On the afternoon of Apr. 24, Kim Hyeong-su, head of the subcontractor branch under the South Gyeongsang chapter of the Korea Metal Workers’ Union, staged a high-altitude protest atop a CCTV tower approximately 30 meters above ground in front of Hanwha Group’s headquarters in central Seoul. It marked the 41st day of his demonstration, which began on Mar. 15. The protesters are calling on Hanwha to reinstate bonuses for subcontracted shipyard workers that were cut during the industry’s downturn.
Hanwha has distanced itself from the dispute, stating that the matter “is not one in which the primary contractor has legal obligations.” Nonetheless, several lawmakers from the Democratic Party of Korea have demanded that Hanwha Ocean step in, holding press conferences and issuing public statements in response.
On Mar. 31, Democratic Party presidential primary contender Lee Jae-myung openly criticized Hanwha. At the time, Hanwha Aerospace was pursuing a 3.6 trillion won ($2.6 billion) rights offering. Lee wrote on social media that the offering could allow the group’s chairman to transfer shares to his children at a lower valuation, thereby significantly reducing potential inheritance tax liabilities. Following the backlash, Hanwha Aerospace scaled back the offering to 2.3 trillion won ($1.7 billion).
Many observers say Hanwha invited the controversy, pointing to questionable share transactions involving a company wholly owned by the chairman’s three sons just prior to the capital raise. Still, in corporate circles, Hanwha’s situation has sparked broader unease, with some fearing they may be next. Lee and the Democratic Party have repeatedly made combative remarks about large corporations, fueling concerns that they view big business and conglomerates as adversaries. Lee’s frequent characterization of himself as a “pro-labor” candidate has further heightened anxiety within the business community.
The prevailing concern among corporate leaders centers on Lee’s strong pro-labor stance and that of his closest allies. Industry officials worry that if elected, Lee could preside over a resurgence of labor unrest. Under President Yoon Suk-yeol’s administration, illegal activities by construction labor unions—including violent protests and unauthorized worksite occupations—have declined significantly due to strict enforcement. However, many now question whether the same legal rigor would be maintained under a new administration.
The first major test is expected to arrive this summer, when annual wage negotiations begin. With the first-quarter GDP slipping back into negative territory after three quarters, companies grappling with declining performance are expected to resist calls for wage hikes or bonus payments. “Firms are already tightening their belts,” said an executive at a major conglomerate. “If Lee is elected, it feels like we’ll face pressure from both labor unions and the government.”
Further adding to corporate apprehension is the Democratic Party’s proposal to reduce statutory working hours. The party’s 4.5-day workweek plan would lower the legal 40-hour workweek to 36 hours by cutting four hours from Friday afternoons. The longer-term objective is to move toward a four-day, 32-hour workweek. Many business leaders argue that legislating productivity targets reflects an anti-business attitude. Even under the current 52-hour cap, companies—particularly small and mid-sized firms—report labor shortages that are already hampering output.
Lee’s rhetoric and policy track record continue to raise alarms across the private sector. Business leaders say his positions suggest a view of corporations not as engines of job creation and economic growth, but as entities that should be tightly controlled through regulation.
An executive at one of South Korea’s top ten conglomerates said, “The common denominator in legislative efforts led by the Democratic Party—including amendments to the Commercial Act, the Yellow Envelope Act, and the 52-hour workweek—is a belief that companies should not be left to operate autonomously in areas like labor, corporate governance, or capital markets.” He added, “I really want to ask—if that’s not a direct challenge to the principles of a market economy, then what is?”