Workers are unionized in a lot of overseas industries that are more productive than the US. Don't know about Korea but they are in Japan and certainly in Europe. Part of it is have better union structures than we do; sectoral bargaining means any employers and unions spend less time fighting each other.
A big problem for US shipbuilding is the Jones Act, which is so protectionist it's easier for the industry to flee the country entirely than deal with it. It's really harmful to our overseas areas like Hawaii and PR too.
I am from South Korea. Hyundai Heavy Industries' Labor Union, the union of the largest and probably the most productive shipyard in the world in Ulsan, is likely one of the strongest union in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uXqkbpy-6s is an official music video of The Song of Hyundai Heavy Industries' Labor Union. Lyrics is like "Comrades, remember, the spring of '89, we will fight with our lives" etc, referring to one of the most legendary event in South Korean labor history, 128 days strike at HHI of 1989.
The union is a sectoral union, a chapter under Korean Metal Worker's Union, but it is so large it has a special carveout solely reserved for it. Korean Metal Worker's Union otherwise forbids company-specific union.
Since this was well received, here is a full translation of The Song of Hyundai Heavy Industries' Labor Union, done by ChatGPT and reviewed by me:
The Song of Hyundai Heavy Industries Union
Brothers of Hyundai, standing tall,
Piercing violence and suppression's call!
Forward! Forward! Let us rush on through!
Towards the liberation of workers, true!
Even if the power's violence is widespread,
We'll fight with our lives, ahead we'll tread!
Liberation! For liberation we fight!
Struggle! For struggle we unite!
At the vanguard of the workers' liberation call,
Hyundai Heavy Industries Union, standing tall!
The Sun is rising over the Mipo bay,
The hot tears of our mothers, they say
Forward! Forward! Let us rush on through!
Towards the liberation of people, true!
Comrades! Don't you remember the spring of '89?
We'll fight with our lives, our destinies entwine!
Liberation! For liberation we fight!
Struggle! For struggle we unite!
At the vanguard of the people's liberation call,
Hyundai Heavy Industries Union, above all!
My point was that you will not solve this with a startup, because of how a startup must operate due to its inherent nature (ruthlessly capital efficient, constrained runway). You must operate this as a long term, sustainable operation (perhaps a public private partnership), like you would build a nuclear reactor over years or a decade. To not do this is to ignore the muscle memory needed to retain the core component: teams of skilled labor with options. It’s a flywheel you bring up to speed with capital, a pipeline/book of work far into the future, and domain experienced management.
Boeing is learning this the hard way currently, for example, and is in talks to buy the subcontractor (Spirit AeroSystems) it spun out: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39571819
> A big problem for US shipbuilding is the Jones Act, which is so protectionist it's easier for the industry to flee the country entirely than deal with it. It's really harmful to our overseas areas like Hawaii and PR too.
In theory, protectionism should help the industry. The government has opened a niche for a US shipper and a US shipbuilder (or maybe a vertically integrated shipper and builder) to get mainland goods to Hawaii, PR and Alaska.
Doesn't seem like a wide enough niche to get much traction though. It's easier to simply not serve that shipping market.
And shipyards are hard to start. They've almost certainly got to be in environmentally sensitive areas, that are often pretty expensive real estate, and then you've got all the machinery and what not. Hard to get that done these days.
They'll tolerate it if appropriately compensated, e.g. if you structured the venture as a workers' cooperative where they share the upside as well as the downside.
Unions in the United States are entrenched with a particular government-backed structure that puts the high-ups far from the working guys... they're not all necessarily leftist or willing to accept models other than management-and-bargaining.
A lot of people believe the sanctioned union structure was a compromise with employers who did not want fully functional collective bargaining counterparties but who knew they couldn't eliminate unions entirely, and they could be right as far as I know.
An argument in favor of this viewpoint is the treatment of sectoral/sympathy strikes (and other important solidarity tactics like sectoral boycotts) under the Taft-Hartley act: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80%93Hartley_Act
People think of the NLRA as a legacy of the New Deal and therefore inherently pro-labor, but conveniently forget that the deal was changed by a bipartisan alliance of corporatists over Truman's veto.
Sectoral/sympathy strikes were historically the backbone of union power in the US and remain so today in jurisdictions with strong unions. Legally protecting ineffectual strikes but not effective strikes traps labor in a local maximum, where there's just enough to lose to disincentivize going for more substantial gains.