The across-the-board increase in consumer prices was not caused by the implementation of the new five-day workweek, but by greedy employers taking advantage of the new work scheme to fatten their pockets.
The 40-hour workweek took effect on Jan. 1. The government also scrapped seven public holidays this year — to the benefit of many employers. The five-day workweek has limited effect on businesses, affecting only some industries. That some businesses have been affected only shows that many employers did not implement the five-day workweek following the announcement of the new policy last year, while there were some irresponsible remarks by government officials, which contributed to the confusion.
Former vice president Wu Den-yih (吳敦義), while he was premier, said that “whoever invented unpaid leave should be awarded a Nobel prize.”
In the same spirit, Premier Lin Chuan (林全) said that it was inevitable that consumer prices would increase with the implementation of the new workweek.
When top government officials openly endorse unpaid leave or price increases, it would be stupid not to go along. Even the civil service examination test centers have claimed that they must raise exam application fees because the five-day workweek will increase salary costs by NT$30 million (US$949,307). That is clearly a joke, as national exam proctors only work for two days and should be unaffected by the change to a five-day workweek. Many of the problems that have emerged following the new policy are just a result of having incompetent leaders.
The five-day workweek, with one fixed day off and one flexible day off, was designed to give workers at least one day off per week while allowing them the option of working on their flexible day off with increased overtime pay. In cases where the employer prefers hiring part-time workers who are paid the minimum hourly wage of NT$133, full-time employees can get the benefit of two days off per week. In a way, the new work scheme is no different from having two fixed days off, which is what the opposition advocated.
Indeed, the real reason the new work scheme has not been going well is because of a few unscrupulous employers who have used it as an excuse to raise prices, and certain media outlets and TV personalities who have exaggerated the situation. Increased personnel costs is an inevitable result of reduced work hours and the Ministry of Labor should plan more supplementary measures for industries affected by the new policy.
Given that it will take some time for businesses to become accustomed to the new rules, the ministry needs to step up its efforts to crack down on labor violations.
Employers that violate the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法) and businesses that hike their prices for no reason should be investigated and punished.
Wu Ching-pin is a former director of the Kaohsiung Department of Labor Affairs and director-general of the Kaohsiung Confederation of Trade Unions.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
Numerous expert analyses characterize today’s US presidential election as a risk for Taiwan, given that the two major candidates, US Vice President Kamala Harris and former US president Donald Trump, are perceived to possess divergent foreign policy perspectives. If Harris is elected, many presume that the US would maintain its existing relationship with Taiwan, as established through the American Institute in Taiwan, and would continue to sell Taiwan weapons and equipment to help it defend itself against China. Under the administration of US President Joe Biden, whose political views Harris shares, the US on Oct. 25 authorized arms transfers to Taiwan, another
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and