TRA’s disciplinary action violating labor law: union

By Abraham Gerber  /  Staff reporter

The Taiwan Railways Administration’s (TRA) disciplining of employees who took time off during the Lunar New Year holiday by deeming them as absent without leave is a violation of the labor law, Taiwan Labor Union members said yesterday, citing a Taipei Labor Department ruling that workers have the right to refuse to work on national holidays.

“The Taiwan Railways Administration cannot say that we were ‘absent without leave,’ because it is against the law,” union president Wang Jieh (王傑) said, referring to action taken by union members who took a “legal holiday” over the Lunar New Year period to protest the TRA’s refusal to negotiate working-hour reductions.

The TRA has announced plans to discipline 370 people for being absent without leave, with those who were absent for the four-day period to be given two major demerits — enough to be fired.

The Taipei Labor Department told the union that workers would only be obliged to work if they consented to their days off being moved, because the Lunar New Year holiday is an official national holiday, Wang said.

He dismissed TRA claims that it could punish workers because holiday movement is mentioned in TRA employees’ job descriptions.

“The description mentions a ‘shift system,’ but does not specify how shifts would be arranged,” Wang said. “This only started in 2013. Does that mean that people who were hired before that time are not subject to the changes?”

Wang criticized the administration for referring workers to a 1988 labor agreement concerning the movement of holidays.

“That agreement was only binding at the time and cannot be used to restrict those who were employed later — we still have to consent before holidays are moved,” he said.

Wang said the Public Functionary Service Act (公務員服務法), which requires employees to stay at their posts, is inaccurate, because railway employees are subject to the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法).

Those who are considered both workers and civil servants are supposed to have their rights determined on a case-by-case basis, applying whichever of the two regulatory standards is most advantageous for employees, he said.