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.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
When a recall campaign targeting the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators was launched, something rather disturbing happened. According to reports, Hualien County Government officials visited several people to verify their signatures. Local authorities allegedly used routine or harmless reasons as an excuse to enter people’s house for investigation. The KMT launched its own recall campaigns, targeting Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers, and began to collect signatures. It has been found that some of the KMT-headed counties and cities have allegedly been mobilizing municipal machinery. In Keelung, the director of the Department of Civil Affairs used the household registration system
RSS