Protests against Samsung

Samsung, a Korean electronics company, began producing semiconductors in 1974 and has grown to become
one of the largest semiconductor fabricators in the world. In the decades following Samsung's entrance into
semiconductor fabrication, many of its workers developed serious illnesses, including leukemia, lymphoma,
and multiple sclerosis (MS). Beginning in 2007, the families of the impacted workers, with the help of a
variety of domestic and international organizations, organized and mobilized against Samsung in the form of
various protests and legal challenges. This organized opposition lasted for over a decade and largely concluded
upon the signing of a binding settlement agreement between Samsung and the relevant opposition leader.
Additionally, Samsung issued a public apology[1] and acceptance responsibility for causing an increased risk
of serious illness in its semiconductor factories.

Contents
Background
Death of Hwang Yu-mi and beginnings of opposition movement
Hwang Sang-ki
Banolim/SHARPS
Legal victories of the opposition
First appeal ruling (2011)
Responses by Samsung and Banolim
KCOMWEL appeal ruling and Samsung apology (2014)
Representation in popular culture
Another Promise (2014)
Sit-in at Samsung HQ (2015-2018)
Agreement between Samsung and protesters (2018)
References

Background
Samsung first entered the semiconductor fabrication business in 1974 by acquiring Korea Semiconductors.[2]
By 1993, Samsung was the world's largest producer of memory chips, and it has retained that title ever
since.[3]

The semiconductor fabrication process necessitates the use of a variety of chemicals and carcinogenic
substances. At various points in the process, workers are required to dip components in chemical baths, utilize
X-ray radiation, and engage in various other production techniques that expose them to potentially harmful
chemicals.[4]

In the 1980s and 1990s, the semiconductor industry was subject a variety of criticisms for creating potential
health hazards in their fabrication facilities.[5] A number of Samsung's US-based competitors were found to
have statistically greater serious illness incidence rates among their semiconductor workforces, which led to
increased monitoring, safety standards, and protection for semiconductor workers in the US and many other
countries.[4] Samsung, however, has historically declined to release the relevant health data and information on
the environment in its semiconductor plants. This decision has been facilitated by the South Korean
government's regulations protecting trade secrets that have allowed the company to withhold relevant
information, such as the types of chemicals used in semiconductor production, despite numerous attempts to
have it made public.[6]

Studies and reports released decades after Samsung's entry into semiconductor fabrication showed that the
company has a long history of questionable health and safety practices.[7] It was discovered that Samsung
semiconductor workers' exposure to radiation was significantly beyond the acceptable levels recognized by
US regulators.[8] Moreover, it was found that Samsung neglected to actually check the chemical composition
of substances used in its semiconductor fabrication process, and that the company failed to conduct exposure
assessments for 71% of chemicals utilized in production.[8] Other investigations suggested the company
continued to use harmful substances even after stating it would no longer use them. For example, internal
documents showed that Samsung was using TCE, a known toxic substance, as recently as 2010 despite the
company publicly stating it had not been a part of the fabrication process since 1995.[4]

As such, there have been a great deal of cases of serious illness being developed in Samsung's manufacturing
workforce over the decades after it first entered the semiconductor market. However, prior to the organization
of an opposition movement, no court in South Korea had ordered Samsung to pay compensation for causing
illness in any of its workers.

Death of Hwang Yu-mi and beginnings of opposition movement

On March 6, 2007, Hwang Yu-mi, a 22-year old woman working Samsung's Giheung semiconductor plant,
died from leukemia.[9] She began working at Samsung in 2003 as an operator on one of the assembly lines.
She initially worked on the diffusion process, which involves exposure to carcinogenic substances like
benzene and TCE, and later began working on the "wet etching" process, which involves repeatedly dipping
components in chemical baths.[9][4] In October of 2005 she began complaining about fits of dizziness and
nausea, so the factory's infirmary physicians sent her to the hospital where she was diagnosed with acute
myeloid leukemia. She began chemotherapy treatment and after additional treatment her cancer went into
remission in the summer of 2006. Despite this, Yu-mi relapsed in January of 2007 and died three months
later.[9]

Hwang Sang-ki

Yu-mi's father, Hwang Sang-ki, believed there could be a connection between Yu-mi's work and her illness.[9]
Sang-ki subsequently informed Samsung of his intent to file a worker's compensation claim in early 2007 in an
attempt to receive help with his daughter's increasing medical expenses, but was met with resistance by
Samsung. According to Sang-ki, in a meeting with a group of the company's relevant managers he was met
with hostility and complete denial of any link between Samsung and his daughter's condition.[9] Soon after his
daughter's death, Sang-ki was informed by Samsung that he and his family would receive no compensation.
Despite this, Sang-ki firmly believed there was a connection between the working conditions at Samsung's
semiconductor plant and the death of his daughter, so he began his own efforts to investigate and prove his
theory.

In June of 2007, Sang-ki filed a compensation claim with the Korean Workers Compensation and Welfare
Service (KCOMWEL).[10] This was the first such claim for a semiconductor worker ever filed with
KCOMWEL. In an attempt to build support for his claim, Sang-ki contacted a variety of parties he thought
could potentially have some sort of information on the conditions of Yu-mi's workplace and whether other
workers at the Giheung factory had developed illnesses, but was often denied access to information and was
unsuccessful in gathering useful information. It was during this process that Sang-ki was introduced to a labor
activist and attorney named Lee Jong-ran, who was aware of miscarriages in semiconductor workers at
Samsung.[9] Together, Sang-ki and Jong-ran were able to procure funds from a number of interested groups to
form an organization dedicated to investigating and fighting the lack of compensation and public information
on Samsung's role in the illnesses of its semiconductor workers.[9]

Banolim/SHARPS

The organization created by Hwang Sang-ki and Lee Jong-ran was called Banolim, translated as Supporters
for Health and Rights of People in Semiconductor Industry (SHARPS). In addition to promoting and
supporting a strategy of non-violent demonstration, Banolim helped families follow Sang-ki's example of filing
compensation claims with KCOMWEL and funded their legal challenges.[9] In an effort to demonstrate the
prevalence of situations similar to that of Hwang Sang-ki and his family, SHARPS also began a project of
collecting and publicizing information on current and former Samsung workers who had contracted serious
illnesses.[5] Banolim worked with both domestic and international groups to compile as much data as possible
on the incidence of serious diseases in semiconductor workers; Banolim has thus far been able to document
320 cases of work-related diseases reported by Samsung's semiconductor workers and 118 deaths.[10]

Legal victories of the opposition

In 2009, Sang-ki's compensation claim, along with those of a number of other Banolim-supported families,
was rejected by KCOMWEL.[9] The agency claimed that it was unable to establish a link between Samsung
and the incidence of illness in the workers, although it did not publicize the raw data used in its statistical
analyses. In response, Sang-ki filed an appeal of the agency's decision in the South Korean courts and the
appeal was merged with that of other families of impacted Samsung workers whose claims were similarly
denied by KCOMWEL. KCOMWEL's defense against the appeal was funded not only by the Samsung but
by government as well.[9] Soon after the appeal was filed, there was a leak of internal documents from
Samsung that contained a non-public list of chemicals utilized in tasks like those assigned to Hwang Yu-mi.[11]

First appeal ruling (2011)

In 2011, the South Korean courts overturned KCOMWEL's decision and ruled in favor of Sang-ki's and
another families claim for compensation, although it rejected the claims of a few other families.[11] The court
ordered a government compensation fund, which was paid into by South Korean corporations including
Samsung. This marked a very significant moment for Banolim and the opposition movement, as a government
court had formally stated that Samsung played a role in the illnesses developed by many of its semiconductor
workers.

Responses by Samsung and Banolim

In response to the reversal of KCOMWEL's decision by the courts, Samsung hired the consulting firm
Environ to examine the conditions of its semiconductor fabrication facilities.[12] The report given to Samsung
by Environ asserted there was no link between the company and its workers maladies; thus, Samsung refused
to take responsibility despite the court's ruling.[12] There was also no public apology to the families from
Samsung following the ruling.

Following their legal victory, Banolim and its supporters focused on urging KCOMWEL not to further appeal
the court's decision, thus delaying the restitution process even further. From July 5th to July 7th, protesters
conducted a sit-in in the KCOMWEL office building in an effort to pressure the agency into not appealing.
After meeting with the Chair of KCOMWEL, the protesters disbanded in order to wait for a decision.
On July 12th, it was made public that KCOMWEL had decided to appeal the decision of the court.[12]
Following the news, protesters resumed their sit-in both outside and inside the KCOMWEL offices to try to
force a withdrawal of the appeal, as well as public release of the Environ report and the raw data used.

KCOMWEL appeal ruling and Samsung apology (2014)

Despite KCOMWEL's appeal, the South Korean courts upheld the ruling to reverse the original KCOMWEL
decision denying compensation.[11] Soon after the ruling was handed down Samsung publicly apologized and
promised to provide compensation (separate from KCOMWEL funds) to its workers and surviving families of
those who developed serious illnesses.[13] However, Samsung also made clear that it does not acknowledge
any claims linking the company's semiconductor production processes to serious illnesses as legitimate.[11]

Following the ruling, Samsung set up a compensation fund of 100 billion won (~$88 million USD) and
invited Banolim to participate in negotiations over how to administer the funds.[11]

Representation in popular culture

The movement initiated by Hwang Sang-ki and Banolim against Samsung garnered significant public attention
in the years following its initiation. In 2010, South Korea's largest TV station, KBS, nationally televised a
report of the protests and opposition led by Sang-ki and Banolim.[9] This prompted an increase not only in
public attention but in the number of claims filed with KCOMWEL.[9]

Public attention greatly increased after the success of Sang-ki's appeal of the KCOMWEL decision. For
example, soon after the decision a documentary about the conditions in Samsung's semiconductor facilities and
the stories of Hwang Sang-ki, as well as other families, began production. Titled The Empire of Shame, the
documentary was shown at film festivals in South Korea, as well as other countries.[14]

Another Promise (2014)

Another film also began production after the successful appeal in 2011. Also released in 2014, Another
Promise is a fictional movie entirely based on Hwang Sang-ki's struggle against Samsung. The movie focuses
on Hang Sang-gu after the death of his daughter, Han Yoon-mi. Illustrating the popular support for Hwang
Sang-ki's efforts, the movie was the first in South Korean history to be produced using only crowd funded
money. Over 7,000 people and roughly a hundred small firms contributed approximately 1.3 billion won
towards the production of the movie. The film's initial title was "Another Family," which is a reference to one
of Samsung's previous slogans, but it was later changed by the filmmaker.

Sit-in at Samsung HQ (2015-2018)

In October of 2015, protesters led and organized by Hwang Sang-ki and Banolim initiated a non-violent sit-in
protest beneath Samsung's headquarters in Seoul.[11] The protesters conducted public memorials and
candlelight rallies in order to attract further attention.[15] Also present during the protests was a papier maché
figure of Hwang Yu-mi, making reference to the origins of this instance of organized opposition against
Samsung.[11]

The catalyst for the sit-in was the breakdown of talks between Samsung and Banolim over the administration
of the compensation fund set up by Samsung after its 2014 apology. Despite hearing the conditions of Banolim
and the impacted families, Samsung ultimately imposed a compensation framework that, at least in Banolim's
opinion, was not acceptable to the families of its workers.
Lacking a response from Samsung, the sit-in went on for over 1,000 days and garnered a great deal of
attention. The protesters also created a shrine to the Samsung workers who died after working in
semiconductor fabrication. Roughly ten months into the sit-in, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights
and Hazardous Materials publicly questioned the South Korean government for withholding relevant
information from the families of Samsung workers and spoke out against Samsung's treatment of its workers in
semiconductor plants.[16] On the 600th day of the protest, the Secretary-General of the International Trade
Union Confederation (ITUC) visited the protest site to support their cause and raised the issue in a meeting
with President Moon Jae the following day.[17] A few months later, the ITUC published a report titled
"Samsung - Modern Tech, Medieval Conditions" as a part of its "End Corporate Greed" campaign.[18]

On the 776th day of the sit-in, which coincided with the ten-year anniversary of the creation of Banolim, a
widely covered press conference was held with Banolim and activists from more than 100 other groups during
which they once again called for Samsung to take responsibility and fairly compensate the workers'
families.[19] In July of 2018, 1,000 protesters joined together and formed a ring around the Samsung HQ to
commemorate the 1,000th day of the sit-in protest.[11] Less than a month after this, Samsung contacted
Banolim to reinitiate compensation discussions and the company agreed to enter into binding mediation.

Agreement between Samsung and protesters (2018)

In October of 2018, the binding mediation process yielded a signed agreement between Samsung and
Banolim.[20] The President and CEO of Samsung Device Solutions issued a public apology in which he
conceded that Samsung had not properly protected its workers against health risks and that the company had
not responded to the issues in a timely enough manner.[20]

Under the agreement, Samsung committed to pay 150 million won to each of its current and former workers
upon the condition that they are found to have illnesses due to work-related exposure to dangerous
substances.[21] The agreement also extends to contractors employed by Samsung and those who suffered
miscarriages.[21] All current and former employees and contractors that have worked in Samsung's
semiconductor fabrication facilities since 1984 are eligible to apply for compensation under the agreement and
Samsung has committed to compensating all the impacted parties by 2028.[21]

In response to the apology, Hwang Sang-ki stated, "No apology would be enough given the deception and
humiliation we experienced from Samsung over the past 11 years, the pain of losing loved ones," but indicated
he was pleased at the successful effort to procure adequate compensation.[11]

References
1. "Samsung admits fault over illnesses and deaths of workers" (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/
samsung-electronics-apology-sicknesses-deaths-of-workers-today-2018-11-23/).
www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved 2019-05-02.
2. "Samsung Electronics" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Samsung_Electronics&oldid
=887398974), Wikipedia, 2019-03-12, retrieved 2019-03-20
3. "DRAM revenue worldwide manufacturers 2011-2018 | Statistic" (https://www.statista.com/stati
stics/271725/global-dram-revenues-of-semiconductor-companies-since-2010/). Statista.
Retrieved 2019-03-20.
4. Kim, Inah; Kim, Hyun J.; Lim, Sin Y.; Kongyoo, Jungok (2012). "Leukemia and non-Hodgkin
lymphoma in semiconductor industry workers in Korea". International Journal of Occupational
and Environmental Health. 18 (2): 147–153. doi:10.1179/1077352512z.00000000019 (https://d
oi.org/10.1179%2F1077352512z.00000000019). ISSN 1077-3525 (https://www.worldcat.org/is
sn/1077-3525). PMID 22762495 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22762495). S2CID 6280174
(https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:6280174).
 5. Lee, Mira; Waitzkin, Howard (2012). "A heroic struggle to understand the risk of cancers among
workers in the electronics industry: the case of Samsung" (https://doi.org/10.1179%2F1077352
512Z.00000000022). International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. 18 (2):
89–91. doi:10.1179/1077352512Z.00000000022 (https://doi.org/10.1179%2F1077352512Z.00
000000022). ISSN 1077-3525 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1077-3525). PMID 22762486 (htt
ps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22762486).
6. Lee, Youkyung (2016-08-11). "2 words keep sick Samsung workers from data: trade secrets" (h
ttps://apnews.com/ea1b8280b50b4ad3a9bdcd9def798914). AP NEWS. Retrieved 2019-03-20.
7. Park, Seung-Hyun (2012). "Exposure Possibility to By-products during the Processes of
Semiconductor Manufacture". J Korean Soc Occup Environ Hyg. 22: 52–59.
doi:10.35371/kjoem.2012.24.1.52 (https://doi.org/10.35371%2Fkjoem.2012.24.1.52).
8. Risk Assessment Team of Semiconductor Advisory Group, Seoul University R&DB Foundation
(2009). "Advisor report about risk assessment of Samsung Giheung plant". Seoul: Samsung
Semiconductor: 5–29.
9. Simpson, Cam (2014). "Samsung's War at Home" (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2
014-04-11/samsung-s-war-at-home). Bloomberg.
10. "10 year struggle of Banollim for semiconductor workers' health and human rights" (http://englis
h.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/820700.html). english.hani.co.kr. Retrieved
2019-03-20.
11. Jan 29, CBC Radio · Posted; January 29, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated. " 'Let me die with
my mother': Samsung to compensate sick workers, but many will never recover | CBC Radio"
(https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-january-29-2019-1.4995965/let-me-die-with-
my-mother-samsung-to-compensate-sick-workers-but-many-will-never-recover-1.4996212).
CBC. Retrieved 2019-03-20.
12. "Samsung study rejects claims semiconductor plants caused cancers" (https://www.reuters.co
m/article/us-samsung-cancer-idUSTRE76D0XD20110714). Reuters. 2011-07-14. Retrieved
2019-03-20.
13. May 14, The Associated Press · Posted; May 14, 2014 8:54 AM ET | Last Updated; 2014.
"Samsung apologizes to sick workers, vows compensation | CBC News" (https://www.cbc.ca/n
ews/business/samsung-apologizes-to-sick-workers-vows-compensation-1.2642411). CBC.
Retrieved 2019-03-20.
14. "[Movie] Another Promise & The Empire of Shame" (http://www.zoominkorea.org/movie-another
-promise-the-empire-of-shame/). Zoom in Korea. 2014-03-08. Retrieved 2019-03-20.
15. GL, GoodElectronics Network International office Sarphatistraat 30 1018; Netherl, Amsterdam
(2016-10-12). "A year into sit-in, SHARPS urges Samsung's heir Lee Jae-yong to Reinitiate
Dialogue" (https://goodelectronics.org/a-year-into-sit-in-sharps-urges-samsungs-heir-lee-jae-yo
ng-to-reinitiate-dialogue/). GoodElectronics. Retrieved 2019-03-20.
16. "Former Workers Pressure Samsung Over Deadly Illnesses" (https://www.ft.com/content/f20418
26-7ba9-11e5-93c6-bba4b4b36134). Financial Times. October 2015.
17. GL, GoodElectronics Network International office Sarphatistraat 30 1018; Netherl, Amsterdam
(2017-06-02). "SHARPS marks the 600th day of sit-in against Samsung Electronics" (https://go
odelectronics.org/sharps-marks-the-600th-day-of-sit-in-against-samsung-electronics/).
GoodElectronics. Retrieved 2019-03-20.
18. End Corporate Greed (2016). "Samsung - Modern Tech, Medieval Conditions" (https://www.ituc
-csi.org/IMG/pdf/samsung_web_en.pdf) (PDF). International Trade Union Confederation.
19. "10 year struggle of Banollim for semiconductor workers' health and human rights" (http://englis
h.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/820700.html). english.hani.co.kr. Retrieved
2019-03-20.
20. Nov 23, The Associated Press · Posted; November 23, 2018 11:43 AM ET | Last Updated;
2018. "Samsung apologizes for illnesses at chip, liquid display factories | CBC News" (https://w
ww.cbc.ca/news/business/samsung-apology-factory-workers-1.4917894). CBC. Retrieved
2019-03-20.
21. "Samsung Electronics vows to pay compensation for ill workers by 2028" (https://www.reuters.c
om/article/us-samsung-workers-idUSKCN1NS09M). Reuters. 2018-11-23. Retrieved
2019-03-20.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Protests_against_Samsung&oldid=1018081487"

This page was last edited on 16 April 2021, at 05:18 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.