【Pearl River Delta】Analysis on the labour collective actions in the 2nd quarter, 2015

【Pearl River Delta】

Analysis on the labour collective actions in the 2nd quarter, 2015

24 July 2015 – Intern at Little Hammer

According to the last review on the labour collective actions in the Pearl River Delta (PRD), there were at least 17 incidents which are recorded on the Internet. That involves 17 enterprises, and at least 6950 people were involved. Because the data came from the Internet, there might be slight error. As for the causes of the incident, we analyze based on the demands of the workers. We hardly know about the results of most of these incidents. Due to the limited sampling size, we would be grateful if readers can provide us with more information.

#	Date	Company	Venue	Size	Actions taken	Causes	Police actions	Result
1	28Mar	Hisense Kelon	Foshan	400	Strike, complaint	Relocation without compensation No housing pension	Standby	Failed
2	1Apr	New Spring Offsets Printing (SZ) Ltd	Shenzhen	200	Strike, Protest	Relocation without compensation	Suppress	N/A
3	28Apr	New An Lun Lamp	Shenzhen	100	Strike, complaint	No social security	Suppress	N/A
4	20Apr	Guangzhou Panyu Lide Shoe Co	Guangzhou	2700	Strike, collective bargaining	Non compliance with bargain, without fee to seniority	Standby	Success
5	21Apr	SZ Eng Electronics Co Ltd	Shenzhen	100	Strike	Change in ownership, without compensation	N/A	N/A
6	29Apr	Dongguan Hou Hong Garment Co. Ltd	Dongguan	1000	March	Closure without compensation	Standby	N/A
7	29Apr	Shenzhen Dongzhi Technology	Shenzhen	400	Strike	Wage arrears	Standby	N/A
8	7May	Guangzhou Bilture Furniture	Guangzhou	200	March	Bankruptcy, no social security	Suppress	N/A
9	9May	Xin Chuang Silicone Rubber Products Co	Dongguan	400	March	Closure without compensation	Suppress	N/A
10	13May	Song hui Shiye	Shenzhen	300		Closure without compensation	Suppress	N/A
11	15May	Huagao Clothing Factory	Dongguan	200	Strike, occupy	Wage arrears, cancellation of registration without public notice	Suppress	N/A
12	27May	Guang Xin Footwear Company	Shanwei	N/A	Strike, march	Wage arrears	Standby	N/A
13	1Jun	Tianbaoge Restaurant	Guangzhou	50	Complaint, collective bargaining	Change in ownership without pay, no social security	N/A	N/A
14	3Jun	Leader Sporting Co Ltd	Shenzhen	500	Assembly, march	Wage arrears, no compensation	Suppress	N/A
15	8Jun	Shenzhen Artigas Clothing & Leather	Shenzhen	100	Strike, petition, sit-in	No social security	Suppress	N/A
16	10Jun	Dongguan Zhenghao Electronics Co Ltd	Dongguan	300	March, petition, negotiation	Closure without compensation	Suppress	Partially
17	26Jun	Huangjia Gongguan Hotel	Huizhou	N/A	Petition	Wage arrears	Suppress	N/A

Geographical Distribution

From the above diagram, we can observe that there were the largest number of incidents in Shenzhen (7 times), followed by Dongguan (4 times, 23.53%) and Guangzhou (3 times, 17.65%). The duration of these incidents transcends through April, May and June.

Among the 7 incidents in Shenzhen, there were 2 incidents involving the relocation or change of ownership of factories, 2 incidents relating to arrears of salary and 2 incidents on unpaid social insurance. There was also 1 incident of closure of factories and wage arrears. Those actions in Guangzhou and Dongguan were also mostly related to closure of factories and wage arrears.

Distribution in causes

Amongst the causes, there were 6 incidents on wage arrears upon relocation, change in ownerships and bankruptcy of the factory company, which is about 29.41%. 11 incidents of them were on wage arrears which takes up 64.7%. 3 of them were factories escaping compensations upon relocation and sale; and 2 were refusing paying workers’ social insurance. There was also 1 incident labelled as “other causes”.

From these, we can know that many of the incidents are rooted in wage arrears and many also involve relocation, change of ownership and closure of these factories. This is directly relational to the slowing down of the PRD economic growth and the trend of restructuring of industries.

The interference of the police

In the process of 17 collective actions, there were 10 incidents in which the police have physically abused and arrested workers. That takes up 58.82% of the incidents. 5 cases (29.41%) are those with the police stand-by and there were no confrontations. There were 2 incidents that we do not know the situations. From these, we can see there have been strong tensions and serious confrontations; and the government officials and the employed have rarely resorted to more reasonable terms.

The success rates of the events

From what we know, there is only 1 incident that achieved its purpose, and another one partly achieved. As for other cases, we do not have information. But from a wider perspective, it is typical that the workers’ demands are not accepted and not handled fairly by the employers and government officials. This is also why for some incidents, the protest would easily die down after a few months of actions. The Tianbaoge incident may be one of those.

Comparison between the first and second quarter

From the geographical location, the incidents have concentrated onto Dongguan, Shenzhen; more collective actions took place in Guangzhou, with a percentage increased from 8.71% to 17.65%. Shenzhen has become the most serious area, from 21.74% increases to 41.18%.
The causes of these actions have focused on relocation, closure of factories and compensation issues. More workers are confronted by the fact that employers are running away. The problem of not contributing to social insurance remains serious, and this has triggered off quite some collective actions. Among all other causes, the wage arrears is the most serious issue in labour actions, rising from 26% to 64.7%.
Observing from the police’s interference, workers only face worsening suppression than before. In particular, the police have explicitly intervened 88% of the incidents, a lot more than 61% last quarter. Assaults and arrests have also occurred at 59% of the incidents, more than 48% last quarter. This reflects the attitude of the employers and the officials.
The effectiveness of the actions is less appealing than the first term comparatively. From what we know, the demands of the workers are only satisfied in 12% of the incidents, which is much less than 30.5% scored in the first term.