[Digital Today reporter Ji-young Lee] Collective action by finance-sector unions is continuing. At KakaoBank, labour-management conflict over performance compensation and wage increases has spilled into a strike. At Nonghyup and state-run policy banks, opposition is spreading to the government’s push for a second phase of relocating public institutions to regions outside the capital.

On July 31, the KakaoBank union carried out a planned one-day strike, according to the finance sector. About 700 members took part in a “logout day” format, using annual leave or time off to step away from work.

KakaoBank and its union have been unable to narrow differences over the annual salary increase rate and criteria for performance bonus payments, it was reported. The union held a strike authorisation vote after the Gyeonggi Provincial Labour Relations Commission decided to halt mediation. Some 95 percent of those who voted supported strike action, leading the union to move ahead with the walkout. In mid-month, union membership exceeded half of all employees, securing majority-union status.

The union says that as the company’s size and performance have grown, compensation for employees should also increase.

KakaoBank plans to minimise inconvenience for customers by maintaining core services such as deposits, transfers, loan repayments and consumer protection under its business continuity plan. No additional schedule for collective action after July 31 has been set so far, it was reported.

A KakaoBank official said, "We will do our best to ensure service stability and secure business continuity so that customers do not face inconvenience." The official added, "We are responding thoroughly in line with a business continuity plan established in advance, centred on staff who report to work, personnel assigned to carry out core duties, and personnel designated for joint cooperation obligations under the labour-management collective agreement."

◆Opposition front to regional relocation widens

Opposition over relocating financial institutions to regions outside the capital is also intensifying as the government is reportedly set to announce its second-phase plan to relocate public institutions in September.

The NH Nonghyup branch of the Korean Financial Industry Union held a rally in Seoul’s Gwanghwamun on July 29 opposing the relocation of Nonghyup’s headquarters to a regional area. The union estimated about 4,000 people attended.

They argue that because Nonghyup Financial Group coordinates agricultural product distribution and price formation and mediates decision-making among agricultural and livestock cooperatives nationwide, leaving the capital region could reduce business efficiency. The union estimates that relocating headquarters would require at least 252 billion won even excluding land purchase costs, and says large relocation costs could reduce funds available to support farmers.

It also says about 73 percent of employees work outside Seoul, Gyeonggi and Incheon, limiting any balanced development effect from an additional relocation. Of 1,167 staff at the central headquarters, the union estimates about 460 could be relocated after excluding functions that must remain in the capital region, such as asset management and the data centre.

The union is also raising questions about the legal basis. It argues that because Nonghyup is an institution established for mutual aid, it is excluded under current law from public institution relocation targets, and that pursuing relocation through separate legal revisions could undermine the autonomy and independence of the cooperative.

Unions at state-run policy banks also signalled a joint response. Unions at the Korea Development Bank, IBK Industrial Bank of Korea and the Export-Import Bank of Korea plan to hold a rally on Aug. 11 near the Korea Development Bank headquarters in Seoul’s Yeouido opposing relocation. They plan to hold the rally after business hours to avoid immediate disruption, but say they could consider industrial action or a strike if relocation discussions are pushed ahead.

In the finance sector, concerns are being raised that relocation could affect work coordination among policy lenders and the securing of specialist staff. Because policy banks are in charge of expanding the government’s productive finance and managing policy funds, there is a view that prolonged conflict could also become a burden on policy implementation.

A finance-sector official said of relocation, "It appears the union is trying to block it as much as possible by continuing collective actions such as rallies to respond pre-emptively to the currently discussed possibility of relocation." The official added, "There is an atmosphere that it is necessary to share awareness of the issue with relevant institutions and respond jointly."

The official added, "Because relocating headquarters affects jobs and lives not only of employees but also of workers at partner companies such as cleaning and service contractors and many others, it will be difficult in reality to push it through."