Managers Have Not Lost Their Authority—They Now Have an Electronic Strike ZoneUnderstanding Taiwan’s New Workplace Bullying Rules Through Baseball’s ABS System

At the Chinese Professional Baseball League All-Star Game on July 19, 2026, CPBL Commissioner Tsai Chi-chang personally initiated the first ABS challenge in league history.

Facing a pitch from Wang Chien-ming that bounced in the dirt, Tsai tapped his helmet to request a challenge. The stadium screen immediately displayed a 3D animation showing that the pitch had missed the strike zone by 40.6 centimeters, successfully overturning the home plate umpire’s original call.

The Chinese Professional Baseball League’s Automated Ball-Strike System, commonly known as the “robot umpire,” officially entered live testing in the minor league in July 2026, with full implementation in the top league targeted for 2027. In the future, baseball will have a more precise and objective boundary for determining balls and strikes.

This reminded me of Taiwan’s recently implemented workplace bullying provisions, which serve a similar function.

“Are managers no longer allowed to reprimand employees?”

“Could demanding proper performance now lead to a workplace bullying complaint?”

These are among the questions I have heard most frequently from company chairpersons, chief executive officers, and HR executives since the workplace bullying chapter of the Occupational Safety and Health Act took effect.

My answer is straightforward:

The law has not taken away a manager’s authority. It has simply drawn a clearer boundary around the methods managers may use—much like baseball’s electronic strike zone.

Managers are still allowed to pitch, but they may not throw wild pitches. They may still manage strictly, but they may not cross the legal boundary of what is “necessary and reasonable for business purposes.”

That is the central legislative purpose of the new workplace bullying provisions.

Keywords: Occupational Safety and Health Act, workplace bullying, managerial authority

For labor-law compliance training, accredited continuing education for board members, appointments as external committee members in workplace bullying and sexual harassment investigations, and representation in litigation or mediation proceedings, please contact YesinLaw at +886-2-2515-6822 or visit https://www.yesinlaw.com.

1. Managers Retain Their Authority, but Their Methods Must Fall Within the Occupational Safety and Health Act’s “Strike Zone”

In baseball, pitchers obviously have the right to pitch. Without pitching, the game cannot proceed.

The same is true in business. Managers lawfully possess the authority to assign work, supervise attendance and diligence, evaluate performance, correct deficiencies, and implement Performance Improvement Plans.

The new law has never prohibited managers from demanding proper performance, nor has it prohibited them from correcting employees who fail to meet reasonable expectations.

Instead, it requires every management action to remain within the scope necessary and reasonable for legitimate business purposes.

Where a requirement is genuinely necessary for the work, complies with the principle of proportionality, and respects the employee’s human dignity, it remains a legally permissible “strike”—even if the standard is demanding.

Keywords: PIP, principle of proportionality, human dignity

2. The Unlawful Act Is Not Pitching—it Is Throwing a “Wild Pitch” Through Improper Management

An ABS system does not widen the strike zone merely because the pitcher is a star player. Nor does it turn a ball into a strike simply because the pitcher had no malicious intent.

It examines only whether the pitch actually entered the defined strike zone.

Similarly, a workplace bullying investigation no longer focuses solely on whether a manager acted with good intentions. It objectively examines whether the method of management crossed the legal boundary.

If a manager publicly humiliates an employee, shouts in anger, repeatedly excludes the employee, degrades the employee’s character, deliberately imposes impossible targets, or continuously uses positional power to apply pressure, the conduct is comparable to a pitch thrown directly at the batter.

It is no longer ordinary management. It is a wild pitch.

The focus of legal scrutiny has therefore shifted from the manager’s stated purpose to the actual methods used.

Keywords: emotional intelligence management, legal liability, managerial conduct

3. Corporate Management Has Officially Entered the Era of the “Electronic Strike Zone”

In the past, many companies believed that an irritable or aggressive manager could be tolerated as long as that manager delivered strong results.

Under the new law, however, a single statement, email, LINE message, or comment made during a meeting may become important evidence used by an investigation committee, court, or competent authority to determine whether workplace bullying occurred.

This means that corporate governance has moved from examining results alone to examining the process by which those results were achieved.

Just as a baseball pitch’s trajectory must be reviewed to determine whether it passed through the strike zone, a manager’s conduct must now be carefully assessed to determine whether it remained within lawful boundaries.

Chairpersons, chief executive officers, HR leaders, and managers at every level must therefore develop more than performance-management skills. Companies must also ensure that managers possess emotional regulation, communication skills, and labor-law compliance awareness.

Only then can each management action remain within the legal strike zone and avoid repeated “wild pitches” that may result in administrative penalties, reputational damage, supply-chain audit failures, and civil or criminal liability.

Keywords: corporate governance, supply-chain audits, labor-law compliance

Attorney Chen Yeh-Hsin’s Reminder

In my view, the most significant institutional change introduced by the workplace bullying chapter of the Occupational Safety and Health Act is not the restriction of managerial authority.

It is the creation of an objective, fair, and predictable management standard—similar to baseball’s ABS electronic strike zone.

A truly outstanding manager is not the person who throws every pitch with the greatest speed or force. It is the person who knows how to keep every pitch within the strike zone drawn by law.

Likewise, a genuinely competitive company does not depend on high-pressure management to produce results. It creates a sustainable organizational culture through lawful management, respect for human dignity, and sound emotional intelligence.

As Taiwanese companies officially enter the era of an “electronic strike zone for management,” does every manager in your organization know whether each management action is a perfectly placed strike—or a wild pitch that has already crossed the legal line?