Government officials on Tuesday said that they would assist Wistron in its negotiations with New Delhi after the Taiwanese company’s plant in southern India’s Narasapura industrial area was damaged when workers rioted.
Minister of Economic Affairs Wang Mei-hua (王美花) said the nation’s representative office in India was seeking information from New Delhi and promised government support to Wistron if needed.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Wen Yu-hsia (溫玉霞) urged the government “to take a hardline stance helping Wistron negotiate with the Indian government,” CNA reported on Wednesday.
It is good that the government expresses support for Taiwanese businesspeople operating abroad, but it should maintain a neutral stance on the issue until an investigation has been completed.
The workers claim that they were not paid the wages originally negotiated, and while this is not an excuse for violent or destructive behavior against the company or its property, if found to be true, it could impact the company’s operations, or those of other Taiwanese companies.
Hon Hai Precision Industry — a key supplier of components to Apple — came under fire when numerous employees at its complex in Shenzhen, China, committed suicide in 2010 and 2011, allegedly due to poor working conditions.
Wistron is also a supplier to Apple, and US companies such as Apple, Nike and Dell have increasingly come under pressure to investigate labor conditions at their suppliers.
Reuters reported that Wistron is being investigated by Apple over working conditions at its plants.
Apple is an important client for many Taiwanese companies, while South Asia and Southeast Asia are becoming increasingly important areas of operation for the companies, which are seeking to reduce their reliance on China, particularly due to the US-China trade dispute and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The government is also attempting to improve relations with nations in those regions through initiatives under its New Southbound Policy.
That is why it is important for the government to remain neutral until it can determine the details of the dispute between Wistron and its employees at the Narasapura plant, which had been going on for three months before the riot occurred.
Disputes about the working conditions of migrant workers employed in Taiwan have been ongoing for years, so it is not impossible that Taiwanese employers overseas are engaged in similar practices.
The government should audit overseas employers through its representative offices when such disputes arise, as it is in the interests of the nation to help resolve disputes in a manner that shows that Taiwan is a champion of workers’ rights.
Taiwanese companies want to maximize profits to justify the costs and challenges of moving operations from China to elsewhere, but the long-term damage to a company’s reputation would exceed any short-term gain if they violate workers’ rights or the labor laws of the nation in which they are operating.
US Senator Marco Rubio and US Representative James McGovern in March proposed a bill that would bar imports to the US of goods made using forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region after a public outcry about the treatment of Uighurs.
Taiwan has worked hard to present itself as democracy that protects human rights, in stark contrast to China. If Taiwanese companies gain a negative reputation with regard to workers’ rights, Taiwan also risks being the target of legislation.
The government should ensure that Taiwanese companies operating abroad hold themselves to the high standards expected of a democracy. Destruction of property should not be tolerated, but neither should unfair working conditions.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS