Brazil’s labor department, along with five other government departments, collaborated to rescue 163 Chinese workers who were enslaved, accusing the contractor Jinshang of BYD of trafficking people for the purpose of labor exploitation. However, days later, the rescued Chinese “slave workers” spoke out in defense of the employers.
Analysts believe this reflects the significant disparity between the living and working conditions of Chinese laborers and those from other countries. This is also why China’s application to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) has been rejected.
On December 27, the Brazilian government stated that they were investigating Chinese automotive giant BYD and its contractor Jinshang for allegedly “trafficking” Chinese workers. Federal prosecutors in Brazil are considering taking criminal action.
On the same day, the Brazilian Ministry of Justice issued a statement saying that if the irregularities found at the BYD factory by the prosecutors are confirmed, they will revoke the residency permits issued to the Chinese workers. Additionally, Reuters cited sources saying that the Ministry of Justice has requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to halt the issuance of temporary visas to BYD.
Brazil is BYD’s largest overseas market. BYD has invested only 620 million dollars in building a factory in Bahia, Brazil. The factory has become a symbol of China’s growing influence in South American countries.
On December 26, Li Yunfei, the brand and public relations director of BYD, criticized the Brazilian government for “slandering Chinese brands, smearing China, and attempting to undermine Sino-Brazilian friendship.” He accused “external forces” of deliberately smearing.
So, what did the Brazilian government do to provoke such a strong reaction from BYD executives?
On December 23, an operation by six Brazilian government departments raided accommodations and parts of construction sites at BYD’s assembly plant in Camasari, rescuing 163 workers in slave-like conditions. The government demanded that Jinshang cease its employment contracts with the workers and halt construction activities.
The six government departments involved in the operation were the Public Labor Ministry (MPT), Labor and Employment Ministry (MTE), Federal Public Defender’s Office (DPU), Federal Highway Police (PRF), along with the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) and the Federal Police (PF).
The Brazilian Labor Ministry reported on its website under the title “Special task force rescues 163 workers and closes BYD’s construction in Camasari (BA),” detailing the operation. The Labor Ministry’s report revealed that in a series of inspections starting in mid-November, they found that the situation of 163 workers employed by Jinshang, an outsourcing company for BYD, was akin to slavery. The workers’ living and working conditions were atrocious.
The Brazilian government’s raid also discovered that the passports of 107 employees were locked in Jinshang’s cabinet, indicating that the workers’ freedom was restricted.
On the day the Brazilian government rescued the workers, BYD announced that they would “immediately terminate the contract with Jinshang.”
However, three days later, BYD’s stance took a complete U-turn. Li Yunfei, the public relations director of BYD, accused the Brazilian government on December 26 of “trying to make trouble without cause.” Li Yunfei reposted Jinshang’s statement, claiming that the Brazilian government’s accusations were unfounded. They attributed the conclusions drawn by the Brazilian government regarding “enslaving workers” to “cultural differences,” “leading questions,” and “deviations in language translation and understanding.”
Jinshang also gathered all workers at the construction site to shoot a video. Two workers stood at the forefront, one holding a microphone, reading out the employee statement word for word. These workers then signed beneath the paper statement and stamped it emphatically in red.
In their joint letter, the workers stated that the company collected their passports only to process temporary identification cards for them. The workers also claimed that Jinshang never restricted their freedom, paid wages regularly, and provided various welfare benefits.
However, the Brazilian Labor Ministry’s article described the living and working conditions of Jinshang workers as follows: “In the first accommodation on Colorado Street, workers sleep on beds without mattresses, lacking lockers to store personal items, with these items mixed with food materials. The health conditions are particularly severe, with one bathroom shared among every 31 workers, forcing them to queue up at 4 in the morning and be ready to leave for work by 5:30 am.”
“The second residence on Colorado Street is primarily for welders, but the conditions are equally poor. While the beds have fabric covering, it is only 3 cm thick and insufficient to provide minimum usage conditions, with some beds lacking this covering altogether.”
The Labor Ministry’s article stated that all accommodations had serious infrastructure and hygiene issues. The bathrooms lacked sufficient space, were not gender-segregated, had inadequate toilet seats, and unstable hygiene conditions. Due to a lack of proper laundry facilities, the workers had to use their bathrooms to do laundry.
The situation at the construction site also revealed serious violations. The workplace cafeteria provided meals using coolers, unable to ensure minimal hygiene conditions. Approximately 600 workers had only 8 bathrooms, a dire situation with no toilet paper, water, or adequate maintenance, and did not comply with regulatory minimum distances.
Workers were exposed to intense sunlight, showing signs of significant skin damage. Several workplace accidents occurred, with one case involving a worker being injured due to inadequate living conditions and excessive working hours leading to a lack of sleep. Another severe case involved a worker who injured his eyes in April, despite requesting ophthalmologic care, never receiving proper follow-up medical treatment.
Jinshang’s employment contract stipulated 10-hour workdays without rest days. One work accident victim had worked for 25 consecutive days without rest when the accident occurred. The worker expressed feeling tired and sleepy at the time of the accident. The Labor Ministry’s article stated that this indicated that long working hours and obstructed rest due to accommodation conditions were key factors in accidents.
In addition to degrading working and living conditions, Jinshang’s employment also exhibited characteristics of forced labor. The Brazilian government found in their inspection that workers were forced to pay deposits, had 60% of their wages withheld (receiving only 40% in Chinese currency). Terminating the contract prematurely would result in deposit losses, and workers also had to pay for return and arrival flights. This meant that if a worker tried to terminate the employment contract six months later, they would not effectively receive any work compensation.
So, why did the rescued workers speak out in defense of the employers? Wang Yongzhi, a columnist writing under the pseudonym Wang Wu Si, believes this reflects the vast disparity in working conditions and living standards between Chinese laborers and those from other countries. The appalling conditions described by the Brazilian Labor Ministry, such as “proximity of dormitories to toilets, showers, and kitchens,” “food containers being casually discarded on the floor or near beds,” and “workers having to directly drink water from taps without any treatment,” are commonplace on many Chinese construction sites.
Wang Wu Si’s article suggests that the workers’ so-called “love” for Jinshang may be genuine because their work in Brazil not only pays higher than domestically, but the probability of being owed wages is much lower than in China.
An article from the public account “Huozhi Xin Chuan” also highlights the significant gap in living standards between Chinese people and those from other countries due to the BYD “enslavement” incident – “What we consider normal, they see as slavery.” The article suggests that our perceived decent living standards are despicable in the eyes of others.
The article from “Huozhi Xin Chuan” argues that China’s rejection from joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) reflects its lagging labor rights because the CPTPP lists good labor standards as a compulsory requirement.
CPTPP outlines five provisions for labor rights, including the elimination of forced labor, child labor, discrimination in the workplace, freedom of association, and meeting satisfactory work conditions. Work conditions encompass aspects like working hours, minimum wages, and workspace conditions. The standards for work conditions are formulated by the International Labour Organization.
The International Labour Organization specifies that work hours should be 8 hours per day, 48 hours per week, or 40 hours per week.
Brazil’s regulations on work hours dictate a weekly working time of 40-44 hours. However, in the context of the BYD labor incident, Jinshang explicitly stated that workers were required to work 10 hours a day, seven days a week.
China applied to join the CPTPP three years ago but has yet to be approved. China claims to strive for full compliance with CPTPP regulations through reforms. However, solely focusing on labor rights, this goal appears challenging to achieve.
In Forbes’ 2023 “Global Tax Misery Index,” China continues to be the most heavily taxed country among Asian economies, ranking third globally. China’s welfare level is ranked 76th out of 149 countries and regions worldwide. For instance, in terms of employee wages, social insurance accounts for 40% of the total wages.
The high proportion of social insurance is due to the need to support 80 million civil servants nationwide and hundreds of millions of retired elderly people. Without significantly extending working hours and pushing for overwork, businesses cannot be profitable. If businesses were to adopt an 8-hour work system like Western countries, very few could survive.
Therefore, China’s aspiration to join the CPTPP remains a distant dream.