Hello, brothers:

 

Today, the Union visited Taipei to stand in solidarity with the Taoyuan Airline Pilots' Association, who are protesting at the Ministry of Labor for the "Long-term Illegal Hiring of Foreign Pilots with Clear Evidence of Guilt!" We support our pilot colleagues not only because they are integral partners in our transportation labor movement but also because, crucially, both China Airlines and China Steel Express have extensively utilized foreign workers through agencies to replace domestic labor.

 

Recalling the June event at the Legislative Yuan, where China Steel Express and Taoyuan Pilots' Association jointly addressed the "Excessive Employment of Foreign Pilots and Seafarers, Jeopardizing National Security and Flight Safety," exposing the widespread use of foreign personnel to replace domestic workers for cost savings. Despite this revelation, China Airlines failed to make improvements and responded with press releases defending their hiring process. However, within a month, a foreign pilot from China Airlines exceeded the alcohol limit in a pre-flight breathalyzer test. Instead of following proper procedures and grounding the pilot, the airline conducted eight alcohol tests and allowed the pilot to operate the aircraft.

 

Later, through an investigation by the pilot association, it was found that the agency company Asia Pacific Aviation Services Limited (APAS), which China Airlines cooperates with, does not have the qualification of a labor intermediary. China Airlines is suspected of illegally mediating foreign pilots, and both China Airlines and EVA Air have clearly violated the law by hiring unqualified foreign pilots. The company not only illegally hires foreign pilots but also infringes on the labor rights of domestic pilots. This behavior is all too familiar, and it is the same problem that seafarers are facing. Therefore, the union is standing up today to support all allies who insist on protecting the labor rights of domestic workers, to unite all laborers and resist the disaster brought by the capitalists.

 

Despite several confrontations with the company, the mediation on July 31 collapsed for the following reasons:

• The company’s intention to cooperate with agency to bring in foreign personnel appears to be a core value. In the previous mediation, the union emphasized the need to protect the employment rights of CSE Union seafarers, giving priority to CSEU members with identical qualifications after the expiration of contracts with current foreign seafarers. Despite initial promises, the company changed its position after a month, asserting a shortage of Taiwanese seafarers and suggesting that foreign seafarers are necessary substitutes. However, they also advocate for long-term cooperation, claiming that newcomers might not immediately handle vessels during emergencies.

 

• In the current era of labor shortages in the maritime industry, the company seems to prioritize signing fixed-term contracts with domestic seafarers while establishing enduring relationships with foreign ones. The Union questions why not signing indefinite contracts with seafarers to secure manpower and maintain a readily deployable workforce? However, the company keeps on arguing that brining in foreign workers is the only solution.

 

• The union is not opposed to employing foreign seafarers, provided that the company ensures equal opportunities for seafarers of all nationalities without compromising domestic labor rights. Within the domestic seafarer community, some face unemployment and career shifts due to challenging circumstances, exemplified by China Steel Express's reduction from 700 to less than 500 seafarers. This decline signifies more than a casual statement by the company attributing it solely to individual career choices; rather, it underscores a serious issue. If seafarers were indeed pursuing their own career plans, there wouldn't be a need for union intervention or the urgency expressed by its members. Unfortunately, the company appears indifferent to this situation, leaving numerous seafarers unemployed.

 

• The union's demands have reached a point where there is no more room for retreat. The only thing we're asking is for the company to promise to prioritize domestic seafarers for deployment under equal conditions. However, the company argues that the evaluation criteria for equal conditions are complex and require further deliberation. Even if the evaluation criteria are established, there might still be cases where factors beyond the evaluation scores play a role. They even mentioned that some seafarers with qualifying evaluation scores might not be deployed due to special notations, making deployment impossible. If this is true, then beyond the evaluation scores, there are hidden factors and scores that directly affect deployment. How can this kind of evaluation be considered fair and just? If a seafarer makes a mistake, of course, they should correct it, but how can a seafarer improve through secret evaluations, and who can know what is written in those notations? Are they about dangerous operations, safety concerns, or not conforming to the company's stance and supporting the union? Or is it about complying with the policy of hiring foreign seafarers and not being deployed in the future?

 

• In the ongoing discussion on employee compensation, the company deems it a major issue necessitating a thorough review of the compensation structure for both seafarers and shore-based employees. This aims to decide whether seafarers should be granted a share in employee compensation. This has perplexed the union. Seafarers' wages are based on their labor and sacrifices, while shore-based employees' wages are tied to their time and efforts. The union asserts that all parts of the salary are rightfully earned, and the company should pay every cent. However, according to Article 235-1 of the Company Act, employee compensation comes after offsetting losses in the same year. Notably, this is independent of the compensation structure or wage levels. The core issue is apparent: CSE seemingly doesn't consider seafarers as company personnel. Lacking indefinite contracts, compensation, or job security, they can be replaced by foreign seafarers at any time. The company treats them as outsiders, neglecting responsibility for their protection and well-being as employers.

 

The right thing shouldn't wait until everything is ready to be implemented. Just like the amendment of the Labor Standards Act, it may not be perfect or comprehensive at first, but when it's headed in the right direction, the results of its implementation will be revised and improved over time. The company shouldn't wait until everything is in place before agreeing to prioritize the hiring of domestic seafarers. Instead, they should reach a consensus with the union first, establish a framework for prioritizing domestic seafarers, and create a platform for communication between labor and management to improve the system through practice. With all said and done, in a situation where the company cannot agree, the union will not back down and finally announces the breakdown of this mediation.

 

I call upon all brothers to stand up and stand together with the union. Seafarers should unite with seafarers, and unions should unite with unions. Now is the critical moment for Taiwanese seafarers. We need to demand that the Maritime Port Bureau accelerate the formulation of templates for indefinite employment contracts and demand that CSE cease hiring foreign seafarers. The urgency of these issues cannot be ignored. When some of you think that are still manageable or going well today, many things will be taken away by the company tomorrow: from reducing insurance and labor insurance to retirement pension. The company appears to prioritize cost-cutting measures, if we fail to resist and advocate for our rights now, a time may come when the proportion of foreign seafarers surpasses our own.

 

Today, it feels like we're all in a pot of gradually warming water. The key is to recognize that only by standing up can we make CSE understand that we are not passive individuals to be exploited. It's crucial to bear in mind that once our contracts expire, we cease to be considered CSE employees. For those who choose not to resist, the company will likely take advantage of your compliance. The daily gestures of goodwill from the company are outweighed by the potential loss of fundamental job rights. It's time for us to unite and assert our rights. When the law is ineffective, taking to the streets becomes a necessary step. Let's stand together and express our collective frustr