The Ministry of Labor on Feb. 17 announced a new path to permanent residency for migrant workers and foreign students who earn degrees in Taiwan. Workforce Development Agency Director-General Tsai Meng-liang (蔡孟良) said that the program, which is to take effect next month, is aimed at relieving Taiwan’s shortage of “intermediate skilled workers,” which was as high as 131,000 last year, the Central News Agency reported on the day of the announcement. It might also have helped eliminate one of the most egregious injustices faced by migrant workers in Taiwan: a requirement to leave after 12 years of working here.
The scheme is unlikely to achieve either of the goals. To be eligible, graduates must earn NT$50,500 per month within five years of finding employment — higher than the nation’s average regular monthly salary of NT$42,498 as reported by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics last year. Under the program, live-in caregivers must earn a minimum of NT$24,000 per month, and migrant workers in the production, construction, agriculture and fisheries industries must earn NT$33,000 per month.
A Taiwan News report published on Jan. 26 last year cited a ministry survey as showing that the average monthly salary of a caregiver was NT$19,918, and NT$28,583 for a migrant worker. It also cited caregivers as reporting an average of 10.5 work hours per day.
The conditions of the new residency scheme are simply unreachable for the majority of those it is aimed at helping. Is the ministry taking the issue seriously? It should be, given that — as Tsai said during the program’s announcement — Japan and Singapore are vying with Taiwan for foreign workers, and those countries offer more competitive salaries.
Anyone who works in Taiwan for 12 years should be allowed to stay regardless of their salary. Canada — which is also struggling with a declining birthrate and aging population — last year announced plans to grant permanent residency to 401,000 immigrants. Toward that end, it granted residency to 30,000 temporary foreign workers in essential occupations, including caregivers, who were eligible if they had “one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent part-time experience (1,560 hours) in Canada ... in the three years preceding the application date,” regardless of salary.
Salary requirements might ensure that applicants can support themselves and not become a burden on social assistance programs, but 12 years of living and working in Taiwan should be sufficient to demonstrate an applicant’s ability to do so.
If a caregiver fails to earn at least NT$24,000 per month, or a migrant worker NT$33,000, the blame might well be partly on the state because it has failed to protect their labor rights.
A US Department of State report last year said that migrant workers in Taiwan are generally exploited, and foreign fishers working for Taiwanese employers are commonly subjected to poor working conditions.
The ministry should focus on ameliorating conditions for migrant workers, which should include raising their wages, ensuring they have sufficient time for rest and giving them attainable paths to permanent residency. Taiwan needs foreign workers more than those workers need Taiwan, so it is in the nation’s best interests to be an attractive immigration destination. Canada and other nations learned this a long time ago.
Taiwan has been called a “beacon of democracy” in East Asia, so it seems inappropriate for it to be associated with harsh conditions for migrant workers. Japan has long been resistant to embracing migrant workers as a solution to its birthrate and population woes, so Taiwan has an opportunity to be an example for Japan on these issues — just as it has been with marriage equality.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS