This paper has two major objectives through its explanations of the divergence
between confrontational labor relations in Korea and accommodating relations in
Taiwan. First, I critique the existing explanations for East Asian labor that have
emphasized the effects of economic structure and union organization through a more
accurate and on-the-ground account of the economic and organizational features that
define unions in Korea and Taiwan. Second, I explain the divergent contours of labor
politics from a political institutional perspective. Inspired by recent literature on labor
politics, I highlight institutional mechanisms as critically shaping the articulation of
union demands and strategies (Mullio 2001, Candland and Sil 2001). I particularly
examine the effects and interactions of two institutional avenues that have created
political incentives and constraints for union activism: (1) the permissiveness of
national and local political institutions and (2) the incentives for union-party alignment
in electoral politics. Together, these two inseparable political factors were highly
influential in shaping the pattern of Korean and Taiwanese labor politics.
This research asserts that political institutions created during the
democratization process create incentives for the inclusion of unions into formal
political channels. Greater institutional permissiveness combined with opportunities of
union-party alliances moderate the mode of union mobilization by guiding unions to
address the labor agenda through existing political channels (as in the case of Taiwanese
3
Convention