Regarding whether the government has fulfilled its state obligation as regulated by CEDAW and other International Human Rights Treaties, it is crucial to first determine whether the government has adopted the appropriate legislation and other necessary measures to achieve the elimination of any direct or indirect public or private discrimination against women, change gender stereotypes and prejudice, and prevent discrimination against or harm to women by third parties. The complainant, the Taoyuan Flight Attendants Union, which consists of 13 cabin crew, filed a complaint with the Taoyuan City Government against EVA Air’s regulations on uniforms, appearance, and self-purchased shoe allowances, alleging gender-based differential treatment in terms of dress and shoe requirements, makeup requirements, and the amount of the self-purchased shoe allowance given. The Taoyuan City Government Gender Equality Committee ruled the complaint unfounded; the decision was seconded by the Ministry of Labor’s Gender Equality Committee. Their reasons for why the airlines’ actions do not constitute gender discrimination are detailed in each approval letter, which differs from the NHRC’s dress code analysis and conclusions based on CEDAW’s definition of discrimination. Additionally, concerning the inadequacies in the regulations, the complainant stated that the current Gender Equality in Employment Act does not cover or apply to collective gender discrimination or inequality complaints, and that the competent authorities do not accept complaints filed by unions on behalf of victims. a. CEDAW’s state obligation includes the duty to respect, protect, fulfill, and promote Article 1 of CEDAW clearly defines what constitutes discrimination against women (distinctions, exclusions, or restrictions made based on gender that impede or deny women the equal enjoyment of rights and freedom). Article 4 of the convention explains that two types of differential 72