Ground Staff Should Strike Too! Commentary on China Airlines: Why Does Taiwan Society Only Accept “Attractive” Workers’ Rights?
The Visibility Paradox
The 2016 China Airlines strike brought an interesting phenomenon to light in Taiwan’s social discourse. When the flight attendants—predominantly young, conventionally attractive women—took to the streets, the public largely supported their cause. Media outlets ran numerous stories. Social media erupted with sympathy. Public opinion mobilized behind calls for better labor conditions.
But there is another side to this story that reveals something uncomfortable about Taiwan’s values.
The Ground Staff Question
China Airlines has other workers too, of course. Beyond the cabin crew in their uniforms walking through airports, there are maintenance workers, baggage handlers, check-in staff, mechanics, and countless other ground employees. Many of these workers have similarly difficult working conditions, similarly long hours, and similarly inadequate protections.
Yet when did they last capture public sympathy in the same overwhelming way?
The answer is simple and troubling: They don’t have the same visual appeal.
The Media Narrative
Notice how different the coverage became when we compare the two groups:
Flight Attendants:
- News reports featured their images prominently
- Publications praised their “brave stand”
- Politicians rushed to express solidarity
- The public rallied to support them
Ground Staff:
- Largely invisible in media coverage
- Complaints about their working conditions met with indifference
- When they have attempted to organize, they faced different public reception
- Society seems to say: “But you’re not as… presentable”
Society’s Uncomfortable Preference
This preference reveals something that Taiwan would rather not acknowledge: Our society seems to value workers’ rights more highly when the workers themselves conform to conventional beauty standards.
When the workers campaigning for better conditions are young, uniformed, and photogenic, the narrative is about labor justice and workers’ dignity.
When the same workers are older, less conventionally attractive, or work in positions that do not put them before the public eye, the narrative shifts. Suddenly concerns about “disruption,” “inconvenience,” and “reasonableness” take precedence.
The Double Standard in Action
Consider these scenarios:
Scenario 1: A 25-year-old flight attendant with professional makeup and pressed uniform discusses pay inequality. Response: “This is terrible! We must support her!”
Scenario 2: A 45-year-old male baggage handler with calloused hands discusses the same issue. Response: “Well, that’s just what the job pays. If he doesn’t like it, he can find other work.”
Why the difference? The work is equally important. The workers are equally human. The demands for basic dignity are equally valid.
Yet Taiwan’s public discourse suggests that some workers’ rights matter more than others—specifically, those rights matter more when they can be presented in an aesthetically pleasing package.
Why This Matters
This is not merely a matter of fairness to ground staff (though it is that). It reflects something deeper about how Taiwan sees workers’ dignity:
-
Beauty as a Proxy for Deservingness: The implicit message is that attractive workers deserve support; less attractive ones should just accept their lot.
-
Service Role Definition: Flight attendants are in customer-facing roles where appearance is somewhat relevant to job function. But does that make their labor more worthy of protection than that of workers in mechanical roles?
-
Gender and Class Dynamics: Flight attendants are predominantly female and white-collar. Ground staff are more male-dominated and blue-collar. Is Taiwan’s selective sympathy actually about gender and class rather than labor justice?
The Deeper Question
If Taiwan truly believes in workers’ rights and dignity, then these rights should extend equally to all workers, regardless of:
- Their appearance
- Their position in the company hierarchy
- Whether they appear on television
- Whether they conform to conventional beauty standards
- Their gender or age
What Should Change
Taiwan’s labor movement and civil society should:
-
Expand Support: Actively advocate for ALL workers’ rights, not just those occupying visible roles
-
Examine Bias: Question why we automatically sympathize with certain workers over others
-
Reframe the Narrative: Shift from “support these sympathetic workers” to “support all workers’ fundamental dignity”
-
Include the Invisible: Bring attention to the working conditions of mechanics, cleaners, maintenance staff, and other behind-the-scenes workers
-
Challenge Class Assumptions: Recognize that blue-collar workers deserve no less support than white-collar workers
The Challenge Ahead
For Taiwan to truly live up to its values as a democratic society that respects workers’ rights, it must move beyond the double standard of “attractive labor activism.”
All workers deserve dignity. All workers deserve fair compensation. All workers deserve safe conditions. All workers deserve the right to organize and advocate for their interests.
Not just those who happen to look good in a photograph.
The question is not whether ground staff should strike—they absolutely should, if conditions warrant it. The question is whether, when they do, Taiwan’s public and media will grant them the same consideration, support, and basic respect that was so readily given to flight attendants.
That would be a true measure of Taiwan’s commitment to workers’ rights—not selective sympathy for the photogenic, but genuine solidarity with all workers, regardless of appearance or occupation.