On December 12, 2024, the 44th session of the “Adventus Amicorum” seminar series, organized by the Institute of Area Studies Peking University, took place online. The seminar featured as its as main speaker Associate Professor Jedidiah J. Kroncke from the Law School of the University of Hong Kong. The event was chaired by Chen Yifeng, an associate professor at the School of Law at Peking University. The discussant was Ke Zhenxing, a lecturer at the Law School of Nankai University.
The lecture mainly revolved around how the convergence of workplace governance models facilitated the economic integration between China and the US. Prof. Jedidiah J. Kroncke pointed out that, before 1978, there were significant differences between the labor law systems of China and the US. China had a tradition of social democracy, lacked a labor wage market, and workers’ benefits were directly provided by the state, closely linking workers’ interests with those of the nation. At the same time, workers participated in the economy and management through organizations such as workers’ committees, but these organizational forms were relatively weak and state-led. In contrast, the US placed greater emphasis on the role of labor unions in workplace democracy, considering unions as private institutions that should act as “micro-democracies.” Moreover, the US welfare system was relatively weak, relying more on private institutions to provide security.
After 1978, labor laws in China and the US gradually converged in concept and operation. Labor law gradually replaced collective action as the dominant framework, and the protection of workers’ rights increasingly depended on the enforcement of labor laws. At the same time, corporate governance in both countries exhibited authoritarian characteristics, with decision-making power concentrated in the hands of a few, thus requiring the strengthening or amendment of labor laws to improve employment relationships. Despite some progress in labor laws, both countries commonly engaged in circumventing labor laws through labor dispatch practices. In summary, labor law has become the main regulatory framework, and worker participation mechanisms have gradually weakened. This isomorphical trend has not only promoted the integration of the two countries’ economies but also advanced the deepening of Sino-American trade relations since 1978.
Additionally, another commonality between China and the US in the economic field was the widespread implementation of employee stock ownership practices. The concept of employee stock ownership positioned workers as both owners and workers of the company through traditional shareholder ownership notions, aiming to address the lack of democracy. Although employee participation through equity never became the core of the economies of both countries, this practice sparked extensive discussion and resonance in both nations. It is worth noting that despite workers owning shares, these equity plans did not truly empower the employees. In both China and the US, legal arrangements separated ownership from governance, thereby limiting the actual influence of employees and preventing them from truly promoting a more democratic workplace.
Prof. Kroncke emphasized that, despite significant differences in legal systems and political structures between China and the US, their similarities in workplace governance paths should not be overlooked. He expressed his belief that national security frameworks often limited the space for self-criticism, and a profound understanding of Sino-American relations was not only crucial for each country but would also more effectively address common challenges faced globally.
During the discussion session, the moderator and discussant commented on and questioned the content of lecture. Ke Zhenxing discussed the similarities and differences in workplace governance between China and the US, as well as the impact of algorithmic governance on workers’ rights. He pointed out that although China has made efforts to protect the occupational safety of platform workers and provide work injury insurance, this is only a basic protection, and the overall social security system still has deficiencies. Prof. Kroncke said he considered algorithmic governance a globally significant research topic facing many challenges. He emphasized that workers’ rights issues were of vital importance and that attention should be paid to the relevant situations worldwide.
Chen Yifeng discussed the role of neoliberal forces in the global economy, pointing out that labor legislation in China during the 1990s was more about adapting to the market economy. He also mentioned that employee stock ownership was mainly present in high-tech companies and failed to universally promote workers’ welfare. Furthermore, the intensification of strategic competition between China and the US could lead to labor laws becoming a tool for consolidating social inequality. Prof. Kroncke said he believed that despite the different political systems of the two countries, they faced similar pressures in participating in the market economy. He pointed out that labor laws failed to widely distribute surplus value, and the contributions of workers were not recognized; therefore, they felt excluded from the economic system. This indicates an urgent need for reform, and geopolitical issues should not be used to exacerbate worker sacrifices.
In his concluding remarks, Chen Yifeng pointed out that the role of labor law in the economic and social context should be viewed in a more comprehensive and constructive manner. He called for labor law scholars from both China and the US to enhance dialogue and cooperation to promote social inclusion and equality.
