The call for justice, fair treatment and protection under the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法) was echoed at a rally on Thursday last week, when hundreds of migrant workers gathered in Taipei. Migrant workers from various countries and sectors urged the government to strengthen protections for all, particularly for domestic workers, who remain excluded from protection under the labor law.
On the one hand, the protest initiated by cross-border workers stands as a testament to Taiwan’s commitment to democratic values, particularly freedom of expression and the right to unionize, rights that are often denied in other labor-receiving countries.
This is hardly surprising, given Taiwan’s consistent ranking as the top democracy in Asia. Indeed, only two countries in the region qualified as full democracies: Taiwan and Japan, the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index for last year showed.
On the other hand, the demonstration also raised concerns about the depth of that democratic commitment, particularly whether the voices of migrant workers truly matter. The issues they highlighted have persisted for years, yet the government has done little to address them, or even dismissed them as non-issues.
Migrant workers and non-governmental organizations have long campaigned for the rights of so-called blue-collar workers, many of whom remain excluded from protection under the Labor Standards Act, do not have regular days off, and continue to face systemic discrimination.
A massive gap between the government and migrant workers’ concerns is also reflected in the country’s long-term retention policy, known as the Mid-Level Technical Worker scheme, introduced in 2022. This arrangement allows qualified migrant workers to remain in Taiwan without a time limit. They are also entitled to higher salaries and are eligible to apply for permanent residency after five years. Government officials firmly believe that the policy would improve their well-being and working conditions, as it offers a career path for foreign laborers.
However, this policy is not what migrant workers are looking for. What they seek is the abolition of the 12-year work limit — and 14 years for care workers — which they view as unfair. The long-term retention policy was not designed with migrant workers in mind.
Consequently, not only do the promised benefits remain largely unattainable, but the policy also risks worsening their already precarious working conditions by introducing new problems.
This raises an important question: as a democratic role model in Asia, should the government not take migrant workers’ voices into consideration when designing policies that affect them?
There are several reasons that Taiwan cannot turn a blind eye to migrant workers’ aspirations.
First, the country’s dependence on them is expected to increase significantly due to labor shortages and a rapidly aging society. Taiwanese aged 65 or older are projected to make up 41 percent of the population by 2060, the National Development Council has said.
While the demand for care workers continues to grow, many local workers are reluctant to take on such roles due to their association with so-called dirty, dangerous and demeaning jobs — positions that neither offer a promising career path, nor competitive wages.
Labor shortages also continue to haunt Taiwan’s semiconductor sector, a flagship industry that has long served as the backbone of the country’s economy.
This situation should serve as a wake-up call for the government, signaling that the labor crisis would not only affect non-professional workers, but also skilled and professional workers.
Second, Taiwan’s positive image is a major driving factor attracting migrant workers to the country. In an interview, a migrant worker who has lived in Hualien for more than 10 years told me that she had previously worked as a domestic helper in Saudi Arabia.
At the time, she had never even heard of Taiwan, but her employer in Saudi Arabia told her that if she ever worked there, she would be treated fairly and her rights would be respected. Looking back, she said her employer was right — and as a result, she now enjoys working in Taiwan.
However, that sentiment might be difficult for many long-term residents of Taiwan to reconcile with reality. Discrimination against migrant workers still occurs openly in the country.
Many, particularly those employed as caregivers, are routinely tasked not only with elder care, but also with running errands, tending shops, or maintaining their employers’ gardens. Nevertheless, this kind of testimony should serve as a stimulus for Taiwan to improve the working conditions of its migrant workers.
These conversations highlight the importance of non-economic factors in attracting migrant workers to Taiwan. In today’s globalized world, Taiwan should leverage this advantage — hoping that migrant workers would share their positive experiences online, rather than turning their precarious working conditions into viral content. A reputation for fair treatment and dignity at work could encourage more prospective workers to consider Taiwan as a destination.
Last, to remain competitive with other labor-receiving countries, Taiwan must reinforce its democratic identity in practice, not just in rhetoric.
Among Indonesian migrant worker communities, there is a saying — if not a stereotype — about labor destinations. Japan or South Korea is ideal for those seeking higher wages and willing to endure a lengthy pre-departure process; Singapore is chosen for its geographic proximity, albeit with more limited freedoms; Saudi Arabia appeals to Muslims seeking closeness to holy sites, but comes with harsh working conditions; and countries such as Canada attract migrants with the promise of permanent residency and citizenship.
Put differently, every country has its own advantages and shortcomings, shaped by distinct political and social contexts. However, taking foreign workers’ concerns into account could serve as Taiwan’s bargaining strength to outweigh the advantages offered by other countries. In doing so, Taiwan can position itself as a country that genuinely humanizes its migrant workers across sectors.
How Taiwan treats its foreign workers can bolster its claim to moral leadership in Asia — especially as it seeks greater international visibility and legitimacy. Taiwan does not need to choose between being efficient and being fair.
By listening to migrant workers’ voices, it can do both — strengthening its democratic identity while addressing its economic challenges. In doing so, Taiwan can set a regional benchmark for a worker-centered democracy.
Vanny El Rahman is a doctoral candidate and research assistant in Asia-Pacific Regional Studies at National Dong Hwa University.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS