TAIWAN'S FOREIGN LABOR policy is such that foreign workers arriving in Taiwan on two-year contracts must pay between US$1,500 and US$3,000 to a local broker before leaving for Taiwan, and another NT$42,000 to a Taiwanese broker after arriving here.
After paying plane tickets, health check fees, labor and health insurance fees, board and lodging and income taxes, workers make only about NT$6,000 per month if they do not get paychecks for any overtime they do.
The so-called "placement fee" for Taiwanese brokers is, in other words, the equivalent of seven months' salary and the fee for overseas brokers is equivalent to eight to 16 months' salary.
Are such high fees reasonable?
Singapore's GDP per capita is about twice Taiwan's. There are approximately 700,000 foreign workers there and, as in Taiwan, blue-collar foreign workers make only around NT$6,000 per month.
For foreign laborers on two-year contracts, employers need to pay domestic brokers NT$6,000, which is equivalent to one month's salary.
Malaysia's GDP per capita is less than one-third Taiwan's. There are 2 million foreign workers there, making an average of NT$5,000 to NT$6,000 per month. Indonesian, Lao, Vietnamese and Nepalese workers who want to work in Singapore or Malaysia must pay local brokers the equivalent of three months' salary.
What this means is that the monthly wage of NT$6,000 is the going market rate internationally.
The Taiwanese government has set a minimum wage of NT$17,280 for foreign workers before various fees and costs are deducted. On the surface, the policy therefore does not seem discriminatory. But this figure has nothing to do with reality.
Most of a foreign worker's salary disappears to overseas and local brokers, allowing brokers to make extravagant profits.
These labor policies are unfair in many ways, also minimizing the profits of Taiwanese employers. The exploitation of foreign workers is also damaging to public welfare and is hardly conducive to maintaining competitive industries. In the end, these industries move overseas and Taiwan's economy pays a price.
Nor do these policies translate into good human rights practices. A US human rights report last year cited four categorical problems in Taiwan directly related to or affecting the nation's human rights: corruption among officials, gender-based discrimination, human trafficking and abuse of foreign workers.
The third and fourth issues are directly related to the nation's labor policies. Foreign workers get into debt to pay their placement fees. Then, upon arriving in Taiwan, they live in fear of being sent home before their contracts end and being unable to pay off those debts. As a result, foreign workers are usually too scared to report an employee who abuses them physically, discriminates against them or otherwise mistreats them. As a result, desperate foreign workers run from their jobs. They end up in dire situations and have a high suicide rate.
Taiwan's record in this respect is shameful.
Singapore and Malaysia both respect the market mechanism. They are not cited for these labor rights violations in the US report, which even praised Singapore for effective channels for complaints by employees.
The nation's foreign labor policy has sacrificed public interest, destroyed the competitiveness of its industries and damaged the nation's human rights image.
Unfortunately, Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (
This is truly a tragedy.
William Kao is chairman of the Victims of Investment in China Association.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs