"Problems can be resolved through negotiation; we will fight to the end against violent suppression!" — An Interview with the Democratic Union of Modern Heavy Industries

【Editor’s Note: Below is a record of an interview conducted by readers of this publication with a leader of the Democratic Union of Modern Heavy Industries, who is currently in hiding following the suppression of the workers’ struggle at the factory.】 Q: What were the main causes of the strike? A: The workers’ union at Modern Heavy Industries was officially established at the end of 1987. From its inception, issues concerning workers’ rights and interests were resolved through collective bargaining between workers and management. Starting in June 1988, the union began collective negotiations with management over various demands raised by workers (see [1]). However, after six months of negotiations, management consistently refused to accept our demands. Exercising our “Three Labor Rights” (Interviewer’s note: South Korea’s Constitution guarantees workers the rights to organize, to bargain collectively, and to strike), we resolved to go on strike. Management labeled our strike “illegal” and accused us of being “communists” and “rioters.” Due to such baseless accusations by management—and the resulting distorted media coverage—we received no public support during that period. Our negotiations with management for the benefit of all workers were not conducted from the standpoint of a “labor movement,” but rather from the legitimate position of a “trade union.” Of course, as the trade union movement develops, the broader labor movement will also grow stronger—won’t this contribute to the democratization of our country? This is precisely what we aspire to. Q: Negotiations began in June 1988 and continued until the strike commenced on December 12, 1988, lasting until the government’s violent suppression on March 30—a total of 109 days. Why did this struggle drag on for so long? A: That’s correct—we formally launched a full-scale strike on December 12. At that time, the union chairman (Interviewer’s note: His name was Seo Tae-su) led the strike for fewer than five days before meeting with management alone. Afterwards, he called on workers to resume work fully first, and only then resume negotiations. At the time, the majority of union members and the union’s executive committee deemed the chairman’s unilateral action inappropriate. Moreover, resuming work without achieving any gains was simply unthinkable. Consequently, union members voted a vote of no confidence in the chairman and removed him from office. Some lawyers advised our union that, although Seo Tae-su had disregarded workers’ opinions, he remained the legally designated union chairman—and thus, even if workers reorganized a new executive committee, it would not be legally recognized. Therefore, union members held another vote and elected the then-vice-chairman—currently the chairperson of the Strike Guidance Committee, Lee Won-geun—as the new union chairman. The heavy industry plant’s union has a total of 18,000 members; two-thirds participated in the vote, and over 90% supported Lee Won-geun’s election. Yet management refused to recognize the newly elected union executive committee, branding it an “illegal organization” and refusing to negotiate with us. During the strike, we were repeatedly attacked by thugs dispatched by management. On January 8, 1989—late at night—while we were holding an assembly inside the factory, management’s thugs armed with wooden clubs and iron rods suddenly assaulted our group of workers, leaving many with serious head, waist, arm, and leg injuries. On February 21, over 8,000 union members staged a sit-in protest inside the factory, when management deployed more than 200 security guards and thugs, each wielding knives, sharpened water pipes, iron rods, and wooden clubs, launching a surprise attack. Many workers sustained injuries.

Soldiers carry only 150 rounds of ammunition—what happens when they run out on the battlefield?

From the perspective of cartridge types, the new 6.8 mm ammunition includes: general-purpose rounds, specialized rounds, blank cartridges, reduced-range training rounds, and tracer rounds (visible only from one direction, offering better concealment). Currently, only the general-purpose round and blank cartridge are officially fielded—with the general-purpose round, designated XM1186, being the most widely issued. Its design closely resembles that of the U.S. military’s current 5.56 mm M855A1 enhanced-performance round: both feature semi-jacketed, steel-core projectiles with exposed tips to improve armor-piercing capability. Leveraging a case capacity equivalent to that of the 7.62×51 mm NATO round—but filled with higher-energy-density, faster-burning propellant—the XM1186 achieves a chamber pressure of up to 80,000 PSI and a muzzle energy of 3,653 joules—nearly double that of the current 5.56 mm M855A1 round, and even exceeding the 7.62×51 mm M80A1 round by 180 joules. This substantial increase in chamber pressure and muzzle energy not only enhances terminal effectiveness, but also yields flatter long-range trajectories and greater resistance to environmental factors like crosswinds—resulting in markedly improved accuracy at medium-to-long ranges. The copper-steel hybrid case reduces weight by 23% while retaining sufficient strength to safely contain this generational leap in chamber pressure. Like all weapon systems, the XM1186 represents a deliberate trade-off of performance attributes: its larger size reduces the individual soldier’s combat load from 210 to 140 rounds, and increases total ammunition weight. In response, the U.S. Army believes the significant gains in accuracy, lethality, effective range, and concealment more than offset this drawback. Moreover, the “Ammunition Management System” integrated into the M7 rifle—combined with resupply drones and the newly fielded Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV), a light tactical all-terrain vehicle for infantry squads—greatly enhances both squad-level ammunition carriage capacity and resupply efficiency. But most fundamentally, the performance advantages conferred by the new rifle will transform infantry tactics: dramatically improved armor penetration significantly reduces the number of physical barriers behind which enemies can take cover—such as hollow-brick walls.

Strike Continues at Lake City Army Ammunition Plant as Union Rejects Latest Offer

Apr 28, 2026

Olin Corporation faces an ongoing strike at its Lake City Army Ammunition Plant after the union rejected the latest contract offer. The dispute involves the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Local 778.

The Business Journals

2026-01-09

Olin Cuts Q4 EBITDA Guidance

2026-03-31

Mizuho Issues Positive Forecast for Olin (NYSE:OLN) Stock Price

2026-04-02

Olin Corporation to Release Q1 2026 Results on May 7, Host Investor Call on May 8

2026-04-03

Olin Corporation First Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call Announcement

2026-04-06

Olin Stock Upgraded to 'Overweight' by Wells Fargo