大陸自改革開放30年來，經濟成長突飛猛進，每年GDP成長率幾乎獨步全球，近年來更將從全球的世界工廠轉為世界市場，但2010年台商鴻海集團旗下大陸子公司富士康國際發生多起員工跳樓自殺事件，之後又發生後續一連串勞工抗議薪資過低，要求比照富士康企業加薪，以維護勞動權益的罷工事件。本研究認為中國大陸與勞工相關的勞動制度、分配制度、戶籍制度與政治制度，制度間的扞格衝突形成了替富士康工作的農民工自殺的背景因素。由於先天上缺乏自由組織工會與罷工的權利，僅有個人力量的勞動者無足夠的權利與保障以對抗資方的剝削，工人只能一而再、再而三地將勞資爭議或衝突外部化，尋求體制外力量的幫助，加上種種貧富不均、戶籍制度上等社會不公，導致逐漸加劇的勞工維權運動。 從富士康事件可以看出，黨國基於己身鞏固政權的目的，維持對社會既有的控制力，不僅剝奪全體勞工的集體權利，也間接剝奪了勞工向資本家主張工資福利的個人權利。黨國對於勞資雙方不平衡的狀態，不願從根本上改革勞動制度，給予勞工自由結社、罷工等權利，而以提高法定最低工資及繼續加強勞工法律上個人權益等政治或法律的手段來影響勞資關係。國家不只是對企業主軟硬兼施，對工人一樣採取胡蘿蔔加鞭子的兩手策略，為了使工人能在國家劃定的範圍內維權，國家一方面加強實施有關勞工個人利益的政策，協助工人向資方爭取利益，另一方面對於超出劃定的範圍又影響國家統治權的活動，則以各種國家機器的控治手段壓制勞工的維權運動。 / Since the reformation and opening-up 30 years ago, the economics of China has been improving rapidly. The annual GDP growth rate has had almost no equal around the world. In the recent years, the role of China has transformed from the world’s factory to the world’s market. However, in 2010, several employees of the subsidiary of the Foxconn Technology Group in China had committed suicide by jumping off buildings. After those suicides, there had been a series of protests and strikes by labors regarding low wages, requesting for raises following the example of the Foxconn Technology Group. This study believes that the reasons behind the suicides of the farmers working for Foxconn were caused by the conflicts among the labor system, the distribution system, the household registration system, and the political system. Due to the lack of the right to form trade unions freely and the right to strike, labors with only individual strengths had no sufficient protections or rights to fight against being exploited by the management. Labors could only externalize the labor-management controversies and conflicts over and over again, looking for help from outside the system. Plus there was the social unfairness such as the disparity between the rich and the poor and the household registration system unfairness, finally leading to the Appealing Movement of Labor Rights. It can be seen from the Foxconn event that, for the purposes of consolidating its own political power and maintaining existing control over the society, the party-state exploited not only all labors’ group rights, but also their individual rights of standing for their wages and welfare in front of capitalists. The party-state wasn’t willing to reform the labor system from the fundamentals to improve the unbalanced state between the labor and the management by offering labors the freedom of association and the right to strike. Instead, it tried to influence the labor-management relationship via political or legal means such as increasing the legal minimum wage and continuously improving labors’ individual legal rights and interests. The nation not only adopted both hard and soft tactics against proprietors, it also applied the two-hand strategy with labors. In order to ensure that labors would appeal within the pre-set limits, the nation on the one hand improved the implementation of policies regarding labors’ individual interests to help labors fight the management for their interests, on the other hand applied various controlling measures of state apparatus to suppress labors’ appealing movement for activities which went beyond the pre-defined scope and would influence the nation’s sovereign power.