8 Conclusion Conclusion The Korean auto industry is, in general, manifesting serious problems during this time of transition. Automakers’ relations with their(sub)contractors are hindering the development of innovative capabilities, which are required for the transition of parts makers that are under pressure to cut prices. New orders on parts for future automobiles are moving to the subsidiaries (Hyundai Mobis) of automakers(Hyundai Motor). Instead of a fair development of the industrial ecosystem, the weight of auto industry chaebol is increasing. The same is true with industrial relations. Neoliberal attempts by capitalists to weaken unions is becoming serious in the midst of transition. The production of core components for future vehicles is allocated to companies without unions. Industrial policy lacks a comprehensive perspective into the shift of mobility. It is, however, particularly important that this shift be examined, along with public transport and environmental policy, which today focus solely on growth and competitiveness. The situation in Korea is far from a just transition. To make things worse, labor unions have not shown the ability to properly respond to this. Industry-level unions are urgently needed to forge a democratic relationship with management so that they can intervene in the establishment of industrial policies. In this sense, the industrial policies of Germany and the responses of that nation’s largest metalworkers’ union provide a lot to think about. Unions in Korea, in particular, need to refer to Germany’s NPM towards improving the internal stability of the Automotive Forum of Labor, Management and Government, and at the same time, organize consultative bodies for industrial policymaking at the central and regional level. In addition, a“future agreement” should be concluded at the workplace level to ensure a fair transition without sacrificing workers. The South Korean Automobile Industry in Transition: A Trade Union Perspective