In a classic quote from the movie Wall Street, blue-collar worker Carl Fox says: “The only difference between the pyramids and the Empire State Building is the Egyptians didn’t allow unions.”
In Taiwan, less than 7 percent of workers are organized into labor unions. This is less than half of the 15 percent average unionization rate among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries.
With such low unionization, how much better can conditions for Taiwanese workers be than for those who built the pyramids thousands of years ago?
For many years, Taiwan stood on the front lines of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union. This coincided with the White Terror era, when leftists were purged. Taiwan also has its replica of the American Dream — the idea that any worker can become a boss. For these reasons, Taiwanese are unfamiliar with workers’ strikes and regard them with suspicion.
If we look at society’s reaction to the three airline strikes that have happened over the past three years, the dividing line between those who support a strike and those who oppose it does not coincide with the divide between those who support unification with China and those who want independence for Taiwan.
Instead, a hint of class consciousness is emerging that can be compared with the generational battle over same-sex marriage.
Minister of Transportation and Communications Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) has urged the two sides in the latest dispute to “think about it from the other side’s point of view.”
He wants them to harness the strength of communication and dialogue in deliberative democracy.
As far as the strike by EVA Airways flight attendants is concerned, the government should not do too much to help the employer solve the problems arising from the strike.
The only exception is the outlying Matsu Islands, which are only served by EVA subsidiary Uni Air, so the government has a duty to intervene to protect the rights of the islands’ inhabitants.
It seems more and more likely that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) will put forward a corporate capitalist as its presidential candidate. If the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) does not do more to harness progressive values, Taiwanese might see middle-class and young people voting for “third force” parties instead.
Taiwan’s economic transition must avoid the old strategy of a “race to the bottom,” which sacrifices the environment and human rights. Unlike China, Taiwan has long since graduated from the demographic dividend.
If the DPP follows the KMT’s old ways, it cannot expect people to vote for it. It would do better to expand and improve the DPP government’s achievements in innovation and social welfare, while supporting small and medium-size enterprises and workers.
The kind of people who dare to turn the tables on uncaring employers and say: “If I don’t like it, I won’t do it” are definitely not losers who only know how to complain. They are technical workers and experts who are not so worried about losing their jobs because of labor disputes.
Such workers are often seen as “labor aristocrats.” Despite the highly restrictive legally prescribed procedures for holding strikes, these specialized workers dare to collectively fight for their rights.
They are capable of moving from one country to another or heading over to China for better pay and conditions, but instead of leaving, they prefer to stay and work in Taiwan. Does this not show how much they love the nation?
In the course of these strikes, society’s view of industrial disputes is likely to become more mature and move beyond tearful sympathy for the disadvantaged.
The ruling party should show the non-unionized majority of workers and staff that the Labor Standards Act (勞基法) is not just a pretense, and that as long as they are reasonable, the government will side with workers.
Next to the Egyptian pyramids lie the graves of the workers who built them, and beside Taipei 101 stands a memorial to victims of work-related deaths and injuries. The title of that memorial is “Partners.”
Employers and employees should get together and establish new partnerships. They should be willing to shake hands and make up after a fight.
If the two sides can reasonably share the fruits of economic growth, Taiwanese workers could live better than those who built the pyramids and companies would still be competitive in international markets.
Pan Han-shen is international secretary of the Trees Party.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with