Before Typhoon Gaemi made landfall, county and municipal governments made the decision to halt work and classes as they watched the rain and wind conditions evolve.
However, the nation continues to have an unsavory issue. Typhoon days seem to be specifically intended for those working in white-collar professions. For those in the service industry or with manual labor jobs, typhoon days seem like a fantasy.
As a result, we often see that everyone in urban areas takes off coveted typhoon days. They go out to restaurants, boutiques and shopping malls, or go to movie theaters to catch a film.
Of course, some people are also holed up at home and have no desire to brave the wind and rain for any of this.
Central and local governments declare class and work cancelation standards for so-called typhoon days. These standards are mostly related to considerations of risk to life and property.
When classes and work are canceled, there is the implicit expectation that everyone ought to stay inside so rates of injury or worse are kept at a minimum.
However, reality is nothing like this. Many nine-to-fivers still risk heading out into the winds and rain for work. This is because some companies might use typhoon days as an excuse to sell stuff.
This is not a great development. It differs little from devaluing everyone’s personal safety or placing it on a lower priority than the commodities being sold.
When governments have called for a temporary halt to work and classes, companies — regardless of whether they are service or labor sectors — ought to use the same standard for a full halt to operations. They do not need to put their workers in harm’s way by making them travel far to get to work, much less risk the winds and rain in the first place.
A comprehensive typhoon response standard ought to prioritize selling food that could be enjoyed at home and outright avoiding opening in-store dining and service. Many more people could enjoy a well-deserved day off and the right to avoid being maimed or worse.
Chen Chi-nung is an educator from Nantou County.
Translated by Tim Smith
The Paris Olympics are over and the five-ringed views of the Louvre, Invalides, Eiffel and Versailles just memories. As a diplomatic historian, my thoughts naturally turn to France! The Olympian of world affairs, the creators of “diplomacy,” Cardinal Richelieu and Prince Talleyrand. But sixty years ago, at the 1964 diplomatic games, Team China bested Team France in a battle of wits in “free-style negotiations” over Taiwan. Paris never recovered. To be fair, in Europe of 1963-1964, France was besieged. She had been ousted from her Asian dominions. She had begun her first nuclear weapons tests just as the United States and
Having the title doctor or the letters PhD after your name carries the connotation of having broad knowledge. In reality, while people with doctoral degrees often possess highly specialized expertise and might be held in high esteem among their peers, they are likely virtually unknown to the general public. In Taiwan, people with doctorates are common, while probably fewer than one out of 100 of them could truly make a name for themselves. Of course, there are exceptions. Those who gain media exposure can easily become well-known, especially if they are involved in politics. However, many fail to live up to
For the past few weeks, the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and its Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) have been embroiled in a series of scandals related to irregularities in their presidential campaign financial reporting. These scandals continue to expand as more evidence surfaces, raising more questions about the party’s financial propriety and competency. These irregularities include unusually high spending, allegedly accepting donations from abroad, reporting 97.3 percent of personal donations as “cash,” making large payments to marketing firms with close ties to the party and accounting errors. When the financial irregularities were first reported, the party blamed it on “arbitrary misconduct” by
Over the past few years, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a visible change in the EU’s approach to Taiwan. I call this phenomenon European hype about Taiwan. The change is noticeable at both the EU and member-state levels, with parliaments and Central Europe leading the way. The best example is the fact that Taiwan is finally mentioned in various EU documents (a real novelty compared with the past 30 years), in addition to statements by European politicians, an increase in bilateral contacts, a growing awareness of Taiwan’s importance and its contribution not only to European prosperity, but