A Study on the Review Mechanism of Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals

• Main Authors: Shiue, Jain Joag, 薛鑑忠
• Other Authors: 成之約
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/22758450590963438450

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 行政管理碩士學程 === 102 === The issue of imbalanced talent resources in Taiwan is a downward spiral in recent years. Not only Taiwanese talents are leaving Taiwan for better job opportunity. But the number of white-collar foreign professionals working in Taiwan has remained at 25,000 to 27,500, far from a large number, in the past decade. Why is Taiwan experiencing stagnation of labor market while other countries continue to attract foreign experts and professionals for work？ To better understand the current status of introduction of foreign professionals to work in Taiwan, the existing employment review mechanism, how it is being implemented and relevant issues, this study conducts analysis and comparison of the policies on introduction, requirements on introduction (economic needs test system), current status of introduction and review mechanism in Taiwan, the United States of America, Singapore and Korea. The study method includes document research, secondary data analysis, comparative analysis and in-depth interviews. Major discoveries of this study are: (1) the foreign professionals currently working in Taiwan are consistent with the purpose of introduction, but the policies are tilted in favor of a lenient treatment, with the possibility of the purpose of introduction being overlooked; (2) the current definition of work may not satisfy the needs in the real world; (3) Taiwan’s economic needs test system does not have restrictions on introduction of medium- to senior-level talents, and requirements on education level, employer’s capital amount and revenues impose no restrictions on medium-level talents; (4) while the salary standards in Taiwan are catching up with market standards, Taiwan’s salary level is at the lower end of the international pricing spectrum; (5) Taiwan’s parallel mode for introduction of foreign labor force cannot satisfy the needs for foreign workers at different levels; (6) despite of the government’s efforts to promote introduction of talents, Taiwan’s low salary standards are likely to become a huge obstacle in attracting foreign professionals to Taiwan or keeping overseas Chinese or foreign students in Taiwan when they graduate; (7) given the fact that the period of stay of foreign professionals for work is relatively short, if the mode of instruction remains unchanged, a successful combination of the policy on employment of foreign professionals and the policy on immigration may be compromised; and (8) transparency and efficiency of Taiwan’s review mechanism generally coincides with the needs, but the system relatively lacks flexibility; and many countries around the world have moved toward becoming more flexible to the review mechanism, and Taiwan’s mechanism may hamper the promotion of a flexible examination. Last but not least, the discoveries of this study have prompted the following concrete suggestions: (1) switch Taiwan’s mode for introduction of foreign workers to triple-track mode as in Singapore, and establish economic needs test system based on policies for introduction of foreign workers at different levels; (2) modify the definition of work and add regulations on the purpose of service provision and guidelines to meet the needs in the real world; (3) moderately revise Taiwan’s economic needs test system, including job description, requirement of two-year experiences in related work, adjustment of salary standards, etc.; (4) combine the policy on employment of foreign professionals and the policy on immigration from a big picture perspective, and educate the public about necessity of introduction of professionals and experts from the developing countries; and (5) establish an inquiry system that constantly updates information and strengthen the education and training of relevant staff.