Looking at the employee suicides at Hon Hai-owned Foxconn Technology Group’s plant in Shenzhen, China, as a mere labor dispute is superficial. It is easy to see that Hon Hai chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘) is a visionary entrepreneur from his response to the events. In one week, he raised workers’ salaries twice — a total of 122 percent.
The raise satisfied workers, stunned competitors and forced the Chinese government to consider the long-term impacts of the decision on China’s development.
The first of these is that the working conditions of Chinese workers will greatly improve and they will receive more respect. The fact that the first move was made by a Taiwanese company instead of a state-owned Chinese enterprise will improve the image of Taiwanese businesspeople. Although under pressure to act, a Taiwanese company responded faster and more effectively to social pressure than the Chinese government.
Second, the salary increase is likely to trigger a reaction among workers throughout China and force other enterprises to follow in Foxconn’s footsteps. The Chinese government will not have any good reason to suppress such a reaction and the awareness among workers that they must fight for their rights will greatly increase. In other words, unless factory party committees and labor unions do not get on board with the rapidly changing environment, they will lose support quickly.
Third, increased worker income could help the Chinese government to meet its goal of stimulating domestic demand. Rising personnel costs will eliminate weaker companies, which will force structural economic reform. It will also force some foreign investors to leave China and cause potential investors to think twice before opening factories there, which will affect economic growth.
Finally, the Chinese government finds itself in an awkward position. It will be forced to welcome pay raises offered by foreign companies, even though that will hurt the interests of “red compradors,” intermediaries who facilitate government contacts. In addition, growing awareness of human rights among workers is bound to worry the government. Social movements are certain to increase in future, but is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) able to reform itself?
The Foxconn suicides have raised disturbing legal issues that may never be resolved. Will its competitors stop trying to bring the company down?
China’s central and local governments and various interest groups continue to wrangle over the Foxconn incident. However, there will certainly be changes to China’s development model. In the worst case scenario, a CCP too enamored of its power and privilege will refuse to reform. China would then become a bloody battleground where civilians and officials fight each other. In such a situation Taiwanese businesspeople would come under more pressure and many would possibly return to Taiwan. For this reason, it is important that President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration does not remain indifferent. Rather than help China, it should instead try to do the following:
First, it should ensure Taiwanese businesspeople are able to return safely to Taiwan without the Chinese government taking over their businesses.
It should also create a better investment environment to help returning businesspeople start anew and take a fresh look at controversial foreign worker policies that could hinder the growth of Taiwanese industries.
Finally, Taipei should be very cautious, as China is on the verge of tremendous political and economic change, and avoid rushing into an economic cooperation framework agreement.
Paul Lin is a Taipei-based political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY TAIJING WU
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) was on Monday last week invited to give a talk to students of Soochow University, but her responses to questions raised by students and lecturers became a controversial incident and sparked public discussion over the following days. The student association of the university’s Department of Political Science, which hosted the event, on Saturday issued a statement urging people to stop “doxxing,” harassing and attacking the students who raised questions at the event, and called for rational discussion of the talk. Criticism should be directed at viewpoints, opinions or policies, not students, they said, adding