The Council of Labor Affairs contradicted itself when it announced it would draft a new standard contract for migrant workers, only to then say that workers can negotiate for their board, lodging fees and even the cost of their airfare.
The council is not proposing a standard contract at all because the contract can be superseded by another agreement between employers and foreign workers that amounts to contract substitution.
The council also justifies other unjust and even illegal acts -- no days off for those working in homes; the imposition of forced savings; penalties for breach of contract; and the confiscation of passports and Alien Residence Certificates (ARC), to name but a few -- by claiming that both parties can renegotiate for better terms, or by accepting agreements provided by employers and brokers without any questions asked.
How can migrant workers renegotiate for better terms when they have little or no bargaining power? Contracts are supposed to be negotiated even if workers have not yet set foot in Taiwan or if they are required to be on probation for the first 40 days of work.
In addition, migrants cannot form their own unions and can only join existing ones. They also cannot become officers of a union. They therefore have no collective rights and can only bargain individually. Furthermore, migrants can work legally in Taiwan for a maximum of nine years -- entirely at the employer's discretion -- thus leaving workers at their mercy.
Another contradiction is the addition of a clause that states market forces should be used in charting the level of meal, lodging and plane ticket fees and that neither the Taiwanese government nor its counterparts in foreign-labor-exporting countries need bother with such issues. If that were true, why did the Taiwanese government impose a board and lodging fee on migrant workers ranging from NT$2,500 to NT$4,000 per month in 2002 and increase the maximum amount to NT$5,000 this July?
Even the governments of countries like the Philippines are not exempted from this council's impositions. The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration allows an addendum in the original employment contract, which it authenticates. This pertains to amending two articles in the contract that require board and lodging fees and airfare to and from Taiwan be shouldered by the employer.
The board and lodging fee is essentially a wage cut, as it is deducted from the minimum wage. And it is consistent with Article 22 of the Labor Standards Law, as it does not serve the needs of the worker and his family members. Other cuts include management expenses in the guise of service fees; payment for an ARC; medical check-ups; and airfare to and from Taiwan. In essence, migrant workers subsidize their employers.
We therefore propose that a genuine standard employment contract should include the following:
* Guaranteed days off every week and during statutory holidays for caretakers and domestic workers.
* No deductions in the minimum wage disguised as "bonuses" for perfect attendance, good performance and the like, and no deductions for board and lodging for factory and construction workers.
* No deductions in the guise of "savings," no confiscation of passports and ARCs by employers or brokers, as well as the voiding of side agreements for migrants.
In addition:
* All unfair and onerous company and dormitory rules should be scrapped, and migrants should enjoy due process in any conflict with employers and brokers.
* There should be strict enforcement of overtime calculations beyond eight hours, regardless of whether workers have short breaks. Overtime pay should be guaranteed for those working in factories, construction, as seafarers and as caretakers.
The council and governments of migrant-sending countries should carefully consider these proposals for a standard employment contract.
A standard contract should be recognized by the authorities as the basic and minimum content of a contract. It should fall under existing labor ordinances and laws such as Taiwan's Labor Standards Law. Violating the provisions of such a contract should be deemed illegal and be dealt with accordingly.
Gi Estrada
Asia Pacific
Mission for Migrants
Taipei
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”