hayzel7773

1. Those trips are 4-day trips. In addition, the rest schedule is much more fit for jet lag(the flights depart around Taiwan time 4pm meaning FAs are well rested). The morning flights depart at Taiwan time 3-5am, meaning flight attendants did not get a full nights sleep before working again. This schedule only exists for the flight that departs Sunday from TPE and departs SFO on Monday!
2. The flight is not daily. It would create issues with scheduling.
3. No idea
4. SEA flights are only 3x weekly. They have long rest. LAX flights are you arrive in the morning, you leave via the next day's midnight flight(normally BR11).

Rest time is well above legal standards. They are supposed to get at least 20 hours layover after a flight more than 8 hours. EVA proposed to them one additional crew on the flight, which was rejected by the union.

Part of the grief(but not aired publicly) is that the pilots get longer layovers compared to FAs(5 day trip for SFO etc.) and they feel like that is not fair. This will never be said out loud, because you will just create animosity between the two working groups!

BR made record revenue last year, but that does not mean that the airline will have such great success every year. The current issue is that they do not want to work two daytime flights in a row without longer rest because daytime flights are more toiling in terms of service and pax needs(barely anyone sleeps). I feel part of the fear the management has is that if they give in this one time for these long-hauls, they will demand that all long-hauls be changed, and that is costly. They also don't want to change the turns because if they change PEK or TOY, then who is to say the next most tiring ones won't be KIX and ICN(comparable length) and before we know it, they will want those to be overnighters too!
They aren't getting any pity from the media(BR and the Evergreen Group has excellent media relations, they often quash and quell stories) and the airline is not CI...the govt is not going to allow them to 1.strike without a total stall in negotiations 2. create disorder against a private company. That would send a bad message to all the private companies. In fact, when they complained to MOL, they were told that the flights were legal and nothing could be done.

These flights are not the only ones being protested.
BR715/716 to PEK: They want it to become a one night layover instead of a direct turn.
BR108(from KHH)/192/198 to TOY: One night turnaround instead of direct turn, especially 108, whose flight time is almost the same as SIN(yet the crew deplane in SIN).
BR315/316 to BNE: They want 4-5 days instead of 3 and simplified service onboard. The company has agreed to simplify service, meaning cuts will be made in procedure but rest time will not be changed. They claim that with the reduction in freq. that they previously filed, it will return to 4-6 day trips.
BR265/266 to PNH: Although not being disputed this time, this flight is one of the very long direct turns they do. However, they are ok with this because the flight is long enough so that they can eat during the flight and nap during the turn(like SHA from TSA).

EDIT: Just to add on, EVA Air recently calculated the routes using BAM by Jeppesen with the CAA and found they are well within the guidelines prescribed. They also meet AOR and all rest rules. However, the direct turns last year had 68 different reports of illegal labor overtime(longer than 12 hours according to the Article 84-1 they have with FAs) and the airline was fined.