A strike by EVA Airways flight attendants that nearly ended yesterday, 10 days after it started, had already begun faltering on Thursday when the union was greeted with an obstinate response from the company, despite making significant compromises in its demands. This is a far cry from the successful strike that the Taoyuan Flight Attendants’ Union held in 2016, which union director Su Ying-jung (蘇盈蓉) called the “first successful strike held by an independent labor union in Taiwan’s history.” The union’s success spurred other unions that had previously lacked the impetus to call their own strikes.
Taipower Labor Union secretary-general Peng Chi-tsung (彭繼宗) at the time told the News Lens that the China Airlines strike that year brought media attention to his own union’s efforts to prevent the passage of a new electricity industry law.
So, what made the Taoyuan Flight Attendants’ Union strike in 2016 so successful, and why did the union fail to achieve success this time?
Independent unions in Taiwan have long struggled to achieve bargaining power, largely because of their lack of members. Most workers in Taiwan are employed at smaller companies where unions lack effectiveness, and industry unions have often failed because of low membership, or because they are comprised of only a few people from each company they represent — not all of whom want to strike at the same time.
Taiwan’s two main airlines are unique in that each company represents such a large number of employees, and the companies’ employees are collectively represented in the Taoyuan Flight Attendants’ Union and the Taoyuan Union of Pilots.
A sizeable membership is a key factor in union success, but union members must also be united and resolute in their demands. In a 2014 paper, Lanu Kim said that dependence and cohesion are crucial to a strong union: “Dependence measures how well a union monopolizes the supply of workers to an employer... Cohesion indicates how much workers are participating in union activities.”
During strike action last week, hundreds of flight attendants who had handed over travel documents and employee badges to the union later attempted to take them back or replace them. The company then leveraged this in the media to strengthen its position.
EVA was also quick to assure the public that it was increasing flight capacity from 40 percent at the start of the strike to 60 percent by reshuffling employees and flights. This lack of dependence on striking workers weakened the union’s bargaining power, a situation further exacerbated by the union softening its stance only a week into the strike.
The union had not effectively voiced the importance of its demands to the media. Su in 2016 said that the media are important in mitigating criticism from passengers during an airline strike, adding: “How the public reacts is the key to success.”
Hundreds of thousands of passengers were affected by canceled flights last week. If the public sees a union’s demands as greedy or unwarranted, it will have to fight an uphill battle. Passengers need to be better informed about how improved work conditions for flight attendants and pilots would result in a better customer experience.
The Ministry of Labor, which speaks for workers’ interests, on Thursday reportedly accused the Ministry of Transportation and Communications (MOTC), which speaks for passengers, of leaking information on negotiations between the union and EVA management. The MOTC also “created confusion by proposing a strike authorization period,” the Chinese-language Apple Daily reported.
Unions are important in ensuring fair wages and labor conditions, but the Taoyuan Flight Attendants’ Union must be more cohesive and communicate better on key issues to achieve success.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS