Looking at the employee suicides at Hon Hai-owned Foxconn Technology Group’s plant in Shenzhen, China, as a mere labor dispute is superficial. It is easy to see that Hon Hai chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘) is a visionary entrepreneur from his response to the events. In one week, he raised workers’ salaries twice — a total of 122 percent.
The raise satisfied workers, stunned competitors and forced the Chinese government to consider the long-term impacts of the decision on China’s development.
The first of these is that the working conditions of Chinese workers will greatly improve and they will receive more respect. The fact that the first move was made by a Taiwanese company instead of a state-owned Chinese enterprise will improve the image of Taiwanese businesspeople. Although under pressure to act, a Taiwanese company responded faster and more effectively to social pressure than the Chinese government.
Second, the salary increase is likely to trigger a reaction among workers throughout China and force other enterprises to follow in Foxconn’s footsteps. The Chinese government will not have any good reason to suppress such a reaction and the awareness among workers that they must fight for their rights will greatly increase. In other words, unless factory party committees and labor unions do not get on board with the rapidly changing environment, they will lose support quickly.
Third, increased worker income could help the Chinese government to meet its goal of stimulating domestic demand. Rising personnel costs will eliminate weaker companies, which will force structural economic reform. It will also force some foreign investors to leave China and cause potential investors to think twice before opening factories there, which will affect economic growth.
Finally, the Chinese government finds itself in an awkward position. It will be forced to welcome pay raises offered by foreign companies, even though that will hurt the interests of “red compradors,” intermediaries who facilitate government contacts. In addition, growing awareness of human rights among workers is bound to worry the government. Social movements are certain to increase in future, but is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) able to reform itself?
The Foxconn suicides have raised disturbing legal issues that may never be resolved. Will its competitors stop trying to bring the company down?
China’s central and local governments and various interest groups continue to wrangle over the Foxconn incident. However, there will certainly be changes to China’s development model. In the worst case scenario, a CCP too enamored of its power and privilege will refuse to reform. China would then become a bloody battleground where civilians and officials fight each other. In such a situation Taiwanese businesspeople would come under more pressure and many would possibly return to Taiwan. For this reason, it is important that President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration does not remain indifferent. Rather than help China, it should instead try to do the following:
First, it should ensure Taiwanese businesspeople are able to return safely to Taiwan without the Chinese government taking over their businesses.
It should also create a better investment environment to help returning businesspeople start anew and take a fresh look at controversial foreign worker policies that could hinder the growth of Taiwanese industries.
Finally, Taipei should be very cautious, as China is on the verge of tremendous political and economic change, and avoid rushing into an economic cooperation framework agreement.
Paul Lin is a Taipei-based political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY TAIJING WU
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS