[Reporter’s Notebook] Chinese Firm Criticizes Korean Battery Industry

Battery Competitiveness Trapped by Regulations
Politics Focused on Appeasing Labor Unions

"When I come to Korea, I sigh. In China, 500 research personnel work until 11 or 12 at night."

These were the words expressed by Yu Sang-yeol, Vice President of Ronbay Technology in China, during his presentation on Korea-China battery cooperation at the 'Next Generation Battery Conference (NGBS) 2025' recently held by market research firm SNE Research at the L Center in Yangjae, Seoul.

Vice President Yu previously worked at domestic battery companies such as Samsung SDI and L&F before founding the cathode material company Jaese Nungwon in Chungju, Chungbuk in 2013. When this company was absorbed as a subsidiary of China's Ronbay in 2014, Vice President Yu became a co-founder alongside Bai Houshan, the company's chairman. Ronbay has held the world’s number one market share in ternary cathode materials for four consecutive years until last year.

What stood out in Vice President Yu’s presentation that day was the cultural difference between Korean and Chinese companies. Showing various R&D projects underway at Ronbay, Yu said, "Currently, 100 projects are being developed by 500 researchers," and added, "We divide research achievements into five grades and award bonuses ranging from 20 million to 100 million KRW, so everyone works hard." He then said, "When I come to Korea, I think, 'How on earth do they manage like this?'" implying that Korean battery companies are not as intense as those in China.

'K-Battery' companies are losing to China in global markets except in the U.S., where the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) acts as a protective shield. The global market share of K-Battery dropped from 23.4% in 2023 to 18.6% last year. Chinese companies have taken that position. Chinese battery makers, who previously competed on price, are now poised to surpass Korea in terms of performance as well.

The rise of Chinese battery companies is due to various factors such as government subsidies, cheap labor, and control over key mineral supply chains. However, these alone cannot explain everything, especially in advanced industries like batteries. Chinese CATL implements an '8·9·6 work system' (starting work at 8 a.m., finishing at 9 p.m., six days a week) for its R&D personnel. This company has over 20,000 research staff. Recently, Chinese BYD surprised the world by unveiling technology that allows driving 400 km after a 5-minute charge.

In Korea, the 'Semiconductor Special Act,' which exempts semiconductor researchers from the 52-hour workweek, is facing difficulties in the National Assembly. It is not only semiconductors that are losing industrial competitiveness due to the 52-hour workweek limit. Companies are fighting for survival in the jungle-like global competition, but the political sphere is only watching labor’s reactions. What meaning will the carefully protected 52-hour workweek have once companies and jobs disappear?