The Taiwan government has decided to indefinitely extend the partial ban on hiring Filipino workers that was implemented last June 1 for a period of three months. Several reasons were brought forward by the Council of Labor affairs (CLA) to justify the ban's extension.
The first is the "high abscondence rate among Filipino workers." This phrase is ambivalent and can be very misleading. Statistics from 1992 to present show that Filipinos do indeed have the highest percentage rate for leaving the job they came to Taiwan to perform.
But a close analysis of the statistics for the last year and a half reveal that the abscondence rates among immigrant workers was as follows: Indonesians, 2.54 percent; Malaysians, 2.23 percent; Filipinos, 1.63 percent; Thais, 1.03 percent. For the first six months of this year the rates were: Indonesian, 1.52 percent; Malaysians, 5 percent; Filipinos, 0.60 percent; Thais, 0.48 percent.
On the basis of these government statistics, Filipinos have not been the primary offenders for at least the past 18 months. So why is there so much concern about Filipinos and not about, for example, Indonesians and Malaysians, who recently have had higher abscondence rates? The answer is very simple: Indonesians and Malaysians have no Labor Office in Taiwan to care for their workers and they don't dare "interfere" with brokers and employers. So even though they have the highest abscondence rates, their brokers and employers aren't held accountable.
It is a natural tendency to fault the workers of any nationality who leave the job they were contracted to do. Most of the time the migrant worker is not running away from the employer but from a situation of abuse and poor treatment. It might be necessary to have more inspectors monitoring the living conditions of migrant workers.
The second reason for continuing the ban was the failure of the Manila Economic and Cultural Office (MECO) to respond in a satisfactory manner to a request by Taiwanese brokers and employers not to interfere in labor-related disputes. Intervention by both MECO and NGO's in labor disputes has always been handled with full respect for the Taiwan Standard Labor Law and the provisions of the relevant contracts of employment.
In each instance, it could be easily proven that there were serious violations committed by brokers and/or employers. What the brokers and employers are really looking for are migrant workers who can easily be exploited and abused without protection from their countries of origin.
For sure, this new policy is not worthy of a country that aspires to enter the WTO and of a president who, during his inaugural speech, emphasized the value of democracy and human rights. The ban on Filipino workers unilaterally protects the interests of the brokers and employers who would like to continue to profit from migrant workers' hard labor.
The Filipino Government through R.A. 8042 -- also known as the "Magna Carta" for overseas contract workers (OCW's) -- has a mandate to uphold and protect the rights of Filipino workers around the world.
Taiwan should be no exception! In the present situation, because of the demands of brokers and employers, it clearly appears impossible for the Filipino Government to fulfill its mandate and it might have to watch helplessly as Filipino workers are abused, cheated and exploited without the possibility of intervention on their behalf.
For these reasons, we at the Pastoral and Social Workers for Migrant Workers in Taiwan would like to request that the Filipino government totally ban the deployment of Filipino migrant workers to Taiwan until the situation improves.
At the beginning of this year, Philippine President Joseph Estrada, with Proclamation No. 243, declared this year "The Year of Overseas Filipino Workers [OFW's]" and called the OFW's "new heroes" for they "play a very important role in strengthening our country's foreign currency reserves by remitting portions of their dollar earnings."
Dollar remittances and economic considerations should not prevail against the guarantee of the Philippine Government's right to protect its citizens from unscrupulous brokers and employers.
Ciceri Fr. Bruno,
Executive secretary of the Episcopal Commission for Migrants and Itinerant People of the Chinese Regional Bishops Conference of Taiwan
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
RSS