Between conciliation and suppression, Wenzhou government chooses a middle path

31 July 2009
Previously, I had written about the contrast between Chongqing’s conciliatory approach to handling taxi strikes, and the more brutal, retrograde way the Xining government handled its strikes. A recent taxi strike in the prosperous city of Wenzhou seems to show that the Wenzhou government has chosen a middle path between the two, mixing “carrot” and “stick” for good measure.

On 28 July some taxi drivers in Wenzhou went on strike, hoping to decrease the amount they pay in rental fees and in petrol. According to a media report by Zhejiang Online (浙江在线), local Wenzhouese make up only 10 percent of the city’s 3,300 cab drivers, while over 70 percent are from the relatively poorer provinces of Anhui, Hubei, and Jiangsu. These drivers have to “rent” the right to drive the cabs from the people who own the management rights(经营权), who are mainly private Wenzhou investors who bought the rights in city auctions. Besides paying money to these middle men, cab drivers also complain about the lack of a fuel tax subsidy in Wenzhou (even though other cities in Zhejiang have such a subsidy), and they point out  that the taxi meter stays at 10 yuan for a four kilometers, meaning cabbies often gain nothing in time-consuming traffic jams. Cabbies also complain that repair costs, insurance, inspection fees, meter inspection fees, and the operational license fee all eat into their profits, leaving only enough money left for food, with some saying that they only make 50 to 100 yuan per day after an exhausting shift.

Therefore, on 28 July the taxi drivers prepared to go on strike. However, some taxi drivers who were prepared to pick up passengers had their windows broken by their fellow cab drivers. The Wenzhou police summoned eight people who were suspected of illegal activities related to the incident. Authorities then tried to inform drivers of the new policies, including adjustments to the taxi fare system. This, apparently, quelled the strikes.

On 30 July, the Wenzhou government announced six measures aiming to normalize the taxi market. The measures are notable for their detail and the degree to which many of the drivers’ core concerns have been taken on board by the government. According to the Wenzhou Daily (via the Wenzhou government's website):

Recently, the government has formulated six measures to strengthen to fix and standardize the taxi market: First, the pricing structure will be optimized, the city development committee has already, according to legal standard procedures, formulated Wenzhou City taxi pricing readjustment plan, and will in the near future will initiate the a hearing procedure (about the plan). Second, is pushing forward the construction of a taxi management system. The Initial Revised Draft of the “Wenzhou City Taxi Transport Management Measure” has already been shown to the public and is currently soliciting suggestions. Third, the quality of the industry personnel will be promoted, and the “Wenzhou City Taxi Drivers Sincerity Examination Measure” will be implemented. Fourth, a taxi rights defense centre (出租车维权中心) will be established, and the legal rights and interests of taxi drivers will be earnestly defended. Fifth, the unreasonable collection of fares at airports and other public places will be fixed, and within the next few days, the Wenzhou airport will abolish collecting the “waiting for customers fee” from cab drivers the. Sixth, an upper limit standard for the contracts given to taxi drivers (by the middlemen) will be researched and developed.

As one can see, these six measures by the Wenzhou government seem to accept that many of the taxi drivers’ main points of contention have merit and that detailed measures should be adopted to adjust for the government’s mistakes. However, whether the government actually intends to implement these policies, or whether these policies will turn out to be empty promises that gave the government a “carrot” to entice the striking cabbies to call of the strike remains to be seen.

Nonetheless, the Wenzhou government also hasn’t forgotten to use the “stick” either. The Zhejiang Online report states:

According to an initial understanding of the situation, these activities (referring to the strike and the smashing of the car windows) were incited by a small group primarily made of up of Anhui taxi drivers. On 26 June, they were at the airport, the city centre station, at the ferry, and at petrol stations handing out fliers called “the Voice of Taxi Drivers “, inciting and threatening the masses of taxi drivers to strike and stay at home on 28 to 30 July, and to go to the government and ask for a response to the issues of taxi meters’ distance and time problems.

The police hope that drivers will use lawful channels to express their concerns, and they will resolutely strike hard against the behavior of the section of people who intentionally disturb the social order.

So, compared to the Xining government’s response to its taxi strike, the Wenzhou government did recognize the legitimacy of the core set of grievances and they have put together a plan to deal with them, which supposedly contains aspects of public solicitation. Still, like Xining, they also put emphasis on the “small group” who incited (煽动) the masses to strike. Of course, admittedly, some taxi drivers’ windows were broken, and the police should investigate and prosecute those crimes. But it’s worth mentioning that most of the actions that the small groups of taxi drivers “incited” others to do involved passing out fliers, staying at home, and petitioning the government. If these activities come along with the highly politicized term “inciting”, then, just about any strike action would be deemed as such.

As a recent editorial by Huang Guan from Xinhua, translated via Danwei, blaming a small group of malicious people with ulterior motives is often a one way governments can shift blame away from failed policies and personal responsibility:

Finally, the interpretation of mass incidents as ignorant people misled by a malicious few makes one suspicious of the government trying to evade its own responsibility. The occurrence of mass incidents in recent years are usually related to incompetent performance and mishandling of local governments. A recent regulation released by the central government has made it clear that government or party cadres would be held accountable for their "abuse of power, ordering or empowering others to breach the law, or malfeasance that causes mass incidents or other serious consequences". Blaming mass incidents on those with ulterior motives can cover the government officials' own mistakes and avoid their responsibilities.
Back to Top

This website uses cookies that collect information about your computer.

Please see CLB's privacy policy to understand exactly what data is collected from our website visitors and newsletter subscribers, how it is used and how to contact us if you have any concerns over the use of your data.