The public’s reaction to the perceived “collective decision” by about 500 EVA Air flight attendants to take Sunday off due to Typhoon Nesat shows that there is a long way to go in protecting workers’ rights in Taiwan, particularly in terms of the public’s mindset, as some people called the flight attendants selfish, while others accused them of “affecting” passengers’ rights.
Dozens of flights had to be canceled due to the flight attendants’ decision to take a typhoon day off, but people should remember what happened during and after Typhoon Megi in September last year before passing judgement.
EVA Air, the nation’s second-biggest airline, was criticized after it allowed some of its airplanes to take off and land during Megi, which killed four people and injured 662.
The airline was accused of putting the lives of its staff and passengers at risk, while the Civil Aeronautics Administration fined the company NT$1.2 million (US$39,700 at the current exchange rate) for violating the Civil Aviation Act (民用航空法).
In a bid to prevent similar incidents, the airline, under pressure from the EVA Air Corporate Union, adopted a new policy entitling employees to ask for so-called “disaster leave” on typhoon days.
The policy conforms to the guidelines governing the attendance and payment of workers during natural disasters.
The flight attendants had the right to take Sunday off, given that the government had declared a nationwide typhoon day, canceling school and work.
Although some people said that the “collective decision” constituted a strike and criticized the flight attendants for putting their interests above those of the passengers, the public should realize that labor rights do not fall from the sky; they have to be fought for. That often comes at a cost, with unavoidable inconveniences.
Earlier this year, some Taiwan Railways Administration employees took the Lunar New Year holiday off, the busiest time of the year for the nation’s transportation companies.
As expected, their decision was met with public complaints. However, it was not meant to cause inconvenience to people eager to return home for the holiday. It was a last-ditch effort made only after the workers and management failed to resolve long-standing issues over staff shortages and long work hours.
In Taiwan’s Confucian-influenced society, people are accustomed to swallowing grievances — particularly the workplace — and those who speak up and voice complaints are often frowned upon as troublemakers.
This mindset is the reason Taiwanese bosses think it is acceptable for them to send their employees Line messages and e-mails after work or on weekends, or ask them to work overtime without pay.
According to a survey conducted by online job bank yes123 in November last year, 75 percent of respondents said they had to work on days off. Between 51 percent and 69 percent said they had received telephone calls, e-mails or text messages from their superiors on their days off, asking about work-related issues.
Labor rights should not be confined to receiving paychecks on time or not being fired without due cause. Workers should see their rights fully protected, free of pressure from their superiors or peers, be it the right to take annual leave or maintain a healthy work-life balance.
The next time you see a colleague launching a petition, staging a strike, or exercising their right to take a day off in protest, applaud them instead of putting them down for their courage to fight not for only their rights, but probably also yours.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing