In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

The Ethnographic Narrative II: During the Event (Day-2 to Day+1) Day -2: 29 May 1986 (Thursday ) The situatio n wa s pressing . A lette r t o th e Registra r o f Trad e Unions , informing him of the union's inaugural meeting, was drafted: 'Since at present there is a dispute between the production line workers and the management, we write to you in the hope that you will expedite the processing of our case as we fear that the management might sabotage our union and use excuses to dismiss those who are involved.' The letter was signed by the organizing committee o f the union . It s purpose wa s to establish a n official recor d of the d e facto existenc e o f th e unio n an d th e workers ' anticipatio n tha t management would sabotage their organizing effort . The supporters also completed the previously designed leaflet, 'Does it Pay to Join a Union?', which explained th e purpose of organizing a union and the necessity to keep secret its official establishment : In a Japanese-style patriarcha l company like ours, the managemen t is even more hostile towards any organizational efforts I t is therefore likely that sabotage will be attempted by the management to disrupt our organizatio n befor e w e ar e officially registere d No w tha t w e have hande d i n ou r b y laws , you ar e strongl y urge d t o join u s t o strengthen th e unio n an d reinforc e ou r negotiation s wit h th e 5 134 Colours of Money, Shades ofPnde management Onl y throug h collectiv e actio n ca n we proceed t o improve our working conditions While th e supporters were working on th e lette r and leaflet , th e RP s and Centre staff held an emergency meeting. The RPs reviewed the overall situation and surmised that management was either adopting delaying tactics to demoralize the workers or preparing an offensive. They had been muc h more relaxed an d confiden t sinc e the beginning of the week. There wer e rumours tha t temporar y student-worker s woul d b e recruite d fo r training , which never needed more than two or three weeks. There was still almost no supervision on the production lines and yield was unbelievably low. Thus, the workers were prepared for the mass dismissal of workers and ensuing industria l action . Wha t neede d t o b e discussed wer e les s drasti c scenarios. It was decided: 1. Th e worker s would negotiate only with Tosai or representatives fro m headquarters in Japan, and would not show eagerness. 2. Th e negotiating site would be a 'neutral' place. 3. Th e baseline would remain a 6 percent lump sum payment. 4- Whethe t to allow a representative from the Labout Bureau to join the negotiations would be decided later. Day -1 : 3 0 May 1986 (Friday) Ma and F u invited Gu, who was to report t o TWLSC's board o f directors around noontime, for morning dim sum. The thre e discussed the situatio n and made a few decisions: 1. Sinc e the workers did not wish to involve middlemen, the Centre would stall Lo Man-sa for a week or two. 2. The y would continue to push the Registrar for an early establishment of the union . 3. The y would create opportunities to tram second-line leaders 4- Barrin g other developments, they would organize a weekend camp-out for 7- 8 Jun e and us e the occasion t o train th e second-lin e leader s i n organizational work . [3.17.162.247] Project MUSE (2024-04-26 07:04 GMT) The Ethnographic Narrative II 135 5. The y woul d tr y t o persuad e friend s m th e pres s t o intervie w JW M management. In the early evening Gu returned from her meeting exhausted. Five of her directors and one representative from CLA had attended the meeting. After she had briefed them on the JWM case, her immediate supervisor, Li Nai-kuan, told her to limit her role: She was TWLSC's only full-time, pai d staff member; setting too high a goal would damage CLA's reputation. Yen Chin-chih, anothe...

Share