Although Taiwanese workers are used to pie-in-the-sky labor policies, it is still frustrating that they remain out of reach. Rather than continuing to call on employers to raise salaries, the government should set an example by immediately introducing a five-day work week, a policy that has been delayed for a decade.
The International Labour Organization capped working hours at 40 hours a week in the international “Forty-Hour Week Convention” in 1935, 76 years ago. The world’s advanced economies have maintained a five-day work week policy for years, and even Taiwan’s rapidly growing neighbors China and South Korea have capped legal working hours at 40 hours a week.
Back in 2000, Taiwanese workers launched a working hour revolution, which led to the introduction of 84 work hours a fortnight beginning in 2001, although they failed to achieve the goal of a five-day workweek.
According to data from the US Department of Labor, the hourly cost of hiring a worker in Taiwan’s manufacturing sector was only US$8.15 an hour in 2007.
This places Taiwan second from the bottom among the 21 industrialized countries in the survey. Mexico was the only country where labor was cheaper than in Taiwan. The cost of hiring a Taiwanese worker was only about half that of a Japanese or Hong Kong worker. From 1997 to 2007, Taiwan’s annual hourly wage grew a mere 1.4 percent, once again second to last, only ahead of Japan.
The US data also showed that before Taiwan reduced its working hours, its unit labor cost (ULC) in the manufacturing sector rose 0.2 percent from 1990 to 2000. After the cuts, the ULC dropped 3.8 percent from 2000 to 2007 and another 7.4 percent from 2008 to 2009. A comparison with the world’s 16 major industrialized countries shows that Taiwan’s ULC after 2000 is the lowest among all countries surveyed. Clearly, cutting the number of working hours did not raise labor costs as the industrial sector likes to claim.
Data from the Council of Labor Affairs show that about 60 percent of Taiwanese workers in the private sector work five days a week, enjoying two days off in accordance with company regulations. A look at the companies based on their size shows that 46.92 percent of workers in companies with 29 or fewer employees have two days off a week. In companies with 500 workers or more, more than 70 percent of all workers have two days off.
The implementation of a five-day work week policy can boost the leisure industry, increase economic mobility and allow workers to create a balance between work life and family life. It will also allow workers to recharge their batteries and make a greater contribution to their companies, reduce workplace fatigue and promote industrial upgrading — not to mention that it might boost the birth rate and therefore the future labor force.
During his election campaign in 2008, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) pledged to reduce the number of working hours and to promote a balance between work and family. After more than three years in office, he has presented no such concrete plans, although the time is ripe for the nation to implement such a policy.
Since it is the right thing to do, why not launch it in the last six months of his presidency?
The five-day work week has already been delayed for 10 years. Will Taiwan’s workers have to continue lagging behind and wait another 10 long years?
Abbie Shih is the deputy chief of the policy department of Taiwan Confederation of Trade Unions.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past