Cao Dewang has a famous saying: If a trade union is established, I will close the factory. As long as the trade union exists, is there any point in survival?

I don’t know where he got the arrogance to say such things. At least, I completely disagree with this. Isn’t this blatantly contradicting the labor law? No matter how awesome Cao Dewang is, he must follow the provisions of the labor law. No one can be outside the legal system, no one!

01

The existence of trade unions is to protect employees. First of all, what is a trade union? A trade union is a place used to safeguard the rights and interests of workers. As for how much role it plays and how much rights it protects for workers, this is a question of efficiency, not whether it is necessary to exist. If there is no need to exist, it is impossible to include trade unions in the labor law, and it is impossible to have special regulations related to trade unions. Therefore, it is not advisable not to establish a trade union. There is no room for negotiation on this point.

02

The essence of survival in Cao Dewang’s words is exploitation

Cao Dewang said that if a trade union is established to survive, it will be meaningless. This sentence is clearly saying that trade unions The existence of it will hinder him from making money. Taking a closer look, the reason why this is hindered is because the union protects the rights and interests of workers too much, making it impossible for them to opportunistically exploit workers' surplus labor through more means. From this perspective, as an entrepreneur, or even as a relatively famous entrepreneur in China, his words are very irresponsible. If, as he said, he has the right not to establish a union just to safeguard his so-called meaning of survival, can more companies follow suit? When companies start to follow suit, the entire business community is violating the most basic laws and regulations. How can this situation be allowed to happen? ?

03

Entrepreneurs have the obligation to push society forward, rather than forgetting their roots. As entrepreneurs, especially entrepreneurs who are favored by people, they should take the lead. , rather than blatantly contradicting relevant laws and regulations. Regardless of any company, it has a basic obligation to contribute to the society and make the society develop faster and better. The prerequisite for developing faster and better is obviously that some large enterprises must set an example and guide the entire enterprise group to develop in a better direction instead of going in the opposite direction. To put it bluntly, with the support of national policies, the company has grown. After it grew up, not only did it not carry forward this support and lead everyone forward, but it began to openly oppose the basic principles that supported its growth in the first place. This approach is somewhat unjustifiable.