Frankly speaking, I'm really displeased with the quality of Taiwan Railway Administrations' (TRA) service. As railroad employees collectively took a day off on Mid-Autumn Festival, I was one of all those who had to suffer delays. But I still support the union's strike.
Taking a collective holiday is in effect the same thing as going on strike. This is a rare phenomenon in Taiwan. During the martial law era, it would have been tantamount to rebellion and so it would of course never happen, although martial law was lifted many years ago, labor strikes are as rare as the horn of a unicorn. Although labor disputes are as common as fish in the sea. We have to this day seen a mere 36 disputes end in strikes. Of these 36 strikes, only 11 have been legal. Apart from a spike in 1988, strikes have each year stayed in the single digits, and there has not been a single strike since the five-day drivers strike of United Highway Bus Co in November 1998.
Labor strikes (especially in public transportation) will of course bring harm to society, but capitalist nations regard them as something natural. In Germany, a country where the number of strikes has been low (over the past 10 years, an average of nine working days have been lost to strikes per 1,000 German workers per year, while the numbers are 22 for the UK and as high as 48 for the US), Lufthansa engineers and railway employees launched a major strike not long ago.
The tolerance in capitalist societies towards strikes derives from the bitter lessons they learned during the industrial revolution. Workers at the time were destitute and exploited by capitalists. They rose up against oppression and organized labor unions to focus their strength and then used the strike as a weapon to force the capitalists to back down.
The strike is a necessary evil in an open society. When the weaker classes are unable to use this tool to air their dissatisfaction, they become no more than sacrificial lambs and then society has to face the injustice and evils that arise from the gap between the rich and the poor.
From the day the railway employees declared that they collectively would take a day off on Mid-Autumn Festival, the Taiwan Railway Labor Union has been criticized by the public. Politicians have blasted railroad workers for being "anti-reform," consumer organizations have condemned them for ignoring the interests of the public, and media commentaries have criticized them saying that their strike lacks legitimacy. Society as a whole has acted as one formidable enemy, when what we should ask is what railroad workers should do about their livelihood if there was no strike thereby meeting the interests of the greater public.
It is a fact that the quality of the TRA services needs improving. Reform is of course necessary. However, the TRA's problem -- which includes its most severely criticized burden, its human resources -- basically stems from structural factors of the past. In the government's view, following its plan would make the TRA prosper.
But looking at the privatization of other state-run enterprises over the past few years, I'm afraid no one believes that officially directed reform will bring the best possible results for the TRA, especially given its conflict of interests between the current government and the High Speed Railway Corp.
Railway workers shouldn't be mere subjects of reform. Showing their strength through this strike, they should be able to force the government to stop ignoring other opinions and instead sit down in earnest at the negotiating table to work a out a win-win solution.
Huang Jui-ming is an associate professor of law at Providence University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath