[Edaily Reporter Jung Byung-mook ] On the 25th, the Central Labor Relations Commission issued a decision to “suspend mediation” regarding the labor dispute mediation request filed by the Hyundai Motor Company labor union. As a result, the union has secured the legal right to strike. The previous day, the union held a vote on whether to authorize strike action following the breakdown of collective bargaining for 2026, and the motion passed with an overwhelming 92.03% approval rate. While Hyundai Motor’s labor-management negotiations have never gone smoothly and strikes have been a frequent occurrence, this year feels quite different. This is because the Hyundai Motor main plant union is not acting alone.

Since the revised Trade Union Act (the “Yellow Envelope Law”) took effect last March—recognizing the “employer status” of prime contractors over subcontractors—various subcontractors at Hyundai Motor plants, including the cafeteria service provider, have been chanting, “Euisun, come out!” Unions at subcontractors of subsidiaries such as Hyundai Mobis, Hyundai Glovis, and Hyundai Steel have also launched collective action, demanding negotiations with the parent company. It is clear that if the unions of Hyundai Motor and its affiliates, along with the subcontractor unions, go on strike, it will cause massive damage to our industry as a whole.

This year, the first year of the “Yellow Envelope Act,” the Hyundai Motor Group labor unions’ “summer strike” is not merely an issue confined to this group alone. Just 100 days after the act’s implementation, chaos has reached its peak, with subcontractor unions filing over 1,100 bargaining requests and over 430 requests directed at parent companies. In various industries, such as shipbuilding and construction, subcontractors are also demanding, “Bring out the CEO of the prime contractor!” This is a critical turning point that will determine the future direction of labor-management relations in our industrial sector.

Ultimately, the problem lies with the “Yellow Envelope Act,” which is the source of this chaos. Over the first 100 days of its implementation, unpredictable situations have arisen due to its ambiguous provisions. For example, while the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s interpretation guidelines for the act cited on-site cafeterias as examples unrelated to employer status, a local labor commission recently recognized the employer status of large prime contractors even for non-core tasks such as food service, laundry, and security. Critics point out that the provisions themselves, which allow for diverse interpretations, are the root of the problem.

Unless the scope of direct negotiations between prime contractors and subcontractors under the “Yellow Envelope Act” is clearly defined, scenes where thousands of workers—not only from the prime contractor’s union but also from the subcontractor’s union—gather in front of the headquarters chanting “Bring out the owner!” will repeat themselves year after year. The bill also contains many controversial provisions, such as allowing strikes over corporate management decisions and barring claims for damages in cases of union violence or workplace occupations. To safeguard future industrial competitiveness and reduce turmoil in labor-management relations, a comprehensive overhaul of this bill is necessary.