Labour policies and labour movement of Ma government

The newly elected Taiwanese president, Ma Ying-jeou, took office on May 20, 2008, which means KMT, the party that had ruled Taiwan from 1945-2000, after 8 years away from power, has regained its familiar position. The restoration of a KMT regime is thought by many as a comeback of the conservatives, because KMT used to adopt a "development comes first" policy, putting labour and environmental justice out of its sight, while further oppressing Taiwan's democracy movement and social movement; at the same time, it also underlines people's disappointment toward the DPP, who used to be the symbol of democracy and reform.

Apart from Chen Shui-bien's corruption, a major reason for DPP's failure is people's attribution of the sluggish economy and increasing income disparity to DPP's poor governance, especially its tightened China policy. Ma, on the other hand, focused his campaign force on economy and opening up the market to China, and successfully won support.

Therefore, social activists in Taiwan are paying attention to how Ma will handle labour and environmental issues under an economy-centered policy.

Ma's labour policy is basically "no labour policy." For him, the most important job is "boost the economy and maximize employment"; in the annual May Dayconference held by TCTU (Taiwan Confederation Of Trade Unions), Ma said his first priority is "improve the economy, encourage consumption and investment, and then we will devise our labour policies." As for now, the biggest problem facing Taiwan's workers is "labour flexibility," because of which loads of contract workers and irregular workers are being treated with very low employment standards; meanwhile, these "alternative labours" are also threatening the employment conditions of full-time workers.

Ma didn't respond to labour unions' appeals; instead, he proposed national subsidies for the "working poor"-- who have jobs but cannot provide for the family. Ma even mentioned a "income tax-refund policy," which means workers can be subsidized in proportion with their income. For example, if a worker gets paid 10000 USD per year, she can get a subsidy of 1300, which is 13% of her annual salary. In other words, not only does Ma have no intention to handle problems of labour flexibility, he even hopes it could help decrease the unemployment rate. He would rather subsidize workers' low wages with tax money, than making employers to raise salaries. We could almost say "maintaining the existance of labour flexibility" constitutes Ma's labour policy.

Migrant workers make another major group of "alternative labours." In Taiwan, most migrant workers are from The Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and other southeastern countries. During 8 years of DPP rule, the number of migrant workers has increased from 300,000 to 360,000. In 2001, the DPP government made it legal for employers to include food and lodging expenses in the salary, and substantially shrinked the actual salaries of the migrant workers. To further cut their management costs, employers are trying to rule migrant workers out of the "basic wage" laws. Though this attempt has not been fulfilled, but the force from interest groups has been rising since the KMT took power.

In May, the KMT legislators had been planning to pass the laws allowing migrant workers in "trading port free zones" not to be covered by the Labour Standards Act. Once passed, these laws will largely loosen the requirements, number and labour conditions of migrant workers, the percentage of Taiwanese and aboriginal labours will also be adjusted. Though these laws are not yet effective, labours will soon join the "race to the bottom," considering Ma's emphasis on opening markets and "free trading zones." In the near future, the war against "labour flexibility" and one in protection of migrant workers' rights will soon become major challenges of Taiwanese labour movement.

Regarding attitudes toward labour relations, the Ma government remained nonchalant. During the May Day conference, Ma said "we shall strengthen the dialogues among employer, labours and the government," which means the labours should handle the problems on their own, while the government would provide information at times. As for issues like wages, working hours or import of foreign labours, these will be left for the employers and labours to discuss; the government's only job, however, is "help reach consensus," and help the labour unions to become "institutionalized" forces.

In fact, whenever labour disputes arose, the poorly developed labour unions had barely any power over the employers, if the government did not intervene. Considering the scarcity of Taiwanese labour unions (6.47% in year 2006,) it is quite impossible for individual workers to talk with their employers on equal terms. Ma's reiteration of the government's withdrawal is no less than a sign of surrender to the employers.

This attitude has also offended labour movement in Taiwan, which has been holding onto the principle of "fight within the laws" (appealing to the government, asking it to realize labour rights protected by the laws.) Once the government chooses to stand aside, it also negates this direction that Taiwanese labour movement has taken.

Therefore, labour movement in Taiwan has to rethink its strategies in the future. For example, the traditional approach of fighting as "industrial unions" and "craft unions" failed to incorporate irregular workers and foreign labours. Furthermore, the approach of "fight within the laws" would probably need adjustment, and this is a major challenge facing labour movement in Taiwan.