When workers at a garment factory in Yangon, Myanmar, went on strike in February to protest starvation wages, their employer had the army called in.
“[It’s a] classic case of union-busting ... Military vehicles and police showed up to threaten them,” says Ray Cheng (鄭中睿), director of Youth Labor Union 95 (青年勞動九 五聯盟), a Taiwan-based labor rights group that exposes abuses by Taiwanese transnational corporations. “Then the company fired all 26 union members, claiming they’d skipped work [during the strike] and violated their contracts. It was outrageous”
The company in question is Taiwan-headquartered Pou Chen (寶成), the world’s largest manufacturer of branded athletic and casual footwear. The company has an ignominious history of rights violations in Southeast Asia. In 1997, reports of physical and sexual abuse at Pou Chen factories in Vietnam surfaced; in 2011, supervisors at a Pou Chen facility in Indonesia were caught assaulting their staff. Pou Chen dismissed the incidents as “isolated cases,” promising to improve training procedures.
Photo courtesy of Tom Fisk
The violations in Myanmar suggest little has changed. By establishing facilities in a country where labor rights oversights are practically nonexistent and independent unions have been outlawed following a military coup in 2021, Pou Chen has made little progress when it comes to labor rights.
The corporation is far from anomalous among Taiwanese manufacturers, as Cheng made clear at a recent labor rights conference.
Another company with a questionable rights record is Nien Hsing Textile Co (年興紡織), the world’s sixth-largest denim fabric producer, and a supplier for major brands such as Levi Strauss & Co. A 2019 report by the Workers Rights Consortium (WRC) — a US-based NGO that monitors labor rights in the garment industry — uncovered systemic gender-based sexual harassment and violence by supervisors at the company’s factories in Lesotho.
Photo courtesy of Van Long Bui
With employees distrustful of Nien Hsing’s internal resolution mechanisms based on previous failures and the company’s attempts to limit freedom of association, union activists and women’s rights groups took their grievances directly to the brands for whom Nien Hsing contracts. Historically such approaches had not enjoyed much success because of the “pricing power” of the manufacturers, says Cheng.
“When they don’t comply, the brands can’t do much because they can’t find anyone else to take up 60-plus percent of their supply,” says Cheng.
BRAND AWARENESS
However, there are signs that the brands are accepting responsibility for ensuring all elements of their supply chains are following environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) regulations.
In the Nien Hsing case, unions and rights groups in Lesotho signed individual agreements with each brand, compelling them to reduce orders from the Taiwanese supplier in cases of the latter’s non-compliance.
Separate accords were inked with Nien Hsing itself, and the WRC and other US-based NGOs were also signatories to the agreements, which are now enforceable in US courts.
As an executive committee member of the Clean Clothes Movement East Asia Coalition, Cheng focused on Taiwan’s garment manufacturers during his presentation at the conference, which was organized by Taiwan Transnational Corporations Watch (TTNC Watch, 台灣跨國企業監察), a Taiwan-based coalition of seven groups advocating for human rights, labor rights, and environmental protection.
Another by Chang Yu-yin (張譽尹) spotlighted Formosa Plastics Group (FPG, 台塑集團), whose diverse operations include biotech, petrochemicals and electronic components production.
Chang, an attorney and executive director of the Environmental Jurists Association (環境法律人協會), expressed concern for the well-being of veteran activist Diane Wilson who has been on hunger strike since Oct. 31 to protest FPG transgressions in Vietnam and the US.
“She is becoming weak,” said Chang, whose Taiwan-based NGO comprises lawyers and scholars with expertise on environmental issues. “But Formosa has not responded.”
JUSTICE FOR ALL
Wilson’s action was initiated outside the FPG’s factory at Point Comfort, Texas to protest inadequate compensation for fishing communities in Vietnam that were devastated by toxic effluence from plants run by FPG subsidiary Formosa Ha Tinh Steel Corp in Vietnam’s Vung Ang Economic Zone in 2016.
She also cited the Point Comfort facility’s continued flouting of a “zero discharge” order as a motivation for her action.
The discharge condition was part of a US$50-million settlement — a record payout for a civil suit in the United States under the federal Clean Water Act — imposed on FPG in 2020 for plastic pollution of coastal waterways in Texas. At a congressional briefing in Washington, DC in September, Wilson noted that FPG had violated the order more than 500 times since the ruling, resulting in further fines of US$12.8 million.
“Our intent is to bring justice to the Vietnamese fishermen, and our petition in front of Formosa Plastics, Texas is to do just that,” Wilson told attendees at the briefing. “The Vietnamese fishermen deserve justice no less than the Texas fishermen did.”
In an e-mailed response to inquiries about the case, a spokesperson from Formosa Plastics Corporation, U.S.A. expressed “gratitude” for media interest in the case.
“Your coverage plays a vital role in raising awareness and holding us accountable for ensuring the safety of our environment,” wrote Mark A. Walker, a representative of the corporate communications department.
CAMPAIGN OF INTIMIDATION
Meanwhile, attempts to have the violations in Vietnam brought before Taiwan’s courts had seemed futile, before a milestone ruling by Taiwan’s Supreme Court in 2020. This overturned a High Court decision to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.
However, Chang stressed that the process remained an uphill struggle, partly because of issues with lawyers gaining unfettered access to the Vietnamese plaintiffs and their advocates, who face persecution by the Vietnamese authorities, including lengthy incarceration and severe beatings.
“In some cases, it has been almost impossible for the Vietnamese plaintiffs to meet Taiwanese lawyers,” said Chang. “To do so, they would have to notify the local authorities, and that is basically like sending the victims to their oppressors.”
Cheng Ching-hsiang (鄭青祥) turned a small triangle of concrete jammed between two old shops into a cool little bar called 9dimension. In front of the shop, a steampunk-like structure was welded by himself to serve as a booth where he prepares cocktails. “Yancheng used to be just old people,” he says, “but now young people are coming and creating the New Yancheng.” Around the corner, Yu Hsiu-jao (饒毓琇), opened Tiny Cafe. True to its name, it is the size of a cupboard and serves cold-brewed coffee. “Small shops are so special and have personality,” she says, “people come to Yancheng to find such treasures.” She
In July of 1995, a group of local DJs began posting an event flyer around Taipei. It was cheaply photocopied and nearly all in English, with a hand-drawn map on the back and, on the front, a big red hand print alongside one prominent line of text, “Finally… THE PARTY.” The map led to a remote floodplain in Taipei County (now New Taipei City) just across the Tamsui River from Taipei. The organizers got permission from no one. They just drove up in a blue Taiwanese pickup truck, set up a generator, two speakers, two turntables and a mixer. They
The low voter turnout for the referendum on Aug. 23 shows that many Taiwanese are apathetic about nuclear energy, but there are long-term energy stakes involved that the public needs to grasp Taiwan faces an energy trilemma: soaring AI-driven demand, pressure to cut carbon and reliance on fragile fuel imports. But the nuclear referendum on Aug. 23 showed how little this registered with voters, many of whom neither see the long game nor grasp the stakes. Volunteer referendum worker Vivian Chen (陳薇安) put it bluntly: “I’ve seen many people asking what they’re voting for when they arrive to vote. They cast their vote without even doing any research.” Imagine Taiwanese voters invited to a poker table. The bet looked simple — yes or no — yet most never showed. More than two-thirds of those
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu’s (洪秀柱) attendance at the Chinese Communist Party’s (CPP) “Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War” parade in Beijing is infuriating, embarrassing and insulting to nearly everyone in Taiwan, and Taiwan’s friends and allies. She is also ripping off bandages and pouring salt into old wounds. In the process she managed to tie both the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) into uncomfortable knots. The KMT continues to honor their heroic fighters, who defended China against the invading Japanese Empire, which inflicted unimaginable horrors on the
RSS