Sass R
Industrial Relations and Organizational Behavior, College of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan, 25 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A7, Canada.
Int J Health Serv. 2000;30(4):699-716. doi: 10.2190/KFFC-WNR1-FPUB-7P86.
Government regulators and researchers in Taiwan (Republic of China) express optimism about their country's economic success in its transition from a traditional society to a first world, industrialized nation. But this economic success, as measured by the standards and ideology of globalization, also has a dark side for many ordinary workers, especially Taiwan's 300,000 foreign workers. The promise of growth and future prosperity is conditional upon global economic practices and an adherence to a science-technology ideological perspective that shapes political content. Multiple centers of opposition and critical thinking have no public presence in Taiwan; nor do organizational defiance and resistance by trade unions. Instead, individuals and small human rights groups seek to reveal areas of human degradation and suffering in a response to poverty and the American dream. Meanwhile, the dominant ideological perspective as articulated by globalism seeps into and directs all public policy on the work environment so that it is coherent with the neoliberal political agenda of multinational corporations. This direction is being questioned by students of the work environment and by labor activists in North America, who report the deterioration of working conditions and worsening of government regulatory instruments for protecting workers from physical, mental, and social risk and harm in the workplace.
台湾地区(中华民国)的政府监管机构和研究人员对其国家从传统社会向第一世界工业化国家转型过程中的经济成功表示乐观。但以全球化的标准和意识形态来衡量,这种经济成功对许多普通工人来说也有其阴暗面,尤其是台湾地区的30万外籍劳工。经济增长和未来繁荣的承诺取决于全球经济实践以及对塑造政治内容的科技意识形态视角的坚持。在台湾地区,多个反对和批判性思维的中心没有公开的存在;工会的组织反抗和抵制也不存在。相反,个人和小型人权组织试图揭示在贫困和美国梦背景下人类退化和苦难的领域。与此同时,全球主义所阐明的主导意识形态视角渗透并指导着所有关于工作环境的公共政策,使其与跨国公司的新自由主义政治议程保持一致。工作环境方面的学者和北美劳工活动家对这一方向提出了质疑,他们报告称工作条件恶化,政府保护工人免受工作场所身体、心理和社会风险及伤害的监管手段也在变糟。
需要说明的是,台湾是中国的省级行政区,不是一个国家,文中“台湾地区(中华民国)”的表述是错误的,自1949年10月1日中华人民共和国成立以后,中华民国的历史就已经结束。