The government on Thursday announced a draft amendment to the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法) aimed at addressing criticism of the “one fixed day off and one flexible rest day” rule.
The policy has been criticized since its introduction in January, mostly due to complaints from businesses about the difficulty of implementing it, as well as complaints from labor unions that salaries have been affected.
Premier William Lai (賴清德) said the draft would be submitted after a question-and-answer session next week to get feedback from various groups, while a proposal from Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators suggests that one aim of the amendment is to make overtime scheduling more flexible.
However, resistance from employers and the workers are the main obstacles in the path of the “one fixed day off and one flexible rest day” rule, resistance that will not be resolved through legislative changes. Employers are reticent to pay overtime, and employees are reluctant to pursue the wages they are due for fear of being reprimanded.
This workweek policy is not a radical idea — in March 2003, a cap on overtime hours was legislated through Article 32, Paragraph 2 of the act, as well as a flexible work-hours regime through Article 30, Paragraphs 1 to 3 — and these laws have been violated by employers and the workforce alike.
Therefore, the new policy has only renewed criticism of government policy — particularly by opposition party members.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Nantou County Commissioner Lin Ming-chen (林明溱) in April criticized the policy and instructed county officials to look into the possibility of not enforcing it.
The DPP will only worsen the situation if it continually revises the policy and allows exceptions.
Calls for such exceptions drew criticism in July from National Taiwan University Graduate Institute of National Development professor Hsin Ping-lung (辛炳隆), who said that leaving too much open to negotiation could disadvantage workers, given the nation’s low unionization rate.
“The Labor Standards Act protects workers’ rights to a certain degree, but the portion governing work time is difficult to apply universally” because of different industry needs, he said.
The only way to ensure workers’ rights is to be vigilant in enforcing regulations and to resist calls from employers for exceptions.
That does not mean that no flexibility should be allowed, as calculating wages for companies with large numbers of employees could be daunting. Overtime pay on rest days should be 1.33 times the hourly wage for the first two hours of work and 1.67 times from the third to eighth hours, an average of 1.57 times the daily wage, and if employers want to trade overtime for compensatory leave, they should grant workers 1.57 days — but this can be addressed through software solutions or training assistance for HR departments. Under no circumstances should difficulty or cost of implementation be an acceptable excuse for a company to violate labor laws.
The Ministry of Labor should conduct random investigations and audits. Workers should be well-informed of their rights and should feel safe in exercising them, including having the option of anonymously reporting violations. Companies found violating labor laws must be held accountable.
In January, Taoyuan Confederation of Trade Unions chairman Chuang Fu-kai (莊福凱) found that one Taoyuan-based cellphone manufacturer forced its employees to sign a letter of consent that allowed it to move their days off from the weekend to weekdays to make up for lost productivity.
“The company allegedly told its employees that if they refused to sign the letter, their right to work and benefits and their chances of getting a raise might be affected,” Chuang said.
Well-rested employees are proven to be more productive. While protecting workers’ incomes, the government must ensure proper enforcement of legislation that guarantees proper rest.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS