One idol tried to unionize K-pop. Almost no one followed.

A former K-pop idol attempted to form the industry's first labor union for performers, but gave up within nine months after attracting only two people as members in a business where the balance of power with agencies leaves few willing to speak up.

Last September, former Teen Top member Bang Min-su, known by the stage name C.A.P., proposed a union for K-pop idols that would push for a minimum livelihood guarantee and wider enrollment in Korea's four major social insurance programs: national pension, health insurance, employment insurance and industrial accident compensation insurance.

The proposal also wanted agencies to seek removal of malicious online comments and support legal complaints when artists were targeted.

Bang, who chaired the union's preparatory committee, submitted the filing to the Ministry of Employment and Labor's Seongnam branch office in September 2025. He then retracted the establishment on May 13 and asked the labor office to cancel the union's registration.

"Problems arose over differences in values among the [union] members," Bang told the office.

Back to when Bang first made the motion, he said around 10 idols had expressed interest in joining. However, the filing itself listed two members. Officials subsequently asked the committee four times to supplement incomplete documents, and the organizers appear not to have secured legal or administrative assistance.

"There are practical limits stemming from the nature of the job, including how idols would be legally recognized as workers and whether active idols could risk worsening their relationships with agencies to join a union," a source in the entertainment industry said. 

Idols and agencies are contractual partners on paper. In practice, until the artist succeeds, the relationship runs closer to employer and employee, which leaves little room to speak up. 

"I have nothing to say," Bang said when contacted by the JoongAng Ilbo.

The Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, which oversees policy and standard contracts for the popular culture industry, is "considering policy solutions" to the issues the proposed union raised, according to a ministry official.

Behind the not-so-glamorous market

Grievances long predate the union.

When the first-generation boy band H.O.T. broke up in 2001, its members alleged their contracts with SM Entertainment had been unfair, and disputes over unpaid earnings, mistreatment and the protection of underage artists have surfaced steadily since. Organizing has been another matter, because an agency can replace a performer who complains from a pool of trainees that is always larger than the number of debut slots.

Industry sources say the problem is closely tied to the way agencies finance new acts. Agencies spend heavily before groups debut, then recoup costs from later earnings when and if an act succeeds.

"Debuting one team costs anywhere from 5 billion won to 20 billion won [$3.5 million to $14.1 million]," an entertainment-management source said. "The producer shoulders an enormous upfront investment, and trainees accept that structure too, so the whole system becomes all or nothing."

The upfront cost model can also shift some expenses to performers after debut, depending on the terms of their contracts.

"Outside the major agencies, the cost of lessons, food, housing and practice-room rentals used during the trainee period is billed after debut," said Hyebin, who debuted as a member of girl group Momoland, in a July 4 video titled "Why idols don't make money." "Put simply, the bill comes later, and you debut owing hundreds of millions of won."

"These problems arise because trainee periods become excessively long and agencies and artists form a clear hierarchy rather than a partnership," said Kim Jeong-seop, a professor in the Department of Culture Industry and Arts at Sungshin Women's University.

Professional hazard or systematic flaw?

Performers are split on whether the contracts they sign are unfair, and close to half say they cannot tell. Far fewer take a complaint anywhere.

The Korea Creative Content Agency's 2025 survey of the popular culture and arts industry found that 45.1 percent of 1,040 artists said unfair contracts exist, while 43.4 percent said they were unsure and 11.5 percent said they do not. Among 183 singers surveyed, 47.6 percent said unfair contracts exist, 46.4 percent were unsure and 6 percent said they do not.

The survey also found that 4.9 percent of the singers reported a settlement or contract dispute with an agency in the previous three years. Another 4.4 percent reported unpaid earnings, 4.4 percent reported unfair practices on site and 2.7 percent reported a payment dispute involving a casting director.

"The distinction between investment and expenses in contracts, as well as the standards for when profits are distributed, is often quite vague," said Bae Guk-nam, a pop culture critic. "That makes disputes between agencies and artists after success almost inevitable."

The Culture Ministry's own model contracts show the same ambiguity. Its standard contract for trainees sets out the principle that "the agency shall bear all costs required for the trainee's training activities," then adds that "whether and how deductions are made shall be determined by separate agreement between the agency and the trainee."

Idols, artists or just entertainment workers?

Whether an idol counts as a worker at all under the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act is another unsettled question. Simply put, who are idols in the eyes of the law: laborers, subcontractors or commissioned freelancers?

Idols and agencies sign exclusive contracts that divide revenue rather than pay wages, so the arrangement does not establish personal subordination, the legal test of whether an employer directs and supervises the work.

Hanni of girl group NewJeans said in 2024 that she had been subjected to workplace harassment, but labor authorities concluded that she did not qualify as a worker under the Labor Standards Act, which is where the harassment protections sit.

The Supreme Court has taken a broader approach under union law. In a 2018 case involving broadcast performers, it held that worker status under the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act is not limited to people who qualify as workers under the Labor Standards Act.

The Supreme Court noted that union law is designed to protect the three basic labor rights: organizing, collective bargaining and collective action. It said worker status under the act should be assessed by looking at the substance of the working relationship.

The court said the assessment should consider factors including income dependence, who sets contract terms, whether the work is essential to the business, the continuity and exclusivity of the relationship, the degree of direction and supervision and whether payments compensate the work performed. It found that broadcast performers could qualify as workers under union law even when their exclusivity and income dependence were relatively weak, given the overall working relationship and the need for collective bargaining rights.

"We provide legal support for unfair contracts through reporting channels for people in the popular culture and arts industry," a Culture Ministry official said. "Separately, we are working to improve the industry overall through the Korea Creative Content Agency's biennial survey and by encouraging the use of standard contracts."

BY CHOI MIN-JI [cho.yongjun1@joongang.co.kr]