A Politically Sensitive Act: The most significant cultural point about “罢工” is its political sensitivity in the People's Republic of China. While the Chinese constitution has historically mentioned the right to strike, the current legal framework is ambiguous. Independent trade unions are illegal, and all official unions are state-controlled through the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), which often prioritizes productivity and social harmony over labor disputes.
Comparison to Western Strikes: In the U.S. or Europe, strikes are often legally protected, union-organized, and a standard (though serious) tool in collective bargaining. In China, strikes are almost always “wildcat strikes”—spontaneous and not state-sanctioned. They are viewed by authorities not just as a labor issue but as a potential threat to social stability (`维稳 wéiwěn`). Consequently, organizers can face severe repercussions, and strikes are often quickly suppressed or resolved to prevent them from escalating.
Related Values: The official handling of strikes is deeply connected to the value of `维稳 (wéiwěn)`, or “maintaining stability,” which is a paramount priority for the Chinese government. Public, collective action like a “罢工” is seen as a potential source of social unrest (`乱 luàn`), something the state works hard to prevent. Therefore, while strikes do occur over issues like unpaid wages or poor conditions, they exist in a very different risk-and-reward landscape than in the West.