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.
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
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
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath