[Edaily Reporter KIM KI DUK ] The labor unions of HD Hyundai Heavy Industries and Hanwha Ocean—the two leading companies in the domestic shipbuilding industry—will hold a joint press conference in Seoul on the 23rd to explain the reasons behind their high-altitude sit-in protest and outline their future course of action. Despite the shipbuilding industry’s boom, labor-management disagreements over profit-sharing and improvements to working conditions remain unresolved, causing conflicts at individual workplaces to spread into an industry-wide solidarity movement. As the joint response by the unions of both companies gains momentum, this is expected to serve as a turning point in determining whether the level of industrial action—such as solidarity strikes—will escalate.

According to industry sources on the 20th, the HD Hyundai Heavy Industries Branch and the Hanwha Ocean Branch of the Korean Metal Workers’ Union plan to hold a joint press conference on the 23rd at the union’s central headquarters in Jeong-dong, Jung-gu, Seoul, to explain the reasons behind their high-altitude sit-in protest, the key issues in wage and collective bargaining negotiations, and the future direction of their struggle.

Currently, Kim Yu-cheol, chairman of the Hanwha Ocean Branch, and Kim Dong-ha, chairman of the HD Hyundai Heavy Industries Branch, are each staging high-altitude sit-ins on cranes at the Geoje and Ulsan plants, respectively. The unions’ common argument is that while the company’s performance has improved due to the boom in the shipbuilding industry, the distribution of profits to workers and improvements in their working conditions remain insufficient.

A Hanwha Ocean union official told E-Daily in a phone interview, “Although the business environment in the shipbuilding industry has improved, the working conditions for laborers do not reflect this,” adding, “This will be an opportunity to explain the circumstances that left us with no choice but to stage a high-altitude sit-in and how we plan to proceed from here.”

The issues both unions have in common are the distribution of profits resulting from the boom and the re-employment system for workers reaching mandatory retirement age. However, there are differences in their specific demands.

The HD Hyundai Heavy Industries union is maintaining its existing demand that 30% of operating profit be distributed to workers. The intent is not simply to pay a 30% performance bonus, but to return a certain portion of operating profit to workers through measures such as base salary increases, incentive payments, and system improvements. The union maintains that the distribution should include not only regular employees but also subcontracted and migrant workers.

An official from the HD Hyundai Heavy Industries union stated, “We are not asking for a large performance bonus; we are calling for a fair distribution of profits,” adding, “At least 30% of operating profit should be allocated to workers in some form, such as base salary increases or incentive payments.”

The Hanwha Ocean union is demanding transparency in the criteria used to calculate performance bonuses. They argue that the company has not clearly disclosed the specific evaluations and criteria used to determine the 400% performance bonus paid in February of this year. A Hanwha Ocean union official said, “This isn’t about whether the performance bonus is large or small; it’s about knowing the criteria by which it is paid,” adding, “Workers must be able to predict how much of a performance bonus they can expect based on the company’s business performance.”

The issue of rehiring employees who have reached mandatory retirement age is also a key point of contention. The HD Hyundai Heavy Industries union claims that the system for rehiring employees on a contract basis for up to two years—agreed upon in 2023—is not being properly implemented. The Hanwha Ocean union also maintains that the reemployment period for employees reaching mandatory retirement age must be guaranteed for at least two years.

According to the Hanwha Ocean union, while most employees are rehired for the first year after reaching mandatory retirement age, the rehiring rate for the second year stands at only about 42 percent. They argue that the company unilaterally decides on rehiring, and even if an employee works until the end of the year and retires, they will not receive a performance bonus if they are not employed at the time of payment in February of the following year.

It remains to be seen whether the joint response by the unions of both companies will actually lead to a joint strike. Regarding the possibility of a joint strike, a union official from both companies stated, “If the situation drags on, we are considering a solidarity strike.” However, no schedule for a joint strike has been finalized as of yet.

There are concerns within the industry that a prolonged labor-management conflict could have a negative impact not only on production disruptions but also on competitiveness in securing new orders. With both companies having secured several years’ worth of work, a prolonged strike could worsen profitability due to delays in the shipbuilding process and increased cost burdens. In particular, it has been pointed out that repeated delays in ship deliveries could lead to a loss of trust among global shipowners, which could in turn hinder the securing of new orders in the future.

An industry official stated, “While domestic shipbuilders currently have a sufficient order backlog, without stability on the production floor, there could be disruptions in meeting delivery deadlines and managing costs,” adding, “If labor-management conflicts drag on and affect production schedules, it could ultimately have a negative impact on global shipowners’ decisions to place new orders.”