has become reality and confronts us.
The performance bonus controversy, a hot issue in Korean society these days, is one facet of Rifkin's "gloomy prophecy." Samsung Electronics labor and management agreed only on the brink of a strike on a method of paying performance bonuses amounting to 12% of operating profit, an expected figure as high as 36 trillion won. Compensation of up to 600 million won per person is reportedly being made. Samsung Electronics posted unimaginable results, with operating profit of 57 trillion won in the first quarter alone, thanks to the sudden explosion in demand for artificial intelligence (AI) chips from Big Tech firms. The prevailing observation is that the scale of profit will grow as quarters pass.
But upon closer look, it is ironic. Just one year ago, Samsung Electronics management had to repeatedly write letters of self-reflection citing poor performance, pledging to "recover fundamental technological capabilities." How did such a company turn around so quickly? Bluntly speaking, rather than a dramatic recovery in technological capability, it was thanks to the sudden change in the vast external environment known as the AI transition. The point is that the value of labor created by union members did not entirely translate into the windfall results. Perhaps the essence of this controversy lies here.
Employment and Labor Minister Kim Young-hoon, who undertook after-the-fact arbitration between Samsung Electronics labor and management, appeared on a broadcast and defined this situation as a "clash of desires." The expression "desire" coming from the mouth of a minister who was a hardline labor activist and former chairman of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) is significant. Until now, the language of most unions threatening strikes was "right to survival," "restructuring," and "polarization." But this time was different. The situation of union members whose average annual salary far exceeds 100 million won demanding enormous compensation could not be explained by the existing grammar of labor. President Lee Jae-myung's warning to the union to "not cross the line" is in the same context. Just as human labor itself heads toward an end with the emergence of AI and robots, as Rifkin pointed out, the union too has effectively transformed into a kind of massive "interest group."
We must not overlook that behind this "degeneration of the union" lies Korea's distinctively rigid labor system. Korea cries out to be one of the top three AI powers, but its trade union law remains stuck in the manufacturing era. Giant unions have already become a "labor power" that even the government cannot handle, yet simply by displaying the union signboard, they receive the protection of the law under a "weak party frame." So it is with the Yellow Envelope Act, which guaranteed unions the "privilege of striking." Of course, Korean society has day laborers, specially employed workers, and platform workers placed in blind spots of protection. But it cannot be denied that, through this incident, the public's view of large corporate unions has turned irreversibly cold. The spirit of the martyr Jeon Tae-il, who set himself on fire crying "Observe the Labor Standards Act," has vanished, as has the great cause of solidarity that considers the socially weak (subcontractors) over oneself. In their place, individualism and organizational logic that disregard even the company's shareholders have taken hold. Labor is gone, and only desire remains.
The fact that unions recently raising the flag of strikes while demanding "N% of operating profit" all belong to large corporations speaks to this. What is sadder is that the two major labor federations, which have cried out for "social solidarity," remain silent on the reckless behavior of these aristocratic unions. It is cowardly complicity. Now our society has received a weighty question. How long must we protect with law and institutions the giant unions devoted only to enlarging their own share?
We cannot know exactly where AI and robots will lead us. Yet we cannot blindly stand in the way of technological progress by raising a "red flag." But one thing is clear. For a particular group to monopolize the fruits of technological development is neither justice nor fairness. I hope the Samsung Electronics union, which secured unrealistic performance bonuses that ordinary office workers could not even dream of, will realize this, even now.
