Looking at the employee suicides at Hon Hai-owned Foxconn Technology Group’s plant in Shenzhen, China, as a mere labor dispute is superficial. It is easy to see that Hon Hai chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘) is a visionary entrepreneur from his response to the events. In one week, he raised workers’ salaries twice — a total of 122 percent.
The raise satisfied workers, stunned competitors and forced the Chinese government to consider the long-term impacts of the decision on China’s development.
The first of these is that the working conditions of Chinese workers will greatly improve and they will receive more respect. The fact that the first move was made by a Taiwanese company instead of a state-owned Chinese enterprise will improve the image of Taiwanese businesspeople. Although under pressure to act, a Taiwanese company responded faster and more effectively to social pressure than the Chinese government.
Second, the salary increase is likely to trigger a reaction among workers throughout China and force other enterprises to follow in Foxconn’s footsteps. The Chinese government will not have any good reason to suppress such a reaction and the awareness among workers that they must fight for their rights will greatly increase. In other words, unless factory party committees and labor unions do not get on board with the rapidly changing environment, they will lose support quickly.
Third, increased worker income could help the Chinese government to meet its goal of stimulating domestic demand. Rising personnel costs will eliminate weaker companies, which will force structural economic reform. It will also force some foreign investors to leave China and cause potential investors to think twice before opening factories there, which will affect economic growth.
Finally, the Chinese government finds itself in an awkward position. It will be forced to welcome pay raises offered by foreign companies, even though that will hurt the interests of “red compradors,” intermediaries who facilitate government contacts. In addition, growing awareness of human rights among workers is bound to worry the government. Social movements are certain to increase in future, but is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) able to reform itself?
The Foxconn suicides have raised disturbing legal issues that may never be resolved. Will its competitors stop trying to bring the company down?
China’s central and local governments and various interest groups continue to wrangle over the Foxconn incident. However, there will certainly be changes to China’s development model. In the worst case scenario, a CCP too enamored of its power and privilege will refuse to reform. China would then become a bloody battleground where civilians and officials fight each other. In such a situation Taiwanese businesspeople would come under more pressure and many would possibly return to Taiwan. For this reason, it is important that President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration does not remain indifferent. Rather than help China, it should instead try to do the following:
First, it should ensure Taiwanese businesspeople are able to return safely to Taiwan without the Chinese government taking over their businesses.
It should also create a better investment environment to help returning businesspeople start anew and take a fresh look at controversial foreign worker policies that could hinder the growth of Taiwanese industries.
Finally, Taipei should be very cautious, as China is on the verge of tremendous political and economic change, and avoid rushing into an economic cooperation framework agreement.
Paul Lin is a Taipei-based political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY TAIJING WU
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of