“I gave them a choice. Continue this and I will by every means at my disposal teach you and get the people of Singapore to help me teach you a lesson you won't forget.
Took them 65 minutes and they decided ok it isn't worth the fight.
Why? Because they know they'll lose.
They know that I'm prepared to ground the airline. They know that I can get the airline going again without them.“
I'm confused here. Were the Singapore Airlines pilots unionized? If yes, was it illegal for them to strike? These types of "strong man" posts do so little for me. Zero useful context provided and lacking in any nuance.
For example, some light Googling tells me:
Mr Lee had in 1980 taken the pilots' union to task for staging an unofficial work-to-rule protest in November, to demand a 30 per cent basic pay...
To me, "work-to-rule protest" isn't illegal. Annoying, yes, but legal in most places. 30% increase in basic pay: Maybe their current pay was far too low? Again: No deeper info provided in your post.
Singapore is not a representative example of... anything, honestly. Certainly not of "EU / Japan / Korea" which was the original question. So I have no idea what you're getting at.
"On 20 July 2023, the Korean Metal Workers' Union (KMWU) took another strong stand against trade union repression in Korea, calling for an end to the heavy-handed tactics employed by the government."
The idea that workers in unions in Asia suddenly have robust worker protections is false.
The very fact that these fights are happening in 2023 demonstrates that there are, or at least were until recently, strong and active unions. Maybe the Korean government's 2009 law really did depower the unions, and maybe Korea will see a corresponding shortage of workers in air traffic control and similar safety-critical jobs gradually develop as the effect of that works its way through.
Because over there the job comes with a strong union and real job security?