Samsung C&T's collective bargaining with the 'company union' from 2011 to 2020 was deemed unjust, so the Supreme Court ruled that it must negotiate again with the Metal Workers' Union's Gyeonggi Branch Samsung Chapter.
The Supreme Court's First Division (Chief Justice Seo Kyung-hwan) announced on the 4th that it confirmed the second trial's ruling in favor of the Metal Workers' Union in the collective bargaining enforcement lawsuit against Samsung C&T.
Samsung C&T's institutional sector for resorts was a separate entity known as Samsung Everland until July 2014. That year, Samsung Group changed the name of Samsung Everland to Cheil Industries and then absorbed it into Samsung C&T in September 2015.
Samsung Everland saw the establishment of the Everland union in June 2011, followed by the formation of the Samsung Chapter under the Metal Workers' Union the next month. However, the company only recognized the Everland union as the official union and entered wage and collective agreements solely with that union.
In 2013, then-Justice Party lawmaker Sim Sang-jeong raised what is known as the 'Samsung union disruption suspicion' based on internal documents from Samsung. It was alleged that Samsung Group implemented a strategy to disrupt union activities by creating a company union whenever internal signs of unionization efforts were detected.
In relation to this, former Samsung Electronics Vice President of Human Resources Kang Kyung-hoon and others were indicted on charges, including obstruction of business, and were found guilty in 2022. In the same year, the Supreme Court ruled in the case brought by the Metal Workers' Union chapter regarding the 'confirmation of the invalidity of the establishment of the Everland union' that 'the Everland union has no validity as a company union.'
The Metal Workers' Union chapter filed a lawsuit claiming they should negotiate collectively with the company for the first time since its establishment in 2011, up to 2020. The first trial ruled in favor of Samsung C&T, stating, 'There is no legal basis for a wage agreement that retroactively alters past legal relationships.'
However, the second trial ruled in favor of the Metal Workers' Union. The court stated, 'The collective agreements and wage agreements made by the Everland union from 2011 to 2020 have no validity as collective agreements under the Trade Union Act.' It added that 'the Metal Workers' Union chapter was the only union capable of exercising collective bargaining rights within Samsung C&T, yet it was not guaranteed those rights.'