Two petitions recently posted on the Public Policy Online Participation Network Platform calling for a four-day workweek and reduced working hours have passed the signature threshold, requiring the government to respond.
One of the petitions asked that the government make Taiwan the first country in Asia to implement a three-day weekend, while the other appealed to revise Article 30 of the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法) to lower the number of daily working hours to six or seven, or 30 to 35 hours per week.
According to the petition, although Taiwan’s average annual working hours dropped to 2,000 in 2021, the lowest in history, it was still the fourth-highest in the world. The petitioner hopes an extra day off could improve productivity, reduce employee turnover, and allow people to spend more time with family and friends.
Taiwan has already come a long way regarding its work revolution. In 1998, the government introduced a policy of a five-day workweek per fortnight, in the hopes that private firms would reduce working hours. This paved the way for the introduction of 84 work hours per fortnight, and finally a five-day workweek policy in 2001. With the implementation of the five-day workweek, the government canceled seven national holidays, such as Teacher’s Day.
A four-day workweek policy could cause other issues. Although the three-day weekend trend seems to be popular in places such as the US, the Netherlands and Japan, it is still in experimental and trial phases, and has only been adopted by some companies, rather than an all-out policy. Without any country fully adopting the policy, Taiwan should take baby steps when considering its implementation.
The policy might not suit all industries. As the economy is largely export-oriented and manufacturing focused, many sectors require a presence seven days per week, high productivity and a large labor force — such as public transportation, healthcare and public services. Fewer working hours could be impractical or unfavorable to these industries, and it could affect public services and some workers, such as contract workers, could end up with salary cuts. For other sectors, the policy would force employees to work overtime on their workdays to maintain the same workload, which would go against the spirit of the petition.
The policy would not be popular for small and medium-sized enterprises. With regulations governing workers’ days off, and capital paying for workers’ labor insurance and pension, a four-day workweek policy would become a huge burden to these enterprises, which could lead to layoffs. Companies in these areas might have to pay more in overtime fees, or have to draft staff to make up shortfalls.
As with the implementation of the five-day workweek, a four-day workweek would be at the expense of national holidays. For the education sector, that would mean the elimination of summer or winter breaks.
As Taiwanese start to fight for a work-life balance, perhaps the Ministry of Labor could start by amending the Labor Act and first cut down the number of working hours, or increase the number of national holidays with other measures. Instead of pie-in-the-sky labor policies, it would be better for the government to adopt a modest approach.
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
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
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.
RSS