No one could doubt Council of Labor Affairs (CLA) Minister Jennifer Wang’s (王如玄) determination to increase the minimum monthly and hourly wages next year, especially after she tendered a second letter of resignation in protest against the premier’s decision not to raise the minimum monthly wage. The question is not who is in charge of the wage matter, but how the wage committee will move ahead.
The wage committee passed a proposal on Aug. 9, which called for increasing the minimum monthly wage by NT$267, or 1.42 percent, to NT$19,047 next year and raising the minimum hourly wage from NT$103 to NT$109 next year, followed by a further increase to NT$115 in 2014. However, the Cabinet on Wednesday decided to implement the proposed increase in the hourly wage, but turned down the plan to increase the monthly wage on the grounds of the need to maintain competitiveness amid the economic slowdown.
Wang’s move made her the second minister — after former minister of finance Christina Liu (劉憶如) — to bow out of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration since Ma began his second term in office in May. Disagreements within the government over the wage issue have raised further doubts about Ma’s leadership as well as the capability of Premier Sean Chen (陳冲) and the entire Cabinet. However, the real issue that few people have noticed is that the Cabinet’s decision to reject the wage committee’s suggestions puts the committee’s credibility to the test and casts doubt on its legitimacy.
The wage committee is an advisory body set up under the council to review salary standards on an annual basis by accounting for consumer price changes, unemployment levels and other things. The 21-member committee is composed of representatives from the government and academia as well as members of labor unions and businesses. For the most part, government representatives dominate the review process because committee members tend to disagree.
The committee’s wage discussions have never brought cheer to either employees or employers over the past decades. It has always invited heated debate between labor rights groups and business associations over the feasibility of wage hikes before and even after the committee members meet to discuss the issue. This is because an increase to the minimum wage, although a move designed to lift the lowest-paid workers out of poverty, means a higher health insurance, labor insurance and pension fund burden for employers. Therefore, it causes considerable increases in personnel costs for labor-intensive industries. There is also criticism that the committee’s wage proposals fail to keep pace with inflation and about the formula used to determine such wage hikes.
Under Article 21 of the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法), the committee must present the proposal to the Executive Yuan for approval. Over the years, the Cabinet had always paid respect to whatever decisions the committee made and accepted its proposals entirely until this week. The events of the past week serve as a watershed and send out a warning about the nation’s minimum-wage-setting mechanism.
Minimum wage hikes are not an issue of right or wrong, but rather of when and how. One should realize that there will not be any gain without pain. The people who helped establish the wage review committee would like to see the mechanism make steady progress and address the issues facing both employees and employers. However, the Cabinet’s move has raised speculation of a policy that tilts toward business interests at the expense of the public’s trust in the wage committee.
As such, if the government plans to move the wage committee under the Cabinet, rather than under the council, it might still have a chance to rebuild public confidence in the minimum-wage-setting mechanism. Otherwise, it should just dump the advisory body, let the market decide the wage level and stop pretending it cares about living standards.
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.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US