in both countries ，in fact，there have been more labour disturbances in factoriesoperated by taiwanese ，korean and hong kong investors than in the state sector.one reason is that chinese and vietnamese workers are experiencing very similarwork regimes on the shopfloor in these foreign-funded firms.their managements tendnot to abide by safety regulations，and they pay workers few or none of the benefitsstipulated by law.they hire and lay off workers as the situation demands ，andshut down production lines and send workers home without any pay.they demand exhaustinglylong working hours，overtime work without overtime rates and sometimes withoutany pay at all，and deduct wages as a penalty for violating workplace regulations.[36]they provide poor and dangerous working conditions，no medical insurance or unemploymentbenefits，and at times subject workers to verbal and physical abuse.[37]some ofthe worst factories have even recruited child labour.
according to both vietnamese and chinese trade union officials，the most abusiveforeign bosses are the koreans，next worst are the taiwanese ，and then the hongkong chinese.[38]the latter two groups are the major investors in both countries.[39]the harsh work regimes in many of these asian firms have led to an increase in disturbancesand strikes and have instigated an adversarial pattern of industrial relations.in china，250，000strikes were recorded from 1988to 1994，and most of thesetook place in such asian-invested firms.the number of？labour conflictsì，a broadercategory that includes incidents that stop short of strikes ，is climbing apace.in 1995there were some 210，000officially recorded cases ，a 54per cent leapover 1994，which was again a 51per cent increase over 1993.[40]
in the mid-1990s，labour disturbances in china and vietnam began heading indifferent directions.in china，strikes became not only more frequent but alsomore confrontational.china's official media has admitted that？the intense conflictsbetween bosses and workers in foreign ventures that have occurred in recent yearsare unprecedented ，rarely having occurred in state-owned enterprisesì；[41]and ？the problem now is that as soon as there is an incident ，the public security police，for their own reasons ，send policemen to intervene in labour disputes ，thusaggravating industrial relationsì。WWw.11665.CoM[42]intimidation breeds violence.in one highlypublicized case ，more than 500workers besieged and beat up several taiwanesemanagers of a concrete factory.[43]in vietnam this kind of violence and counter-violencehas not yet been reported.[44]
new roles for the trade unions
the chinese authorities ，concerned to maintain social stability ，early inthe reform period foresaw a necessity to give the trade unions more autonomy sothat they could serve as a bottom-up transmission belt，especially in foreign-fundedenterprises.when deng xiaoping came to power in the late 1970s ，aware of theimplications of the solidarity movement in poland ，he revived the acftu and allowedlimited union reforms.[45]this predated the emergence of any domestic capitalismor a foreign-funded sector.the purpose was to provide a pressure valve to alleviatetensions between managers and workers ，especially since the managers were soonto be granted more autonomy.to counter-balance this，the chinese government raisedthe nomenklatura rank of the enterprise-level trade union chair to a level equivalentto a deputy manager.[46]a few years later multi-candidate elections for trade unionchair were introduced ，[47]though these elections were not，in practice，democratic.these tinkering-at-the-edges reforms have not helped much ，however，to sensitizetrade union cadres to workers'interests，so long as the union chair is still amember of the nomenklatura and is responsible to the party secretary or managerin each enterprise.
nonetheless ，as the party-state decentralized authority and power ，the acftuat all levels continued to press throughout the 1980s for a bigger share of power.in particular ，by the mid-1980s ，as state workers'job security and welfareprovisions experienced initial cutbacks and the first labour disputes erupted inthe foreign-funded sector ，the national union officialdom felt challenged to react.taking advantage of the politically liberal period of 1988and early 1989，theacftu passed a document that dropped the hitherto ubiquitous statement about？theunion being under the leadership of the party ì。instead，the primary functionof the acftu was redefined as the ？defence of staff，workers'and the masses'legal interests and democratic rights ì。if realized，this would have meant amore independent acftu.[48]internal debates heard arguments that the acftu shouldshare power with the government.[49]this assertiveness was soon crushed in thegovernment's backlash against the tiananmen protest movement of 1989.a month afterthe june beijing massacre ，jiang zemin，the new head of the communist party，delivered a speech to the acftu that demanded union compliance with party instructions.he pointedly declared that the union's number one mission was to？carry out itswork under party leadership ì。[50]the acftu quickly relapsed into its formerdocility.
efforts to loosen the vietnamese party's grip over unions were more successful.the sixth trade union congress in 1988was a watershed in this respect.the congressdeclared that the objective was to build strong unions with rights to self-governance.the congress adopted the slogan ？renewal ，openness and democracy ì；and forthe first time at a trade union congress，delegates could air spontaneous opinions，rather than simply offer formalistic statements that were orchestrated from above.nguyen van linh ，the secretary general of the party ，announced at the congressthat leading trade-union cadres need not be party members ，and urged union cadresto voice their ideas independent of the party and management（though he cautionedthat this did not mean the union was to be completely free from party control ）。[51]
labour laws and union constitutions
to adjust to the rapidly changing labour situation，both countries recognizedthe necessity to draw up new legislation，and during the drafting process differentinterests within the government contended to influence the new legal documents'contents.[52]in china the trade union law was passed in 1992；[53]a new acftuconstitution was drawn up in 1993；[54]and a labour law was adopted in july 1994.[55]in vietnam the corresponding years for these developments were 1990，1993and1994.but the parallel sequencing of legislative activities took placeindependentlyof each other.the coincidence reflected the emergence of very similar labour issues；it was not that the two countries were necessarily learning from or influencingeach other.
the vietnamese trade union law opens by reiterating ，in stereotypical language，that the union is an organization under the leadership of the party.[56]the chinesetrade union law in contrast has dropped this socialist phraseology.[57]but thesubstantive details of the law grant vietnam's vgcl considerably more autonomy fromthe party than the acftu has ever been permitted.although both laws try to maintaina state-corporatist structure ，it is the chinese law which ensures its perpetuationin the state-owned firms.four major differences can be identified.
first ，unlike in china，the vietnamese unions'role is not to include participationin management or carrying out managerial functions.this stipulation was drawn upin accordance with the wishes of the majority of the vgcl delegates and had alsobeen heatedly debated in the 1989national assembly.[58]both countries'unionshave the right to draw up collective agreements with management on behalf of theworkers ，but the more clear-cut division between management and labour in vietnamis much more likely to lead to an adversarial kind of industrial relations of atype common in the west.
second，in vietnam ，when a new trade union branch is established it onlyneeds to？informìthe government of its existence （article 1.2），whereas inchina the establishment of a new union branch needs to be ？approvedìby a higherlevel union （article 13）。this decentralized right to organize new branches atenterprises in vietnam implies the possibility that more autonomous trade unionbranches may emerge.
a third major difference is that vietnamese trade unions have the right to joininternational trade union organizations （article 1.3），to accept donations frominternational organizations and foreign trade unions（article 16.2.a），and tokeep these as union assets（article 17）。the chinese law is silent on such rights，although in practice，chinese trade unions are forbidden by the party to join internationalorganizations.any contact with foreign unions can only be of an informal and formalisticnature.
fourth is an important difference in union finances.in vietnam a union official'ssalary is paid out of union funds （article 15.3），and the source of union financesincludes membership fees as well as allocations from state revenue（article 16.2.a.b.）。this means that although the umbilical cord between the vgcl and the state has notbeen completely severed ，at least some workplace union officials are not on themanagement payroll，as they generally used to be.[59]the chinese law perpetuatesthe dependence of the enterprise-level union officials on management by stipulatingthat 2per cent of the enterprises'payroll （including foreign-funded factories）should be budgeted to the union （article 36.2）。[60]
in sum，both laws havegranted a bigger role to their respective trade unionsin that unions are to represent workers in labour disputes.but the vietnamese unionis allowed a bigger supervisory role than the chinese union ：the former is empoweredto？check onì（kiem tra）the implementation of the labour contract，recruitment，dismissal ，wages，bonuses，labour protection，social insurance and the like，whereas the chinese union is to ？assistì（xiezhu）the management in these functions（article 26）。on balance ，the vietnamese party is willing to devolve more powerto the unions.
in 1993both national unions passed new constitutions.[61]the chinese tradeunion structure remains basically unchanged.there is to be little autonomy at thegrassroots level，and all union branches in theory are to be subject to the dualleadership of both the industrial unions and the local trade union federation（article 10）。china has 18industrial unions ，but historically these industrialunions have had few functions ，and with decentralization of the economy they havebeen further weakened.in practice，the enterprise union branches today are controlledin each locality by the officials of the local union federations which，in turn，are under tight local party leadership.much as in the past ，the entire acftustructure has little space to manoeuvre.
the vietnamese trade union constitution ，in contrast，lays out a new organizationalstructure that is geared to help lower levels of the trade union organization togain greater autonomy.the constitution downplays the direct leadership role ofthe party.[62]the trade union organizations in local areas will be allowed to setup occupational trade unions（article 14）。this means that in the private sector，workers from different enterprises sharing the same occupation or trade can joinan occupational trade union.
beyond unions at the enterprise level ，vietnam will allow industrial and professionalunions.these will be ？placed under the direct guidance（our italics ）of therespective national industrial and professional unions in matters concerning theindustry and profession ì（article 20.a），but only ？under the direction （ouritalics ）of the local confederation of labour in matters related to socio-economicproblemsì。of greater significance is article 22.1which states ：？the nationalindustrial and professional unions are organized on the basis of the particulartraits of their respective industries and professions and they are not necessarilyarranged in accordance with the administrative organization of the stateì（ouremphasis）。in other words ，at all levels of the vgcl structure，there willbe a dual command system：the hitherto existing local unions in the state sectorwhich continue to be tied to the local government and party and ，alongside these，industrial and professional unions linked with grassroots occupational unions inthe non-state sector，representing interests that may be different from those ofthe state and the localities'governments.to ensure the viability of the industrialand professional unions ，the vgcl should？entrust ìthem with a certain initialsum of money and property ，and thenceforth they will be financially independent（article 23.5）。ultimately ，though ，the vgcl still has the power to？decideon the founding or disbanding ofìall the confederations and industrial and professionalunions（article 26）。if this new trade union structure is to develop，it willmean that the new occupational，industrial and professional unions will be ableto gain a fair degree of autonomy from the local party and government.
in both countries there were heated debates over the drafts of the new labourlaws.[63]by the time the laws were passed in 1994（they both went into effect onjanuary 1，1995），china's had gone through forty drafts，[64]and vietnam'sthirty.[65]in china，to maintain the facade of consensus，differences in opinionover the drafts occurred behind closed doors.[66]in vietnam，there was a lot moretransparency.headlines like？national assembly debates labour code ì，[67]？controversiallabour law goes to parliament ì，[68]and？labour law provokes mixed responseì[69]appeared in the government-sponsored journal vietnam investment review.
arguments over the drafts did break out at the vgcl congress.one faction thatwanted to transform the trade unions into genuine workers'organizations arguedthat managers should not remain members of the trade union.another faction wantedto maintain party and state dominance over the union.these and other debates wenton for months.a full copy of the draft was published in magazines and discussedat the factory level，although not formally on the shop floor.
both countries'labour laws represent compromises between the unions and otherinterests.one of the vgcl's most important victories was that，despite persistentobjections from other bureaucracies ，trade unions were to be set up in enterprisesof all ownership types？and fast ，within six months after the law took effect（article 153）。other controversial issues that the vgcl championed concernedthe unionization of foreign-funded enterprises，the maximum number of working hoursand working days，minimum wages，maternity leave and overtime pay.[70]
