中国工人软禁洋老板的历史解读

    北京一家工厂的美国CEO被中国员工“囚禁”的报道充满了小报色彩的戏剧性。查尔斯•斯塔恩斯是杰普莱斯医疗器械公司（Specialty Medical Supplies）的CEO，公司总部位于美国佛罗里达州。上周五，记者挤进他被囚禁的工厂，隔着装有栅栏的窗户对他进行了电视采访。他到工厂来宣布解雇30名工人，准备将相关业务转移到印度。其他未被解雇的工人却因此陷入恐慌。他们要求工厂提供与被解雇工人一样的补偿金。

    目前，问题仍然没有得到解决。但斯塔恩斯在工厂内接受采访时表示，他觉得自己非常安全，谈判仍然在进行之中。

    不过在这些新闻报道中，有一点并没有提到。那就是中国工人在谈判期间软禁CEO的行为在其他国家也早已有先例。实际上，这种策略也经常被欧洲发达国家的工人使用。在法国，2009年谈判期间，法国工人曾囚禁了卡特彼勒（Caterpillar）、索尼（Sony）和3M公司的高管。2013年3月，也有报道称法国工人要求被囚禁的管理者提供补偿金。这些事件都登上了媒体头条——而这正是受到不公待遇的工人所期待的事情。

    周二早些时候，哥伦比亚广播公司（CBS）的一个摄制组采访了位于北京的杰普莱斯医疗器械公司。斯塔恩斯在工厂大门口接受了采访。他表示自己要想从这里逃走非常容易，但他认为那样做会传达一种错误信息。他希望平息员工的怨气之后再离开。

    而比北京发生的非暴力“敲诈”更有趣的，是斯塔恩斯对于中国劳动力的观点。斯塔恩斯表示，他要将部分业务转移到其他国家，因为中国的劳动力正在逐渐向高技术、高薪酬和高科技岗位转变。

    这或许是在中国发生的第一次大规模业务转移。中国经济从制造业为基础向服务导向经济转变，意味着技术水平较低的工人会逐步面临发展瓶颈。过去四十年间，当匹兹堡和底特律的制造中心向低成本国家转移时，当地的工人也有同样的感受。

    而美国与中国之间的主要区别在于，美国工人有强有力的工会组织。而中国虽然也存在工会，但工人们通常并不信任他们。2008年，中国对劳动法进行全面修订，其中提到了加强工会组织建设、集体劳资谈判和提高最低工资等问题，这实际上是一部具有里程碑意义的工人权益法案。中国新劳动法参照了欧洲的劳动权益法。但在中国，工会由地方政府主导。而工人对地方官员通常并不信任。

    密歇根大学（University of Michigan）罗斯商学院（Ross School of Business）教授琳达•利姆曾研究过中国问题，她说：“工人担心地方工会代表贪污腐败，因此他们不相信工会代表会按法律办事。”

    利姆表示，杰普莱斯医疗器械公司事件在更大意义上代表的是中国过往时代的遗物，而不是未来中国的前兆。2008年，中国劳动法改革之前，工人们与企业谈判时，企业可能一夜之间关闭工厂，到其他地方重新开张，拖欠工人工资和补偿金。担心老板跑路，这或许是导致北京“囚禁”事件的主要原因。

    但随着中国劳动力逐步向服务行业转移，如医疗与教育行业，他们将从事更高技能的岗位，受到更好的法律保护，而且行业内接受过教育的劳动者也会越来越多，这种不平应该会逐渐减少。

    至于北京这次发生的事件，利姆说：“不幸的是，在转型期间，类似事件还会发生。”（财富中文网）

    译者：刘进龙/汪皓

    The news that Chinese workers are holding an American CEO hostage in a Beijing factory has plenty of tabloid drama. The CEO, Charles Starnes of Florida-based Specialty Medical Supplies, conducted television interviews through gated windows as reporters swarmed the Beijing factory where he's been held since last Friday. He traveled there to announce layoffs of 3o jobs destined for India. The remaining factory workers, still employed, panicked. They demanded severance packages similar to those of the departing workers.

    The situation remains unresolved. But in interviews from inside the factory, Starnes has said he feels safe, and negotiations are moving ahead.

    What has been lost in news reports is that China workers aren't alone in holding CEOs captive during negotiations. In fact, it's a tactic used in developed Europe. In France, workers held hostage executives at Caterpillar, Sony, and 3M as part of negotiations during 2009. There arereports as recent as March 2013 of angry French workers demanding severance from captive managers. The incidents produce dramatic headlines -- exactly what aggrieved workers are looking for.

    When a CBS camera crew visited the Specialty Medical Supplies factory in Beijing early Tuesday, Starnes gave an interview at the factory's front gates in which he says he could easily escape. But he says that would send the wrong message. He wants to settle the workers' grievances before leaving.

    What's more interesting than this nonviolent shakedown in Beijing is what the episode says of China's labor pool. Starnes said his medical device company was moving part of its operation as China's labor pool increasingly moves toward higher-skilled, higher-paying, and higher-technology jobs.

    It may be the first act of a large shift underway in China. The evolution of China's economy from a manufacturing-based giant to a services-oriented economy means that lower-skilled workers will increasingly face obstacles. Workers in Pittsburgh and Detroit felt the same sting over the past forty years as jobs in those manufacturing centers migrated to lower-cost countries.

    The key difference between the U.S. and China is that U.S. workers enjoyed strong labor unions. While unions do exist in China, workers often distrust them. A sweeping 2008 China labor reform law that instituted stronger unions, collective bargaining, and minimum wage increases is actually a landmark workers' rights bill. It resembles the strong labor rights laws in Europe. But in China, unions are operated by local governments. And workers often harbor distrust toward local officials.

    "Given fears of corruption, they don't trust local union representatives to enforce the law," says Linda Lim, a professor at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business who has studied China.

    Lim says the Specialty Medical Supplies incident is more a relic of China's past more than a harbinger of its future. Before China's 2008 labor reform, workers negotiated with businesses that could close shop overnight --- owning workers pay and severance -- then open elsewhere in the country. Fears of abandonment remain, which may be driving the so-called hostage situation in Beijing.

    But as China's labor pool moves into more service-based sectors such as health care and education sectors, with higher-skilled positions, better legal protections, and more educated laborers, these type of grievances should decline.

    Says Lim of the Beijing situation: "Unfortunately, this type of incident is stuck with them during their transition."