吃得好與吃得飽的鬥爭：越南台資工廠的午餐政治

Decent Meals versus Poor Food: The Politics of Workplace Meal and Taiwan Capital in Vietnam

本篇論文是從越南改革開放後外資工廠的午餐爭議出發，分析工廠午餐作為一種強制共餐，如何內化於半邊陲的台資威權式與階級種族化的勞動體制之中，進而觸發了接合階級與民族主義的工人午餐抗爭。在越南政府作為「工人國家」與依賴外資的政經脈絡下，具有維生道德意義的工人午餐抗爭促使政府開啟了與食物權相關的保護主義集體協議空間，作為勞資雙方「橋梁」的越南政府，試圖以受限的7c/NQ-BCH號決議來調解勞資階級對立關係。此協議性質而非法律的議案，讓工人的食物權高度依附於資方的善意與否，不滿於資方固守以米飯「吃得飽」的供餐原則，工人只好藉由每日的午餐政治持續對台資抗爭施壓；除了訴求吃得好的得體午餐外（午餐質量與公平性），由於劣質的工作餐通常是與台資工廠嚴苛的勞動條件共變，因此可藉由日常「吃飯」瑣事來開啟其他勞資議題的協議空間，具體化了台商所說的越南工人為反對而反對的反叛意識。相當程度來說，越南工人的工作餐抗爭結合了馬克思式和博蘭尼式的抗爭行動，午餐權利抗爭是交織在階級認同與跨越階級的民族認同之中；一方面，反對經濟剝削，抗議台資提供無法滿足勞動力再生產的劣質午餐，另一方面，反對勞動力商品化帶來的個人和社會災難，抗議種族差異化的劣質工作餐所內含的對工人及社會的貶抑。

This paper examines the politics of workplace meal at Taiwan factories invested in Vietnam. We analyze how the factory lunch, as a kind of coercive commensality and internalized in the authoritarian and racialized division of labor of Taiwan capital, triggers the workers’lunch protests that articulated class identity and nationalism. In a context where the Vietnamese government is a socialist state and dependent on foreign capital for development, the workers’lunch protests force the government to open political space for a food rights collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The Vietnamese government draft Resolution 7c/NQ-BCH tried to mediate the lunch antagonism between Vietnamese workers and Taiwan capital, however the nature of this Resolution is a CBA, rather than law, which makes the workers’food rights highly dependent on the goodwill of the capital. Dissatisfied with the capital’s adherence to the principle of“feeding enough”, the workers have to apply persistent pressure to the Taiwan capital through everyday politics to improve lunch quality. In addition to appealing for a decent lunch (marked by lunch quality and fairness), the poor quality of the workplace meal is always co-variable with the harsh working conditions in Taiwan factories, such that everyday lunch politics also serves as a mean to open up space for other labor issues. Hence, the lunch politics provides an instance of what Taiwan capital perceives as the rebellious consciousness of Vietnamese workers who oppose just for the sake of opposition. To a certain extent, the workers’workplace meal resistances is a combination of Marx-type and Polanyi-type protests in that the workers’struggle for food rights is intertwined with the class identity and the broad-based national identity; on the one hand, the protest is against economic exploitation and poor quality food provided by Taiwan capital that cannot meet the needs of labor reproduction, and on the other hand, it is against the human and social disasters brought about by the commodification of the labor force, and a protest against the degradation of Vietnamese workers and society as evidenced in the racially differentiated poor quality workplace meals.