2017-07-31
Academics Debate Necessity of Requirement for Prior Notice of Strikes
The China Airline strike last year affected 122 flights and approximately 30,000 passengers. Taiwan's Consumers' Foundation cited relevant laws in Italy and Japan, emphasizing that strikes should be used against employers instead of consumers. Therefore, the Government should enact relevant laws to protect the rights of consumers affected by labor strikes.
The chairman of the Consumers' Foundation indicated that under Italian law, a union must give a 10-day prior notice before going on strike so that the businesses and government can be prepared to provide minimum services to consumers. Under Japanese law, there is no notice period; however, once a strike severely impacts economic activities, the government has the power to cancel a strike.
Some academics hold the opinion that in the case of strikes by the employees of monopoly or oligopoly public transportation, such as airlines, high speed rail, railways, the interests of the public should prevail; otherwise, sudden strikes may cause harm to the public interests.
Therefore, some academics agree that a prior notice before a strike is necessary. However, other scholars suggest that although there is no "prior notice" under the current laws, the spirit of "prior notice" is realized during the period from the strike vote, obtaining the right to strike, to the act of going on strike. They argue that it is impossible for the employer to be unaware that a strike will likely be held, and that accordingly, it is not necessary to add a "prior notice" requirement to the current laws.