Author／Jin-Xuan Wu, Research Assistant, RSPRC
            Mu-Xing Lin, Assistant Research Fellow, RSPRC

Translator／Jo-Shih Chiu

Introduction

On 20 October 2016, the Executive Yuan proposed the draft amendment of Electricity Act which had taken a major turn in comparison to the version of the Bureau of Energy (2016). One may find that the amendment adopts the "Green Energy First" principle for the electricity market; in addition, in order to maintain the integrity of Taiwan Power Company (hereinafter refer to as "TPC") and a steady supply of power, with the specialization of electricity generating, transmission and distribution, TPC may transform into a holding company, under which the subsidiaries for electricity generating and electricity transmission, distribution and retailing will be established. As the draft amendment deals first with green electricity and sets the goal to maintain TPC's integrity, the scope of the amendment is becoming smaller and smaller, and it lacks supporting regulations for renewable energy. Environmental protection groups such as Mom Loves Taiwan (Hsu, 2016) criticized that this is an amended "Electricity Act for Taiwan Power Company", and questioned the government's determination to undertake reforms.

After several revisions, the draft amendment of the Electricity Act ultimately adopted a more moderate and gradual strategy of "Green Energy First". When we read the four major newspapers in Taiwan (Apple Daily, Liberty Time, United Daily and China Times), one may find that there have been discussions among the stakeholders such as environmental protection groups, experts and academics, TPC and Taiwan Power Labor Union (hereinafter refer to as "TPLU") regarding the controversy and concerns over the amendment. The Executive Yuan's latest version of amendment is actually the closest version to fulfill TPLU's demands. From the very beginning, TPLU insisted on "maintaining the integrity of TPC", and took many actions to positively express its position during the amendment process.

TPLU worried that splitting up TPC will infringe employees' rights. Thus, they introduced the discussion on labor rights that it has long been striving into the process of amendment. In response to the China Airlines strike, the president of TPLU told media that the union will use "whatever means" to protect the integrity of TPC. However, this statement was interpreted, under the context of the China Airlines strike, by most of the media that "TPLU may go on strikes if TPC is being split up." "Planning a potential strike, TPLU meets the Economics Minister today to put forth 3 demands." United Daily News (2016). "Dissatisfied with the amendment of the Electricity Act. TPLU threatens to strike. The Ministry of Economic Affairs will keep negotiating with TPLU." The News Lens (2016).

One may easily find that when the rhetoric of labor rights enters into the course of power industry transition, the discussion regarding the transition becomes complicated. This essay aims to further examine TPLU's attitude towards industrial transformation - does it strive only for the protection of labor rights, or is it delivering specific demands regarding the amendment of the Electricity Act which will lead to the transition of energy?

Taipower Labor Union's attitude and the policy shift for the amendment of the Electricity Act

According to TPLU Newsletter (2016a), on 30 June 2016, the union leaders met and negotiated with the Minister of Economics Affairs Chih-Kung Lee for one and half hours, and put forth two demands. At that time, the amendment of the Electricity Act was ahead of schedule for half a year, TPLU believed that the Ministry of Economic Affairs did not held any public hearing or communicate with the labor union due to the tight schedule. Tso-Yi Ting, TPLU's president, pointed out that the union was concerned about the amendment of the Electricity Act which might hastily split up the TPC and "if so, Taipower will be faced with organizational changes and shrinking market, followed by relocation and layoff of employees" (TPLU Newsletter, 2016b). President Ting's statement of "the use of whatever means" to the media on 28 June showed the union's insistence on maintaining the integrity of TPC. The straightforward statement that "if the Executive Yuan insists on submitting the draft amendment that splits up TPC to the Legislative Yuan, the union will use whatever means to stop it" was also the first time that labor right and the amendment of the Electricity Act were put together publicly.

On 26 and 27 July 2016, TPLU's members were mobilized to protest outside the Ministry of Economic Affairs against the hastily revised the Electricity Act and expressed their distrust of it. The members believed that the Ministry of Economic Affairs did not reach an agreement with the labor union on the public version of amendment (Taipower Labor Union Newsletter, 2016c). Therefore, President Ting went to the Executive Yuan to negotiate with Minister without Portfolio Ching-Sen Chang, Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs Jong-Chin Shen and Secretary-General of Bureau of Energy Chun-Li Lee. According to Taipower Labor Union Newsletter (2016d), the two parties have reached four agreements as briefly described below:
1. The reform shall not involve privatization;
2. The transition shall be carried out in phases;
3. To transform TPC into a holding company;
4. To establish subsidiaries without harming employees' rights.

At a general meeting of TPLU held the next day, the delegates believed that "the amendment of the Electricity Act may cause harms on the society, the country, the public's well-being and the company's sustainability" and decided to adopt countermeasures when necessary.

Despite the four agreements reached by TPLU and the Executive Yuan and Bureau of Energy, the employees were still dissatisfied and questioned that the amendment may lead to electricity rate hikes or bankruptcy of TPC. TPC's employee Jia-Fa Yang and others launched the "Hiking from South to North for Solidarity" action to protest against "profiteering in the name of liberalization or reform, and selling out Taiwan's interests." During 5 to 19 September, they departed from Nuclear Power Plant No. 3 and walked to the Executive Yuan and Legislative Yuan to deliver their

The commitments made at the meeting with Minister without Portfolio are aligning with the Executive Yuan's latest version of amendment.

On 4 October, the TPLU met again with Minister without Portfolio Ching-Sen Chang. According to TPLU (2016e), Minister without Portfolio Chang's commitments on the issue were close to the latest version of the draft amendment of the Electricity Act. Minister without Portfolio Chang said that "The President merely instructed the administration to develop green energy and open up electricity generating industry, thus the amendment will not cover a wide range of issues. As for the original agreement that ‘TPC may transform into a holding company, under which two subsidiaries (of electricity generating and electricity transmission, distribution and retailing) will be established, and this is to be included in the general explanation of the draft amendment of the Electricity Act', we agreed now to put it into law instead of making it in the legislative explanation." Subsequently, according to spokesperson of the Executive Yuan Hsu Kuo-Yung after Premier Lin Chuan's consultation with the legislators held on 13 October, the Electricity Act will be amended in two phases with the first phase focusing only on the liberalization of power industry; while in the second phase, TPC will not be privatized but transform into two state-owned companies, and the employees' rights will not change (TPLU Newsletter, 2016f).

Figure 1. Timeline of TPLU's position and the policy shift for the amendment of the Electricity Act

Source:  Adapt from TPLU Newsletter by the authors

From the timeline analysis in Figure 1, the TPLU has shown its firm stance against the issue on 28 June and had many conflicts and negotiations with the Executive Yuan and Bureau of Energy since then, one may easily find that the administration has been wavering. In terms of the union's demands and the negotiation process, it can be observed that the Executive Yuan's latest version of amendment has been developed to fulfill the union's expectation.

Are power industry transition and labor rights protection conflicting?

A labor union is supposed to play the role of uniting the employees and negotiating their own rights with business owners. Although TPLU has been striving for labor rights of TPC's employees, it negotiates the rights with the government instead of TPC. Thus, the confrontational relationship does not exist between TPC and TPLU as one may expect for a labor union to represent employees and negotiate with the company management. It is undeniable that the process of power industry transition may cause harms to the employees' rights to some extent, but this essay would suggest that the labor union tries first to express its demands to TPC and asks for supporting measures, then seeks help from the government.

Faced with anxious employees and the concerns that the employees might be relocated or laid off, the TPLU stated publicly that it might go on protests and strikes to stop TPC from being divided by the amendment. This pattern can be observed from many other cases regarding industrial transformation, which is to use labor rights protection as a shield against industrial transformation. For example, the plants in Taipei and Changhua were shut down due to air pollution issues, the employees of Changhua plant then went on protests, and because they believed their right to work has been harmed by shutting down the plant. It is obvious that during the process of industrial transformation, the discourse regarding labor rights has become the most straightforward way to represent the anxiety over the transformation. However, we need to further clarify if labor rights protection and industrial transformation are indeed conflicting.

From the Executive Yuan's latest version of amendment, it promised that the amendment will not privatize TPC, nor will it harm the rights of TPC's employees, the first phase of transition will focus on opening up the market for green electricity, and thus the overall transition time will be prolonged. However, when all the systems are stabilized, and the TPC is divided into two subsidiaries, will it still be possible for TPLU to reject the transition by going on strikes? Therefore, the strikes can serve as a resistance that delays the government's implementation of transition, but cannot be the final solution. Labor rights protection is an important issue and should be tackled carefully during the process of transition, but if we keep avoiding the transition issue, and the government, society, enterprises and labors fail to reach consensus, our society will stagnate, and problems will be left unsolved. During the process of all types of transition, we need to face not only labor right issues, but find out the answer of the essential question of "why should our society go through transition".

Power industry transition and social justice

The discussion regarding power industry transition has been going on for several years, stakeholders associated with the amendment of the Electricity Act are in positions to protect their immediate interests, hoping to benefit from the positive effect brought by the transition, and thus the process of transition and negotiation has always been very long. The essay looked into TPLU's position on the amendment issue, the labor union did not want the company to be divided as it believed this will harm the employees' rights, and thus stated that it might go on protests and strikes when necessary - this can be regarded as their anxiety and dissatisfaction over the possible division of the TPC. During the process of industrial transformation, we should not ignore the harms made to employees' rights. More importantly, we need to examine and reveal from whom we should demand the rights and what are the possible supporting measures. When labor rights and transition are put in opposing positions, the former will become a bargaining chip in negotiations, making us ignore the reason why transition is needed and this will hinder the process of transition. Labor rights should not be conflicting with transition, instead it is part of transition that requires our attention. Labor rights and transformation are not necessarily conflicting. Industrial transformation may bring technological innovation and new social position. It is important that the government, society, enterprises and labors to negotiate and communicate, and ultimately respond to the question of "why should our society go through transition". In this way, the government, enterprises and labor unions can truly protect the rights of employees, and achieve social justice through transition.

Reference

1. Bureau of Energy (2016, October 20). Draft amendment of the Electricity Act. Executive Yuan Report, Legislative Yuan Edition.
2. Gao, S.Q., Qiu, W.R., & Hou, L.A. (2016, June 29). Planning a potential strike, Taipower Labor Union meets the Economics Minister today to put forth 3 demands. United Daily News.
3. Hsu, K.J. (2016, October 27). Opposition to the "Electricity Act for Taipower Company". Liberty Reviews.
4. Kenzo (2016, June 29). Dissatisfied with the amendment to the Electricity Act, TPLU threatens to strike, the Ministry of Economic Affairs will keep negotiating. The News Lens.
   
5. TPLU (2016a, June 30). A meeting with Minister of Economic Affairs for the Electricity Act. Taipower Labor Union Newsletter.
6. TPLU (2016b, July 6). A letter to our members. Taipower Labor Union Newsletter.
7. TPLU (2016c, July 27). Liar Chih-Kung Lee, step down. Taipower Labor Union Newsletter.
8. TPLU (2016d, August 5). Power industry reform will not involve the privatization of Taipower Company. Taipower Labor Union Newsletter.
9. TPLU (2016e, October 5). Amendment of Electricity Act is getting more explicit. Taipower Labor Union Newsletter.
10. TPLU (2016f, October 14). Amendment of Electricity Act has taken a turn. Taipower Labor Union Newsletter.