I extend my New Year greetings to all. On this initial working day of the year, we've organized a comprehensive labor education program, featuring esteemed professors as our speakers. We are privileged to welcome Professor Lin Jiahe from Chengchi University, a steadfast supporter of the union, who came all the way us to lecture on the first day following the New Year break. Additionally, we are delighted to host Professor Chen Jianmin, a Yale Ph.D. and former professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, currently serving as an adjunct professor at National Chengchi University. Professor Chen is widely recognized for his involvement in the "Umbrella Movement." This labor education event presents a unique opportunity, drawing attendees from the Kaohsiung Teachers' Union and Chunghwa Telecom Workers' Union to witness the expertise of these esteemed scholars.
During the morning session, Professor Lin Jiahe delved into a significant topic concerning the protection of employees during mass layoffs. He emphasized that such safeguards do not extend to fixed-term contracted labor, as stipulated by lawmakers. To illustrate this point, he provided examples, including the contentious issue of surrogate motherhood. Drawing a comparison, he highlighted the contrast between the United States, where payment for surrogate mothers is permitted, Taiwan, where it is strictly prohibited, and ongoing debates in European countries. The ultimate resolution for these matters rests in the hands of lawmakers. This divergence is particularly evident in the realm of labor law, where dismissal protection systems differ significantly between continental Europe and the Anglo-American legal systems. Notably, Germany imposes challenges for employee dismissal, while in the UK and the US, employers can easily terminate employment, underscoring the legislative choices made by each jurisdiction.
The need for the Worker Protection of Mass Redundancy Act can be traced back to the internationalization and globalization changes faced by the Labor Standards Act in 1984 when companies began expanding beyond national borders. The transformation of industries resulted in the closure of numerous businesses, leaving behind financial obligations in Taiwan. Workers encountered obstacles in obtaining their due wages and retirement benefits. In this context, the Worker Protection of Mass Redundancy Act emerged. According to the law, employers are required to report large-scale layoffs in advance. In case of severe violations, the company representative may face restrictions on leaving the country.
Professor Lin revealed that he was initially against the restriction on leaving the country. However, his perspective shifted when he assumed the role of a review committee member for mass layoffs. In this capacity, he observed a pattern where employers, who initially claimed bankruptcy and were unable to pay their workers, miraculously found the necessary funds the day after being barred from leaving the country. This experience led him to the realization that certain measures against such employers are indeed necessary.
But is this system a good one? Professor Lin raised examples from the United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) case and the Volkswagen case. In the UMC case, the company laid off a large number of workers, giving immediate notice and paying full severance, only to be fined a meager 500,000 NT dollars for not notifying the local authorities in advance. In the Volkswagen case in Germany, the protection provided by unions and the legal system allowed the workforce to challenge the employer's initial intentions through negotiations on working hours and salaries. Professor Lin pointed out that the fundamental difference lies in the fact that Europe's Mass Layoff Protection Law aims to create sustainable operation through union negotiations, while Taiwan's focuses on handling closures. This has led to a design that leans towards the employer's side and even allows large companies to escape responsibility, indirectly encouraging the use of foreign labor without notification.
In conclusion, Professor Lin remarked that the experience of implementing the Worker Protection of Mass Redundancy Act for twenty years has not been positive. It has not achieved its intended purpose, contributing only slightly to the recovery of workers' wages. In terms of sustainable operation, it has not made significant contributions.
During the afternoon session, Professor Chen Jianmin discussed the correlation between social movements and political opportunities. His initial involvement in social movements occurred during his third year of university when he advocated for a hospital in the East District of Hong Kong Island. Motivated by his observation of a high mortality rate in the area for his graduation thesis, Professor Chen gathered data on pre-hospital deaths and demographics. His findings confirmed a significantly elevated pre-hospital mortality rate in the East District. Further investigation revealed prolonged travel times for patients in various districts. Despite submitting a well-supported report recommending the establishment of a hospital in the East District, British officials dismissed the matter, citing a lack of funds and refusing interviews.
After this incident, Professor Chen was disappointed with advocating within the system and became a community social worker in the East District, fighting for the establishment of a hospital. As Hong Kong was about to be handed back to China, the British government conducted the first district council elections. Professor Chen, with keen political awareness, persuaded all candidates to include in their platforms the establishment of a hospital for the East District. After actively distributing leaflets and obtaining signatures, all elected local representatives passed the proposal to establish a hospital, leading to the Hong Kong government setting up a hospital.
Professor Chen introduced the McAdam model, emphasizing that social movements rely on internal organization and external opportunities, and the relationship with the government is crucial. Illustrating with Nelson Mandela's experience in South Africa, Professor Chen explained Mandela's initial pursuit of equal rights through peaceful means, met with violent suppression. In response, Mandela and his supporters opted for a path of retaliation, leading to imprisonment. Over more than two decades, Mandela observed shifts in the government's stance, ultimately choosing negotiation and successfully securing rights for black people in South Africa.
Professor Chen highlighted the pervasive nature of political opportunities, citing the example of the anti-large dam movement in China. Environmental groups strategically leveraged government department disagreements, collaborated with the environmental protection agency to restrain the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), and tapped into the central government's international image concerns to pressure the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to slow down dam construction. In the 1989 Chinese social movement, attempts to merge anti-corruption, anti-official corruption, labor, and democratic movements generated a significant political impact. However, internal conflicts between government reformists and conservatives expanded the movement, ultimately leading to the well-known Tiananmen Square protests and subsequent suppression. Professor Chen cautioned against such strategies, emphasizing that a relentless crackdown without distinguishing between legal and illegal actions could provoke extreme resistance.
The Blank Paper Revolution serves as a notable example. Fueled by the widespread impact of COVID-19, harsh CCP lockdowns, and pervasive corruption, China faced a critical juncture. Despite the known risks, people took to the streets, symbolizing their protest with blank sheets of paper against the betrayals of an authoritarian government. The professor drew inspiration from this movement, noting how young individuals engaged in negotiations with the police and confronted the government, realizing the strength in unity.
In this spirit, I encourage my fellow brothers to defy tyranny and stand up for your rights. As seafarers, you are more than employees; fear should not hinder you. If everyone steps forward to defend their rights, the union will steadfastly support you. Here's to a new year where, together, we pave the way for a brighter future for Taiwanese seafarers!
