Search

Political and economic decisions are inextricably intertwined in most nations, and China is no exception to this general rule. We will now examine significant political and economic developments since the prodemocracy movement was crushed in 1989, in order to determine their actual and potential impact on the labor scene. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under the policy of economic reform there has been a graduate devolution of production and marketing decisions to individual enterprises. The Law on State-Owned Industrial Enterprises ("Enterprise Law") of 1988 states that the manager, rather than the factory Communist Party Committee, is responsible for day-to-day management of the enterprise. The law speaks in general terms about the "managerial responsibility system," which gives managers ultimate decision-making power over production and management. In practice many factory managers and party secretaries continue to be one and the same person. Other factory managers find it prudent to operate a kind of tripartite system, whereby company policies are thrashed out between factory management, the factory party committee, and worker congress or union representatives. The wisdom of this cooperation is reinforced by the fact that, according to the Enterprise Law, factory managers are subject to removal by the worker congresses for incompetence or malfeasance. Recently, the Chinese press has reported several such removals. Moreover, close working relations are enhanced since, in almost all cases, managers, union officials, and party officials are all members of the party committee. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We have examined economic, political, and sociological variables that have influenced the development of worker rights and labor standards in four East Asian countries. Nine propositions were posited to structure our analysis of this topic. Sufficient evidence has been compiled so that we have arrived at the following findings relating to each premise, which will be examined in turn at this point. Each nation has serious problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the world moves toward a global economy, differences in labor standards, worker organization, and labor relations policies among countries at varying levels of development become critical variables in trade and investment decision making. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) problems plagued Thailand and Indonesia while China had to deal with most favored nation issues. Malaysia also has been subjected to international opprobrium amid allegations it suppresses worker rights while countenancing exploitative labor standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the preceding chapter we discussed the Malaysian government's encouragement of in-house unions. This policy is an example of a union regulatory system aimed at reducing whatever bargaining power workers may have with management. The in-house or enterprise union model is currently the norm in the electronics industry, one of the problem areas examined in this chapter, along with the plight of plantation workers, the flexi-wage proposal linking pay with productivity, the new remuneration system of compensation for public sector employees, and problems created by the large influx of foreign workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As of 1992, there were 519 individual labor unions in Malaysia with 694,365 registered members, an increase of 7,486 over 1991. These are the most recent figures available. Since unions are not allowed to organize workers in industries outside their primary one, Malaysian private sector unions are organized on industry or company lines. It is not uncommon for more than one union to be represented in a single employer, with the different unions representing different types of employers. The limitation on forming unions that cover more than one industry does not comply with international labor standards which state that workers should be able to establish and join organizations of their choosing without prior authorization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Malaysia' basic labor laws include the Employment Act (1955), the Trade Unions Act (1959), the Industrial Relations Act (1967), the Employees' Social Security Act (1969), and the Employees' Provident Fund Act (1991). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Malaysia is a federation, a democracy, and a constitutional monarchy, but one in which power is strongly centralized. Opposition parties have more scope for gaining power than those in neighboring Asian countries; they can, for example, win control of state governments, but the ruling Barisan Nasional (National Front) coalition tends to counter this by cutting funding to states which vote against it. It also strictly controls the press. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Worker rights advocates in labor unions, human rights groups, and other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have played an increasingly important role in promoting internationally established fair labor standards as a factor in international trade. Particularly in the United States, recent developments have widened the scope for action on labor rights in a transnational economy. Advocates of international fair labor standards have challenged the traditional right of countries to address their labor laws and labor relations as solely internal matters. They have sought to constrain the right of multinational corporations to implement labor policies based solely upon the laws of each nation where they operate, especially where laws are designed to repress rather than protect workers, and provide a competitive edge in international trade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number of issues involving the interests of Thai unions and workers have been noted in previous chapters. The determination of compensation, primarily the minimum wage, factors affecting female and child labor, concern for workplace health and safety, and union opposition to privatization of state enterprises were discussed earlier and will be examined in depth in this chapter to provide a clearer perspective on these important developments in Thai industrial relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Thailand unions under the Labor Relations Act of 1975, the basic statute dealing with labor-management relations, are divided into three levels: trade unions, workers' federations, and workers' congresses. Prior to the 1991 coup, at the federation level, unions had a significant degree of leverage with the government, especially during periods of political certainty. In terms of issues directly affecting workers, the key issue was the minimum wage. Beyond this, organized labor activity was directed at promoting the interests of powerful groups supporting their interests. State enterprise unions wielded a strong influence on management and the government, forcing it to abandon its privatization policy. They were also able to influence transfers and appointments of key managers.1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Thailand labor rights and relations are governed primarily by the Labor Relations Act of 1975. Not included under the purview of the Act are agricultural workers, civil servants, and employees of state enterprises. A separate statute, the State Enterprise Labor Relations Act (SELRA), passed in 1991, governs labor in the state firms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thailand has seen at least 22 military coups or coup attempts since absolute monarchy ended in 1932. However, in the July 2, 1995 election, for the first time in many years there was no military intervention and the voting took place against the backdrop of a booming economy that has created an expanding urban middle class. While the population is still predominantly rural, where political life is dominated by money and patronage, urban voters are demanding competent managers who can find solutions to such problems as Bangkok's nightmarish traffic.1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significant developments in Indonesian industrial relations in the 1990s have been discussed in preceding chapters. Strikes, repression of independent unions and labor activists, the role of the military in labor disputes, the threatened suspension of trading privileges, and concerns expressed by international organizations have drawn our attention earlier in summary form. In this chapter the importance of these events will be explored in greater detail to determine their impact on worker rights and labor standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As with other nations, Indonesia has enacted a set of laws that regulate the activities of individual employees, unions, and employers in the labor relations arena. However, unlike China, which now has a comprehensive statute governing all aspects of the employment relationship, Indonesia has a number of laws and regulations which establish the legal framework for labor-management dealings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All relationships in Indonesia, interpersonal and institutional, are guided by the national ideology of Pancasila, which as we have seen emphasizes harmony, mutual self-help, and consensus decision making. Pancasila also theoretically applies to industrial relations in that government, labor, and management are expected to work cooperatively to achieve overall national development goals, including the establishment of social justice and an equitable apportionment of the fruits of economic progress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indonesia is the fourth largest country in the world, the largest Muslim nation, with an estimated 1994 population of 198,055,000. It is larger than any other nation in Southeast Asia and consists of some 13,700 islands in the Malay Archipelago. The country's only land borders are with Malaysia on the northern part of the island of Borneo and with Papua New Guinea to the east of West New Guinea on the island of New Guinea. The Philippines are located to the northeast, Australia lies to the southeast, and the Indian Ocean lies to the south and southwest. Its land area is 741,053 square miles or about one-fourth the size of the United States.1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prime Minister Li Peng's 1995 government work report discusses every conceivable topic related to China's drive to establish a socialist market economy. However, there is one notable omission; nowhere to be found are any references to "trade unions" as vehicles which can contribute to the realization of this ambitious objective. The reasons for this omission become clear when the role of labor organizations is examined, and one then realizes why Chinese unions drew so little publicity from a top government official. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Frederick Deyo, in discussing the severity of labor controls Asian governments may impose, states: In general, it can be assumed that given the political, administrative, and other costs incurred by imposition of severe labor controls, elite groups will impose only those controls they feel are required in order to establish order or to achieve important political or economic goals ….1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]