Skip to content

European Chinese Law Research Hub

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Follow Us
European Chinese Law Research Hub

Tag: Labour Law

Gendered Costs of Human Capital Upgrading: The Case of Garment Workers in China

24. July 2025
A new paper by Yiran Zhang
“Student companion mothers” in their workshop. Photo by Yiran Zhang

As “the factory of the world,” China’s economy was once driven by a massive cheap-commodity manufacturing sector that relied on a cheap and informal workforce of internal migrants. Since the late 2000s, the People’s Republic of China has embraced a new developmental regime that focused on “upgrading” its manufacturing economy through industrial policies and enhancing the quality of its workforce through labor, welfare, and population law reforms, diverting the Chinese economy away from a cheap-labor regime. The industrial upgrading side, once known as “Made in China 2025,” invested in high-tech and more skill-demanding industries. On the “social upgrading” front, the state introduced more labor regulations, made significant efforts to close the urban-migrant social welfare gap, and promoted the stability of migrant families, aiming to transform its manufacturing workforce into one more formal and urbanized. Nevertheless, I find that the heavy dependence of this upgrading reform on parents’ role in the human capital investment of the next generation’s workforce—lacking sufficient public support—led to a downgrading of today’s manufacturing jobs, especially for women, and a new dynamic of gendered supply-chain subordination.

My finding draws from my 2018-19 fieldwork in the Yangtze River Delta that traced the reconfiguring of labor and migration norms across the hometown and worksite of a group of garment workers. In my field work, I observed a group of middle-aged, female industrial workers who had been laboring in coastal factories alongside their husbands for decades, recently returned to their inland hometowns, precisely at a time when labor and social reforms “upgraded” their old factory jobs into higher-quality employment. This trend of reverse migration was primarily motivated by an emerging community norm that may be translated as “student companion mothers (陪读妈妈)” in the region. As mothers of teenage children, women increasingly felt the community expectation that they should return to their hometown to accompany their children and support them as they entered middle or high school. In China, the household registration system (戶口) creates obstacles for students to go to school outside their permanent domicile. As parents seek work opportunities in coastal areas, they often have to leave their children in the care of their grandparents or other family members. Women increasingly decide to return to their hometowns, consciously prioritizing the demands of their children’s education over job and micro-entrepreneur opportunities at the East coast. “Student companion mothers” often live with their children in group housing next to the school and perform care as meticulously as possible, hoping to generate more study time for their children and thus boost their performance in crucial exams. The norm of intense parenting, which started among urban families in the early 2000s, has reached and adapted to migrant families.

This change in family norms also restructured the regional garment industry. The en masse return of female migrant workers gave rise to a new wave of home-based “mothers’ workshops” around inland schools that subcontracted sewing and other labor-intensive tasks from coastal factories. Owned and staffed by student companion mothers, these workshops form a new segment of precarious work— work that is poorly remunerated, low in productivity and contingent, and yet highly flexible as schedules are tailored to fit care work mothers perform for their children in school. The female workers accept what is less than one-third of their old wages because returning to their hometowns transformed their roles within their household from an equal wage earner to a caregiver. The contingency of this workforce also constrained these inland workshops’ bargaining power in the supply chain, creating feminized enclaves in the manufacturing economy that evade both the labor reform and the state’s industrial upgrading efforts.

My case study of garment workers in China raises three interconnected implications for labor and development law and policies. First, precarious work and women’s unpaid social reproductive labor is structurally integrated. Both the institutional arrangements and normative standards of social reproduction condition female workers’ participation in the paid workforce. Thus, mere legal reforms to paid jobs may not be adequate to raise women’s labor conditions. Second, value-chain-upgrading reforms—the primary policy prescription promoted by the mainstream global value chain literature—have a potential gender impact. As one key element in value-chain upgrading strategies, namely human capital accumulation, inevitably relies on highly gendered social institutions such as the household, it is worth examining how such development strategies distribute the costs and gains of upgrading in and beyond the value chain. Third, it remains of crucial importance to understand population and family policies as an integral part of the People’s Republic of China’s development policies. Such a more comprehensive understanding of development policies not only captures a more holistic picture of the state-society relationship, but also reveals that expectations a policy regime imposes on actors in its economy are competing and sometimes contradictory.

The blog post is based on a pair of articles: the sociological analysis, entitled “The Paradox of Upgrading: Standards of Social Reproduction and the Gendered Precarization of Garment Work in China,” appeared in Critical Sociology, and the policy analysis, entitled “Gender, Value-Chain Upgrading, and The Costs of Human Capital: The Case of a Garment Supply Chain in China,” appeared in Cornell International Law Journal vol 57 (2024). Yiran Zhang is the Proskauer Assistant Professor of Employment and Labor Law at Cornell University Industrial and Labor Relations (ILR) School and an Associate Faculty Member of the Cornell Law School. She writes about care, work, gender, and the law in the US and China. Her scholarship is available on SSRN.

General Labour Law, Law and Development, Migration

The Juridification of Government Accountability in China: Addressing Mass Actions

13. January 2025
A new book by Congrui Qiao

“Don’t expect judges in China to have studied at a law school.”

Every time I tell my students at Dutch and Belgian law schools, I see the same reaction: confusion, shock, and a hint of disbelief spread across the classroom. It sounds bizarre but the absence of formal legal training is a long-standing aspect of the Chinese legal landscape. Since 1982, government officials and military officers – with no formal legal education, simply classified under the public personnel administration status of ganbu (干部) or “cadres” – had been transferred into the courts as assistant judges or administrators.

Later in 1983, the Zhejiang Provincial Court requested guidance from the Supreme People’s Court: could assistant judges, some without formal legal training, serve as trial panel members or even presiding judges? The answer came back – yes, they could. That simple approval enabled those who had no legal background to occupy key roles in the judicial process until the 2000s.

As I completed my PhD at Utrecht’s international and European law department, one question kept haunting me: how can the law truly be taken seriously in society? According to Dicey’s classic theory, the absolute supremacy of law necessitates the judiciary to regulate the conduct of government powers and protect individual rights. But as I explored further and learned more about the factors external to the legislature and judiciary—such as political pressure, institutional power dynamics and social norms, I asked myself: is there something more to it?

China, while maintaining the supremacy of political leadership of the CPC, has seen a remarkable legal evolution in recent decades. In 2019, nearly a quarter of court cases challenging government conduct were decided in favour of applicants, a fourfold increase from 2010. This apparent paradox inspired me to develop a new framework to explain and assess the development of law in China —a concept I term juridification.

In my recent book titled Chinese Rules and Procedures for Addressing Mass Actions, I introduce the juridification framework. It builds on a content analysis of a corpus of legislation, court decisions, administrative regulations, political resolutions and media reports from the late 1970s to the mid-2010, texts of over 13 million Chinese words in total. The framework focuses on three core dimensions of the development of government accountability law in China:

  1. Formalisation – How government accountability rules are developed and codified to establish formal accountability of government conduct.
  2. Institutionalisation – The extent to which government bodies, judiciary and semi-official associations conform to these rules, willing and able to adhere to them in practice.
  3. Socialisation – The degree to which social members view personal and public issues through a legal accountability lens, making their decisions in line with legal principles.

Under this framework, I look into three types of “mass actions” in China: collective petitions, labour actions, and farmers’ protests aimed at challenging government decisions. Each type is selected based on four criteria: (a) their claims point to flaws in government policies, or implementation procedures; (b) they take a collective yet non-violent form; (c) their goal is to get the authorities to address their losses or grievances; and (d) they have been widely reported in the Chinese media, reflecting sustained public concern.

By examining the juridification of government accountability law in these cases, this book provides a timely exploration of how legal rules operate and socialise within an authoritarian context, with implications for understanding government-citizen dynamics, and the evolution of government accountability in China.

Dr. Qiao Cong-rui is the Research and Engagement Director of Law4Sustainability, a research initiative dedicated to advancing culturally sensitive approaches to ESG compliance. She holds a PhD in International and European Law from Utrecht University (2018) and has over a decade of experience bridging European and Chinese perspectives on human rights, labour protection, and corporate social responsibility. Dr. Qiao’s academic contributions include over 20 research articles and a monograph in these fields. A BKO-certified educator from VU Amsterdam (2023), she is a senior lecturer in human rights law, governance and business transition, and comparative legal history. She has taught at several prominent law schools, including VU Amsterdam, the University of Amsterdam, the University of Antwerp, Nankai University, and Northwest University of Political Science and Law.

General Chinese courts, Judges, Labour Law, Mass actions, Petitioning

Labour Rights Protection of Foreign Employees in China

17. February 2020

Björn Ahl, Pilar-Paz Czoske and Cui Xu looked at the level of labour rights protection of foreign nationals in China. Their study discovered considerable differences of levels of protection provided by Chinese courts to foreign nationals in labour disputes. In general, courts in Beijing and Guangzhou extended significantly better legal protection to foreign employees than courts in Shanghai. Both groups, foreign employees with and without a valid work permit, do not receive the same level of labour rights protection as Chinese nationals. The legislative framework that governs employment relations between local employers and foreign employees is still based on the assumption that foreign employees do not need comprehensive statutory protections of labour rights. International law that aims at protecting migrant workers acknowledges the equal treatment of nationals and non-nationals with regard of the protection against unjustified dismissal as a minimum standard. The Chinese legislator should consider bringing the current legislation in conformity with international standards.

The study is available on https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3507529.

General Labour Law

Recent Posts

  • Big Data Cannot Answer All Questions About Chinese Courts
  • The Iron Fist in a Digital Glove: How the CCP Manages Its Members with Apps
  • Smart Court, Smarter Party: A Necessary but Incomplete Interpenetration
  • Children’s Tort Liability and Evolution of Chinese Tort Law in the Post-Codification Era
  • Gendered Costs of Human Capital Upgrading: The Case of Garment Workers in China

Tags

Administrative Enforcement Administrative Litigation Administrative Procedure Arbitration Authoritarian Legality China International Commercial Court Chinese courts Civil Code Civil Law Civil litigation Communist Party Comparative Law Constitutional Law Contract Law Covid-19 Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Data Protection Democracy Digitalization Government Transparency Guiding Cases Hong Kong Human Rights Judges Judicial Reform Judicial Reforms Labour Law Latin America Law and Development Lawyers Legal Culture Legal History Migration One Belt One Road Open Public Data Public International Law Regulation Regulation of AI Rule of Law Smart courts Social Credit System State-owned companies Supreme People's Court Supreme People's Procuratorate

Subscribe to our newsletter…

...to be the first to learn about new blogposts.

Idealist by NewMediaThemes