Samsung Electronics Is One Company. So Why Is Wage Bargaining Pulling Apart? — Multiple Labor Markets Can Form Inside One Firm

Two opposite directions are emerging inside the same company

Yonhap reported on September 18 that Donghaeng, a Samsung Electronics union centered on the DX division covering appliances, TVs and smartphones, wants a joint bargaining framework that includes the semiconductor-focused DS division.

Samsung Electronics’ largest union, the DS-centered Samsung branch of the Samsung Group Supra-Enterprise Union, has said it will not form a joint bargaining group for 2027 wage negotiations. In August it also sent Donghaeng a notice arguing that DX should seek separate bargaining.

One side is moving toward ‘we are one company, so bargain together.’ The other is moving toward separating the bargaining unit. Banseog’s interest is not the union conflict itself, but a deeper question: where is the boundary of shared performance inside one company?

One legal company can contain very different business economies

Samsung Electronics is one legal entity, but DS and DX operate with different products, investment cycles, competitors and profit structures.

When semiconductor conditions change sharply, DS profitability can move at a very different pace from DX. Compensation then has to choose a reference point: company-wide results, divisional results, or even business-unit results.

That choice can materially change the compensation volatility and outcomes experienced by employees who work for the same legal employer.

Inside DS, the performance boundary is already split again

Under the 2026 labor agreement, the special management performance pool for DS was set at 10.5% of an agreed business-performance measure, with no payout-rate ceiling.

The pool is allocated 40% at division level and 60% by business unit. Newspim described the design as sharing part of profitable business units’ performance across DS while still reflecting differences between individual businesses.

The boundary therefore does not stop at DS versus DX. Inside DS, common functions and businesses such as Memory, Foundry and System LSI can also carry different economic outcomes into compensation.

The deeper question is not only how much — but with whom

The DX-centered Donghaeng union is calling for measures including a common pool funded by a portion of company-wide performance. Based on the public demand, that moves the compensation denominator toward the whole company.

The DS-centered union’s decision not to form a joint bargaining group points in the opposite direction. It would be too strong, however, to say the 2027 bargaining structure has already been finally determined.

The issue is therefore larger than the size of a bonus. It is a boundary question: how much of the value created inside one legal company should be treated as shared performance?

One Company → Multiple Internal Markets

Banseog describes the pattern as One Company → Multiple Internal Markets.

This does not mean Samsung employees are legally employed by different companies or that separate legal labor markets have already formed. Samsung Electronics remains one employer.

The ‘markets’ here are the compensation, opportunity, growth and mobility environments employees actually experience. When business profitability and talent scarcity diverge and compensation systems directly reflect those differences, different parts of one company can begin to operate like distinct internal markets.

Internal mobility can become more than a department transfer

Moving from one business unit to another inside the same company is legally an internal transfer. But when growth, profitability and performance-pay architecture vary widely, the employee’s economic environment can move too.

Career choice then includes more than ‘what will I learn?’ It can also include ‘which business P&L will my work be connected to?’

That suggests a more granular way to understand employee economics: company × division × business unit × role × individual, rather than company × level × individual performance alone.

Below Employer Brand sits the business-unit talent proposition

Employer branding is usually company-wide. But when internal economics diverge, a company name alone may not give candidates enough information.

Which division? Which business unit? What is the growth and earnings profile? How is performance pay calculated? What changes if an employee moves internally?

At that point, a company competes for talent not only against outside employers. Individual businesses inside the company may also need to persuade people to join or stay.

BANSEOG VIEW | Look at the boundary of performance, not only the boundary of the company

The DX-centered union wants a joint bargaining framework with DS and a common pool tied to company-wide performance. The DS-centered union says it will not form a joint bargaining group for 2027.

At the same time, the DS special performance pool is split 40% division-wide and 60% by business unit. Moving from company to division to business unit, the boundary of shared performance is repeatedly redrawn.

Banseog calls this One Company → Multiple Internal Markets. The legal boundary of the company and the compensation-and-opportunity boundary employees experience do not always have to be identical.

When reading companies and careers, ‘Which company am I in?’ may increasingly need a second question: ‘Which economy inside that company am I part of?’