Last month, China passed a new law to strengthen labor standards and protect the interests of workers. Millions of migrant workers in that country have been laboring in dangerous conditions for long hours and low wages that violate the minimum legal standards established over a decade ago. Moreover, employers regularly engage in a series of illegal practices--collecting security deposits, docking pay for meals and lodging, and simply withholding wages--that result in workers taking home even less than they had been promised. Can the new law promulgated by China's National People's Congress eliminate such inhumane treatment of workers? In other forums, I have already expressed my skepticism about how much the law can accomplish without more systemic political changes. This post describes how this belief has been reaffirmed by witnessing the struggle of over 30 Chinese deliverymen in New York City that both federal and state minimum wage laws have failed to protect from abuse.

Like the migrant workers in China that left their rural homes in search of better opportunities in the bustling cities, dozens of young men left China for New York City in search of better economic opportunities. Instead, as the New York Times has documented, they found themselves working as deliverymen at Saigon Grill in Manhattan, where they labored for as many as 70-hours per week for as low as $1.60 per hour--and of course, no overtime. This is not only a blatant violation of minimum wage standards (New York State law requires that deliverymen be paid at least $4.85 per hour before tips) but also overtime requirements. Further, the restaurant fined workers for closing the door too loudly ($50) or if a customer complained about a late delivery ($200), and even made them repay money lost when the workers were robbed while making deliveries.

This was not an isolated case of abuse or a temporary problem. Several Asian restaurants throughout the city were paying their mostly undocumented deliverymen the same illegal wages. And at least one worker, Yu Guan Ke, has been laboring under such conditions at Saigon Grill for nearly a decade.

For many workers in this situation, federal and state labor laws prove to be insufficient protections. Undocumented workers are often intimidated from seeking help or filing a lawsuit. Those brave enough to do so often lack the necessary records evidencing the hours worked or wages received, especially when these violations have been occurring for several years. Moreover, it often takes several years before the aggrieved workers receive any compensation. And finally, the amount of money involved in these minimum wage cases is insufficient to attract most attorneys to spend years litigating such a case.

The stimulus for changing the status quo at Saigon Grill and other restaurants was action by the workers. It began with the workers informing the boss that they wanted to join a union and were planning on filing a lawsuit. When the deliverymen then refused the employer's demand to sign a letter stating they had always been paid minimum wage, they were all fired. Since then, along with the support of the Chinese Staff and Workers' Association and other community groups, a publicity campaign against the restaurant has been launched and there are daily protests outside of Saigon Grill's two locations. The blog dedicated to the workers' cause contains a video of over 200 students from eight New York City colleges shutting down the restaurant during their sit-in demonstration. Local politicians have pledged support for the workers and the press has covered their plight.

This community action and filing of lawsuits together has produced some results. Although Saigon Grill has not honored the workers' demands for back pay and to be rehired, the restaurant has not been able to offer delivery service since the lockout began. Significantly, workers around Manhattan are reporting that their hours have decreased and wages risen since the campaign began. Some of the former Saigon Grill deliverymen have found new jobs at restaurants with better conditions.

But these avenues that helped produce some change in New York are too often closed to workers in China when disputes erupt. The local government usually sides with the tax-paying employer and can intimidate journalists and influence what appears in the state-run media. Workers are not free to join unions other than the largely toothless one controlled by the state. The same problems with evidence and finding an attorney make filing lawsuits rare. As for publicly protesting, one fired deliveryman at last week's protest commented that this would be "impossible" back home in China, as "the police would drag you away before you could say anything!"

Unfortunately, in such an environment, putting new standards on paper in Beijing will not do much to help China's most vulnerable workers. Avenues for workers to know their rights and actually protect their rights must be opened.