The headquarters of Netmarble, one of South Korea’s leading mobile game producers, used to be called the “lighthouse of Gurodong”, the industrial district in western Seoul, because its engineers often stayed up all night to meet the deadline for game launches.

But Netmarble’s stressful work environment came under the spotlight following a series of worker deaths in 2016, sparking public criticism of so-called “crunch mode” — when developers in the IT industry put in long periods of overtime to finish a project.

And Netmarble was not alone. Naver, South Korea’s biggest search engine, came under fire in 2021, when a developer in his forties died by suicide, leaving a note indicating extreme stress from relentless overtime and workplace bullying.

Now, though, after these cases exposed apparent failures to care for employees’ mental health, a cultural change is afoot in Asia’s fourth-largest economy — albeit slowly. South Korea’s government has promised to overhaul the country’s mental health system, while big companies are providing mental health programmes for their staff.

“Following the tragic incidents in 2016, we have been actively working over the past eight years to encourage a healthier work-life balance for our employees,” says Seijin Park, Netmarble’s spokesperson. 

The company has eliminated the so-called “blanket wage system”, under which employees were forced to do overtime for free. It has also set up an on-site healthcare centre staffed with professional counsellors.

Naver, meanwhile, has established an internal human rights committee and says it regularly assesses its corporate culture. It also runs a counselling centre for employees and offers a free annual mental health check-up.

“Employees’ [personal] growth and wellbeing are directly related to corporate competitiveness,” Naver says. “We are trying to ensure that our employees can exert their best ability in their best condition.”

Experts say Korea’s wider work environment has improved since the country limited the maximum working week to 52 hours in 2018 and enacted a law in 2019 to crack down on workplace bullying.

“Productivity has become much more important for Korean companies as the work hours get shorter,” says Jeon Sang-won, who heads a workplace mental health institute at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital in Seoul. “Big IT companies are actively investing in employees’ mental care as they are increasingly aware of the seriousness of presenteeism as well as absenteeism.”

However, many workers still complain of frequent overtime and a hierarchical corporate culture. The country has among the longest working hours in the OECD, and accusations of bullying continue due to the rigid, top-down management style.

“I have to work overtime almost every day when it gets busy,” says a 34-year-old office worker in one of Samsung’s units. “I am exhausted because of high performance pressure. I really wanted to quit when an executive recently cursed at me.”

Like many other big Korean companies, Samsung — whose electronics subsidiary is ranked 49th on the Best Employers Asia-Pacific list — offers free mental health counselling.

The employee says he never used this because of fears that the information could be shared by his managers, but the company insists that the service is strictly confidential.

Young employees are frustrated with corporate culture lagging behind generational change

Samsung says it abides by legal working hours and supports its employees’ work-life balance. It also runs various programmes for their mental health and deals firmly with any reported verbal abuse.

Jeon estimates that 60 per cent of Korean employees’ occupational stress comes from relationship conflict, and attributes it to the value put on team work in Confucian culture. 

“They suffer from all kinds of conflict stemming from generational, gender and rank differences,” he says. “Especially, young employees are frustrated with the country’s corporate culture lagging behind generational change, while working mothers show higher occupational stress due to prevalent gender discrimination.”

DH Kim, a communications manager at one of the country’s biggest conglomerates, recently received external counselling for insomnia because of her heavy workload and conflict with her colleagues.

“It is so stressful to adjust to the collective culture,” she says. “For example, you have to attend a company dinner even if you don’t want to.”

Like Kim, many Koreans remain unhappy despite the country’s fast economic growth. South Korea’s suicide rate, at 27.3 per 100,000 people last year, is the highest in the OECD. And, according to the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the number of South Koreans seeking treatment for mental illness increased from 3.2mm in 2017 to 4.3mn in 2022 — a 35 per cent rise.

Last year, President Yoon Suk Yeol set up a committee to oversee new mental health initiatives. He also promised to offer free counselling services for 1mn people and to increase the number of mental healthcare facilities by the time his term ends in 2027.

But Jay Kwon, a senior counsellor at MindGym, which provides corporate wellbeing services, says companies are still too focused on performance to give mental health the attention it deserves.

“Employees in cutting-edge industries are more stressed because of stronger performance pressure, but these companies tend to care more about growth and profits than their employees’ mental wellbeing,” he observes.

Jeon believes Korean companies need to make a systematic effort to overhaul toxic cultures — but reckons most see money spent on conventional management consultancy and facilities as a better way to boost productivity than investments in mental health.

“Most top managers still shun consulting on corporate culture because they don’t want to reveal the dark side of their company,” he says.

However, he adds: “When a fish struggles to breathe, you need to change the water in the fish tank.”

MILLIONS of consumers with a mental or physical disability feel excluded from products due to accessibility issues from food packaging to clothing design and store layouts.

A poll of 1,000 adults with invisible and visible disabilities revealed over two-thirds (68%) have felt ignored by retailers and manufacturers.

2

2

Advertisement

And 55% believe mainstream brands simply aren’t interested in making products that cater to their individual needs.

With some of the top issues being food packaging, which is hard to open, clothes which have poor sizing or awkward fastenings and stores with high shelves and poor lighting.

As a result, 76% are loyal to companies who offer a good range of accessible option.

While 80% claim brands could be missing out on millions of pounds worth of sales by not considering disabled consumers.

The spending power of disabled people and their households, known as the purple pound, is estimated to be worth a staggering £274 billion a year.

It also emerged that while 32% don’t expect to see a change from those in the fashion or transport sectors anytime soon – technology has made pace.

With the top tech innovations for people with a disability named as virtual assistants, smart home devices and wearable devices for health monitoring.

Katharina Mayer, head of LifeStyle Lab Europe at Samsung, which commissioned the research, said: “This research has highlighted the huge opportunity for brands to better understand the accessibility needs of consumers to provide greater access for people with disabilities in the UK.

“Companies are rarely able to test their ideas with diverse people with different needs, but this is a must”.

It also emerged 72% of those surveyed have had to abandon a purchase due to a product’s lack of accessibility.

But 56% would be willing to pay more for a product or service that fully met their accessibility needs.

When it comes to online shopping, 80% struggle with websites that are not optimised for accessibility.

While 30% battle through a poorly designed checkout process, and 22% bemoan a lack of text descriptions for images.

Samsung’s spokesperson added: “It’s time to re-write this narrative.

“When designers consider varied needs from the beginning, they don’t just serve people with disabilities – they create solutions that benefit everyone and that is the approach we take to inclusive design at Samsung.”

Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@news.co.uk.

Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories

Which companies do people most like working for in Asia-Pacific? The FT and Statista surveyed 50,000 employees to find out. Plus: long hours in Japan; caste and corporate India; China’s robot revolution; stressed-out South Korea; Australia’s costly childcare

Paul Cheshire (Letters, November 7) contends that agricultural property relief pushed up land prices. He says the price of farmland rose fourfold in the 20 years from 1992. But he forgets that during that period sterling M3 rose fivefold at a time when the UK economy was on its back.

Where else was this monetary incontinence, resulting from the total incompetence of the Monetary Policy Committee, to go but into asset prices, most obviously those in short supply like land? The steep increase in M3 accelerated for the following 10 years as did prices for farmland. At the same time inflation quite predictably rose into double figures. Economics is not known as the dismal science for no reason to the surprise of the MPC. Unlike scientists, economists adhere to economic theories that support their political views. As a result we have modern monetary theory, which is akin to scientists suspending the law of gravity.

Mark Tennant
London W2, UK

MILLIONS more drivers could be owed compensation in a car finance mis-selling scandal after a landmark legal case.

Lenders are set to be given more time to look at complaints after a court decision opened the floodgates to more claims.

1

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) launched an investigation at the start of the year into whether motorists were unknowingly overcharged when they took out a loan to buy a car.

This focused on Discretionary Commission Arrangements (DCAs) which gave dealerships an incentive to push customers towards pricier financing deals.

Those who bought a car, motorbike or van on finance before January 28, 2021 (when DCA was banned) could be owed thousands of pounds.

Now the regulator has set out plans today to extend the deadline by which lenders have to respond to complaints.

It follows a Court of Appeal ruling last month that a broker could not lawfully receive a commission from the lender without obtaining the customer’s fully informed consent to the payment.

The decision applies to more types of commission and not just DCA, meaning more drivers could be owed cash.

The FCA said firms are likely to receive a “high volume” of complaints following the judgment and that an extension is needed to deal with claims.

Close Brothers and Firstrand, the subject of the case, intend to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision.

The watchdog also said it will write to the Supreme Court asking it to decide quickly whether it will permit lenders to appeal.

In a statement published this morning, the FCA said: “Any complaint extension would allow them time to consider how these might be efficiently and effectively handled.

“This would help prevent disorderly, inconsistent and inefficient outcomes for consumers making complaints, motor finance firms and the market.”

Proposals are expected to be published in two weeks, which would mean the complaint extension is in place by mid-December.

Following the news today Money Saving Expert Martin Lewis has weighed in on what it means for drivers.

Writing on X, formerly known as Twitter, he said: “It signals that the FCA is paving the ground to in future broaden the scope of its car finance investigation, so not only at the 40% of past claims that had DCAs (where dealers could increase their commission by increasing interest) but all commissions including fixed commissions.”

Martin also said that it essentially means that “almost everyone” who has had car finance deals may have a complaint and be due money back.

He explained: “This potentially more than doubles the number of people involved, and would really start to look more like PPI scale of payouts (and a substantial threat to the car finance industry).”

The Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) scandal saw 16.5million people handed payouts totalling £38.3billion after banks and other financial institutions mis-sold PPI policies to millions of customers between 1990 and 2010.

The FCA has been unable to confirm how many people will now be possibly owed cash.

Alex Neill, co-founder of consumer rights group Consumer Voice said: “The financial regulator has signalled it will allow motor finance providers more time to consider how to deal with complaints about all secret commissions, not just those that are discretionary.

“This is big news for consumers as it could mean significantly more money is owed to more people.”

“Anyone who has already been told by their finance provider they didn’t have a discretionary commission on their loan should now be asking if any commission at all was applied. If it was, they may be owed compensation.”

Delayed investigation outcome

The FCA had planned to publish the outcome of its investigation in September.

However the publishing date has been pushed back to May next year and the date firms have to respond to customer complaints to December 4, 2025.

It’s worth nothing, the FCA’s decision to extend the deadline to December 4 next year is just when firms have to respond to any complaints.

Customers can still complain to their providers before this point, and in some cases, there are time limits for doing so.

You can find more information about any time limits on the FCA website.

What is the Car Finance Discretionary Commission Scandal?

The Car Finance Discretionary Commission Scandal affects those who bought a car, motorbike or van on finance before January 28, 2021.

After this date, the city watchdog the FCA banned lenders from using “discretionary commission arrangements” (DCAs).

DCAs allowed brokers to increase interest rates on car finance loans, which in turn saw their commission bumped up.

It has been classed as an unfair practice because drivers weren’t told about the DCAs and therefore thought any deals were a fixed price that they couldn’t negotiate on.

Anyone who took out a vehicle on finance before January 28, 2021, could have been unfairly paying more than they should have.

The FCA has now launched an investigation to see how many people have been impacted.

MSE’s website has a useful checklist on who might be in line for money back.

It also has a list of firms that are unlikely to have handed out dodgy deals and therefore don’t owe customers money.

Among the major lenders which could be set to pay out compensation are Lloyds Banking Group, Bank of Ireland, Investec and Santander.

These banks are said to have set aside millions of pounds to help cover the costs of the payouts since the court case in October.

The Royal Bank of Canada has estimated that the industry’s bill for motor finance compensation could stretch to £13billion.

How to claim

Consumer website MoneySavingExpert.com has a page on its website with an email template you can use to complain to your firm.

Or, you can complain directly to them without using the template.

It’s important to note that anyone who took out car finance should make a claim.

Plus those who claimed previously but had it turned down before should try again.

In the complaint, you should ask whether you were overcharged due to your broker getting paid a commission and ask the company to correct this if that is what happened.

If you’re not satisfied with the company’s response, you can take your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) for free.

You have until July 29, 2026, or up to 15 months from the date of their final response letter, whichever is longest.

Be wary of using a claims management firm to help you claw back any overpaid car finance as you’ll have to pay it a portion of any successful claim.

The FCA has previously said the total cost of redressing motorists impacted by the car finance scandal could cost firms between £6billion and £16billion.

It means affected customers could get potentially £1,000s back in overpayments.

Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@news.co.uk.

Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories