Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||勞動三權的昨日今生: 兼淺談台灣罷工行動的若干爭議|
The Trajectory of Collective Labor Rights and A Discussion of Major Disputes Arising from A Taiwanese Flight Attendants' Strike
|Keywords: ||勞動三法 ; 空服員罷工 ; 禁搭便車條款 ; 不當勞動行為 ; 罷工預告期 |
collective labor laws ; flight attendants' strike ; no free-riding clause ; unfair labor practice ; strike notice
|Issue Date: ||2021-06-16 15:25:51 (UTC+8)|
The class consciousness of Taiwanese workers is underdeveloped due to the short history of capitalism in Taiwan, the imposition of martial law for 38 years, rapid economic development and a large number of small-scale enterprises. Worse still, martial law disabled three collective labor laws, namely the Trade Union Law, Collective Bargaining Law and Labor Dispute Law. Therefore, few unions were autonomous before 1987, and thus could not function as a voice to protect workers. Collective action was viewed with hostility by both employers and society. The outbreak and rapid success of the China Airlines flight attendants' strike in 2016 was a great boost to unionists, who were soon upset three years later when a strike by flight attendants at Eva Air was harshly suppressed by their employer. This was no surprise to those who knew the history of labor in advanced capitalist countries where workers have experienced a long history of suppression, crackdown, harassment and even bloodshed. Therefore, the institutionalization of collective labor rights is a hard-won achievement by the workers themselves. Since then, collective action by laborers has to a certain extent been channeled and regulated as well as respected by society. Taiwan has not yet moved to a stage where employers are able to realize the value of laborers' collective rights and their importance to business competitiveness and sustainability. This article also discusses four issues relevant to the flight attendants' strike, namely no free-riding clauses, unfair labor practices, strike notices and ＂outside force interventions＂. There is no lack of discussion of these issues among academics who draw on laws as well as practices from other countries which policymakers may take into consideration when devising future laws. To that end, it is crucial to remember that the regime of collective labor laws differs among countries, each of which has its own social and political development.
|Relation: ||台灣人權學刊, Vol.5, No.3, pp.3-42|
|Data Type: ||article|
|Appears in Collections:||[勞工研究所] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.