成之約Abstract
Due to the influence of market forces and the strategies of labor flexibility, development of "dispatched work" has become an inevitable trend.Based on the research findings, "dispatched work" would cause effects on industrial relations, both individually and collectively.In order to cope with the development of dispatched work, many countries have made directed much effort to the study of effects of dispatched work and to the formation of related labor policies.Even though the development of dispatched work in Taiwan is still at its initial stage, the study on effects of "dispatched work" and its relevant policies shall not be neglected. The interactive relationship between labor unions and “dispatched workers” in Taiwan is chosen as the main topic of discussion for this discourse.Through an empirical survey on both dispatched workers and labor unions, it intends to find what obstacles the dispatched workers have come across to their exercise of the right to organize or participate in labor unions.
This essay explores the intention of dispatched workers to organize or participate in labor unions and the intention of labor unions to accept them as members.Suggestions are offered for how to protect the right of dispatched workers to organize or participate in labor unions.
Keywords: Dispatched Work, Dispatched Workers, Industrial Relations, Labor Policies, Labor Union
＊This essay is part of a research project funded by the National Science Council, Executive Yuan, Taiwan. (Project No. NSC 92-2414-H-004-014)
Introduction
Owing to the influence of labor flexibility strategies, “atypical work types” have been widely adopted by employers in dealing with market variation.An atypical work type, "dispatched work" is controversial and has attracted much academic attention, since it challenges directly the fundamental principle that labor is not a commodity.[1]Although dispatched work is of much concern to employers, workers and governments, it has been growing in some OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries and is recognized as a phenomenon irreversible. (See Table 1)
Table 1 Evolution of Part-time and Temporary Workers as a Percentage of Total Employment in Selected OECD Countries in 1985, 1990 and 1995
|
Country |
Part-time work |
Temporary work |
||||
|
1985 |
1990 |
1995 |
1985 |
1990 |
1995 |
|
|
Ausrtalia1 |
17.5a |
21.3 |
24.8 |
15.6e |
18.7 |
23.5e |
|
Belgium2 |
8.6 |
10.9 |
13.6 |
6.9 |
5.3 |
5.3 |
|
Canada1 |
16.8b |
17.0 |
18.6 |
|
7.5d |
8.8e |
|
France2 |
10.9 |
11.9 |
15.6 |
4.7 |
10.5 |
12.3 |
|
Germany2 |
12.8 |
15.2 |
16.3 |
10.0 |
10.5 |
10.4 |
|
Ireland2 |
6.5 |
8.1 |
12.1 |
7.3 |
8.5 |
10.2 |
|
Japan1 |
15.8b |
18.8 |
19.8 |
10.3 |
11.0 |
10.4e |
|
Netherland2 |
22.7 |
31.8 |
37.4 |
7.5 |
7.6 |
11.4 |
|
New Zealand1 |
15.3b |
20.0 |
21.5 |
－－ |
－－ |
－－ |
|
Norway1 |
29.6 |
26.3 |
26.5 |
－－ |
－－ |
14.0 |
|
Spain2 |
5.8a |
5.0 |
7.5 |
15.6a |
29.8 |
35.0 |
|
Sweden2 |
25.7 |
23.8 |
25.8 |
11.9a |
10.0 |
12.5 |
|
United Kindom2 |
21.2 |
21.7 |
24.1 |
7.0 |
5.1 |
7.0 |
|
United States1 |
18.4b |
16.9 |
18.6 |
－－ |
0.8d |
2.2e |
Source: Ozaki, M. 1999. Negotiating Flexibility: The Role of the Social Partners and the State. (Geneva: ILO.) p. 9.
Notes：1. OECD, 1996-97; 2. European Commission. DG V, 1996, pp. 147-162.
a 1987 data; b 1983 data; c 1984 data; d 1989 data; e 1994 data.
The attitude of labor unions toward dispatched work was defensive and negative.However, in recognition of the irreversibility of dispatched work, labor unions have adjusted their attitude and tried to find an appropriate strategy and method to deal with the development of dispatched work. [2]Generally speaking, labor unions have adopted such strategies as exclusion, servicing, partnership, social dialogue and mobilization to deal with the development of dispatched work. (See Table 2 for description of each strategy.).[3]
Table 2 Labor Union Strategies to Cope with Dispatched Work
|
Strategy |
Description |
|
Exclusion |
Labor unions exclude dispatched workers from employment and perhaps also from union membership. |
|
Servicing, |
Labor unions draw dispatched workers into trade unionism through provision of individual services. |
|
Partnership |
Labor unions seek cooperation with employers for furnishing existing union members with guarantees of future employment. |
|
Social dialogue |
Labor unions attempt to influence government policy and secure changes in employment laws in order to conserve job opportunities of existing union members and reduce the insecurity experienced by dispatched workers. |
|
Mobilization |
Labor unions seek to mobilize members and supporters in pursuit of an explicitly moral demand for justice. |
Source：Excerpt from Heery, Edmund & Abbott, Brian. 2000. “Trade Unions and the Insecure Workforce.” In Heery, Edmund & Salmon, John ed. The Insecure Workforce. (London: Routledge).pp. 158-163.
Although labor unions have adopted such positive strategy as servicing to deal with dispatched work, they are still deeply concerned with the potential threat posed by its development, in particular when the decline in labor union density has become a worldwide phenomenon and most of dispatched workers are inclined not to join labor unions.[4]
Like in many OECD countries, the development of dispatched work in Taiwan has drawn much discussion and attention.[5]Nevertheless, most of the studies in relation to dispatched work in Taiwan cannot provide a comprehensive description of the interactive relationship between labor unions and dispatched workers for lack of empirical surveys or because research is focused on only one of the three parties involved.Two empirical surveys, one about labor unions and the other about dispatched workers, have been made for this discourse, the purpose being to find what obstacles the workers have encountered to their exercise of the right to organize or participate in labor unions and what implications are involved vis-à-vis employment relations and labor policy in Taiwan.
Research Method
Two empirical surveys were conducted about dispatched workers and enterprise-based labor unions in Taiwan.[6]
For lack of aggregate data concerning the quantity of dispatched workers, the sampling in intention was adopted instead of random sampling.A total of 100 dispatched workers were surveyed with the assistance of dispatched work agencies. Questionnaires were sent them but only twenty-eight responded.The questionnaires were designed to understand their attitude toward labor unions and their intention to organize or participate in labor unions.
As to the sampling of labor unions, only enterprise-based labor unions in Keelung City, Taipei County and Taipei City were surveyed. A total of 298 unions were surveyed.Only sixty-two of them responded, however.The survey was held to find out their attitude toward dispatched work and also dispatched workers.
Survey on Dispatched Workers
Most of the respondents are female, with college education or above, and between 20 and o 29 years of age.A majority of them are engaged in clerical and service work, with a monthly pay ranging from US$700 to US$1,000.None of themare labor union members.
They were queried on their opinions about their jobs, their interaction with dispatched work agencies and “user enterprises” or employers, and their own attitude toward dispatched work.
Tomost of the respondents, dispatched work is a temporary job.If possible, most of them would like to have a non-dispatched work type job in the future.Only a small minority, around 18 percent, had agency-arranged dispatched work before. A majority are first-time dispatched workers. Although contract relationship exits between dispatched workers and dispatched work agencies, many of the former regard “user enterprises” as their employers, who they believe determine, at least to some extent, their fringe benefits and monthly pay.
Dispatched workers were asked whether they face a layoff before their contract expires. A 10.7 percent minority confirmed but another 33 percent said they were forced to terminate their contract.Job insecurity did exist, but only a minority had that experience.
Two questions were posed.Dispatched workers were asked whether their dispatched work agencies and user enterprises have labor unions they may join.There exist labor unions in the latter but none in the former..It is therefore necessary to survey user enterprise-based labor unions to gain an insight into the interactive relationship between labor unions and dispatched workers.
Questions concerning the attitude of dispatched workers toward their work and their participation in labor unions are tabulated below..
Table 3 Questions Concerning the Attitude of Dispatched Workers Toward Dispatched Work and Participation in Labor Unions
|
Number |
Question |
|
1 |
Dispatched work is secure. |
|
2 |
Labor unions could be helpful in dealing with the dispute between dispatched workers and dispatched work agencies or user enterprises. |
|
3 |
Labor unions could be helpful in obtaining better terms and working conditions. |
|
4 |
Dispatched workers should take part in user enterprise-based labor unions for acquiring more protection. |
|
5 |
Dispatched workers should take part in dispatched work agency-based labor unions for acquiring more protection. |
|
6 |
Dispatched workers should simultaneously take part in both user enterprise-based and dispatched work agency-based labor unions for acquiring more protection. |
|
7 |
Dispatched worker should organize a labor union of their own to acquire more protection. |
|
8 |
Either organization of or participation in labor unions would be harmful to dispatched workers’ interests. |
|
9 |
It is meaningless to participate in a labor union since its functions are limited. |
Source: The author.
Responses to the nine questions listed in Table 3 are tabulated in Table 4.
As indicated in Table 4, most of the dispatched workers said they do not think their jobs are secure in reply to Question 1 of Table 3. Responses to Questions 2 and 3 about the helpfulness of labor unions are exactly the same.Most of the respondents are agreed on participation in labor unions (Questions 4 , 5 and 6) and on organization of their own labor unions (Question 7).They feel uncertain, when asked whether their participation in or organization of labor unions is harmful to them (Question 8).and “meaningless” because labor unions have “limited functions” (Question 9).
Table 4 Attitude of dispatched workers toward dispatched work and participation in labor unions
|
Question |
Disagree |
Uncertain |
Agree |
Total |
||||
|
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
|
|
1 |
13 |
46.4 |
12 |
42.9 |
3 |
10.7 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
2 |
4 |
14.3 |
12 |
42.9 |
12 |
42.9 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
3 |
4 |
14.3 |
12 |
42.9 |
12 |
42.9 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
4 |
2 |
7.1 |
7 |
25.0 |
20 |
71.4 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
5 |
2 |
7.1 |
5 |
17.9 |
21 |
75.0 |
28 |
100/0 |
|
6 |
2 |
7.1 |
8 |
28.6 |
18 |
64.3 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
7 |
3 |
10.7 |
6 |
21.4 |
19 |
67.9 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
8 |
11 |
39.3 |
15 |
53.6 |
2 |
7.1 |
28 |
100.0 |
|
9 |
4 |
14.3 |
18 |
64.3 |
6 |
21.4 |
28 |
100.0 |
Source: The author.
Most of the respondents are inclined to organize their own unions or participate in those organized by dispatched work agencies or within their user enterprises, probably because they do not feel their jobs are insecure.Nevertheless, quite a few respondents feel uncertain about whether it is indeed helpful to organize or participate in a labor union.
Survey on User Enterprise-based Labor Unions
Sixty-two user enterprise-based labor unions returned the questionnaires.Only 33 of them have labor unions.Sixteen of the 33 enterprises (49.9%) belong to the tertiary industry, while another 40.3 percent are manufacturers.The rest are engaged in construction and farming industries. A membership of 500 is used as a criterion to determine the size of labor unions.[7] Small-sized labor unions account for the largest proportion.
The questions asked are listed in the table below.
Table 5 Questions Concerning the Attitude of Labor Unions Toward Dispatched Workers
|
Number |
Question |
|
1 |
The use of dispatched workers can meet the need of the company. |
|
2 |
Dispatched workers can work in harmony with employees of the company. |
|
3 |
The use of dispatched workers would not affect the right to work of employees of the company. |
|
4 |
The use of dispatched workers would not affect the terms and working conditions of employees of the company. |
|
5 |
The use of dispatched workers would not affect the fringe benefits of employees of the company. |
|
6 |
Labor union members are clannish. |
|
7 |
Labor unions should recruit dispatched workers as members. |
|
8 |
Only when dispatched workers join the labor union can the right to work of employees of the company be well protected. |
|
9 |
Dispatched workers can acquire more protection after they join the labor union. |
|
10 |
Dispatched workers are not employees of the company; there is no legal base to let them join the labor union. |
Source: The author.
Responses to the ten questions listed above are tabulated in Table 6.
Respondents disagreeing with the clannishness of labor unions (Question 6) and their membership contributing to the protection of the employees of user enterprises (Question 8) outnumber those who agree (36.4% vs. 30.3% and 39.4% vs.33.3%). The ratios in the rest of the questions are reversed. It is fair to say that labor unions in general are not clannish, though a few of them think that the right to work of employees in the company may not be well protected if dispatched workers are given membership.
Table 6 Attitude of Labor Unions Toward Dispatched workers
|
Question |
Disagree |
Uncertain |
Agree |
Total |
||||
|
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
|
|
1 |
8 |
24.2 |
10 |
30.3 |
15 |
45.5 |
33 |
100 |
|
2 |
4 |
12.1 |
13 |
39.4 |
16 |
48.5 |
33 |
100 |
|
3 |
12 |
36.4 |
6 |
18.2 |
15 |
45.5 |
33 |
100 |
|
4 |
11 |
33.3 |
8 |
24.2 |
14 |
42.4 |
33 |
100 |
|
5 |
12 |
36.4 |
5 |
15.1 |
16 |
48.5 |
33 |
100 |
|
6 |
12 |
36.4 |
11 |
33.3 |
10 |
30.3 |
33 |
100 |
|
7 |
12 |
36.4 |
7 |
21.2 |
14 |
42.4 |
33 |
100 |
|
8 |
13 |
39.4 |
9 |
27.3 |
11 |
33.3 |
33 |
100 |
|
9 |
9 |
27.3 |
6 |
18.2 |
18 |
54.5 |
33 |
100 |
|
10 |
4 |
12.1 |
7 |
21.2 |
22 |
66.7 |
33 |
100 |
Source: The author.
Note: Although 62 labor unions returned their questionnaire, only 33 of them replied their companies have employed dispatched workers.The analysis is based upon the responses from the 33 labor unions.
Even though labor unions in general are not clannish, their industry and size attributes may make difference.A cross-examination of industry attributes with the attitude of labor unions shows those manufacturing and construction companies are more inclined to be exclusive-minded. Table 7 indicates labor unions in manufacturing and construction industries tend to disagree on Question 3 (dispatched workers likely to affect the right of work of employees of the company), Question 4 (dispatched workers unlikely to affect the terms and working conditions of employees of the company), and Question 5 (dispatched workers unlikely to affect the fringe benefits of employees of the company).
Size attributes of labor unions also makes difference.Table 8 shows small-sized labor unions disagree on the employment of dispatched likely to meet the need of the company (Question 1) and agree on labor unions being clannish (Question 6).
Table 7 Attitude of Labor Unions Toward Dispatched Workers by Industries
|
Q. |
Industry |
Disagree |
Uncertain |
Agree |
Total |
||||
|
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
||
|
1 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
1 |
50.0 |
1 |
50.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
3 |
0.25 |
4 |
0.33 |
5 |
41.7 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
5 |
26.3 |
6 |
32.6 |
8 |
42.1 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
2 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
0 |
0.0 |
6 |
50.0 |
6 |
50.0 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
4 |
21.1 |
7 |
36.8 |
8 |
42.1 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
3 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
6 |
50.0 |
1 |
8.3 |
5 |
41.7 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
6 |
32.6 |
5 |
26.3 |
8 |
42.1 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
4 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
6 |
50.0 |
1 |
8.3 |
5 |
41.7 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
5 |
26.3 |
7 |
36.8 |
7 |
36.8 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
5 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
5 |
41.7 |
2 |
16.7 |
4 |
33.3 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
6 |
31.6 |
3 |
15.8 |
10 |
52.6 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
6
|
Agri., etc |
1 |
50.0 |
1 |
50.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
3 |
25.0 |
6 |
50.0 |
3 |
25.0 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
9 |
47.4 |
5 |
26.3 |
5 |
26.3 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
7 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
4 |
33.3 |
2 |
16.7 |
6 |
50.0 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
6 |
31.6 |
4 |
21.1 |
9 |
47.4 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
8 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
4 |
33.3 |
3 |
25.0 |
5 |
41.7 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
9 |
47.4 |
6 |
31.6 |
4 |
21.1 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
9 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
4 |
33.3 |
1 |
8.3 |
7 |
58.3 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
5 |
26.3 |
5 |
26.3 |
9 |
47.4 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
|
10 |
Agri., etc |
0 |
0.0 |
1 |
50.0 |
1 |
50.0 |
2 |
100.0 |
|
Industry |
2 |
16.7 |
2 |
16.7 |
8 |
66.7 |
12 |
100.0 |
|
|
Services |
2 |
10.5 |
4 |
21.1 |
13 |
68.4 |
19 |
100.0 |
|
Source: The author.
Table 7 Attitude of Labor Unions Toward Dispatched Workers by Size
|
Q. |
Sizes (persons) |
Disagree |
Uncertain |
Agree |
Total |
|||||
|
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
|||
|
1 |
500 and below |
7 |
41.2 |
3 |
17.6 |
7 |
41.2 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
0 |
0.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
4 |
80.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
1 |
9.1 |
6 |
54.5 |
4 |
36.4 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
2 |
500 and below |
3 |
17.6 |
7 |
41.2 |
7 |
41.2 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
0 |
0.0 |
6 |
54.5 |
5 |
45.5 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
3 |
500 and below |
7 |
41.2 |
1 |
5.9 |
9 |
52.9 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
1 |
20.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
3 |
60.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
4 |
36.4 |
4 |
36.4 |
3 |
27.3 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
4 |
500 and below |
6 |
35.3 |
4 |
23.5 |
7 |
41.2 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
1 |
20.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
4 |
80.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
4 |
36.4 |
4 |
36.4 |
3 |
27.3 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
5 |
500 and below |
7 |
41.2 |
1 |
5.9 |
9 |
52.9 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
2 |
40.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
2 |
40.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
3 |
27.2 |
3 |
27.2 |
5 |
45.5 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
6 |
500 and below |
4 |
23.5 |
5 |
29.4 |
8 |
47.1 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
4 |
80.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
4 |
36.4 |
6 |
54.5 |
1 |
9.1 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
7 |
500 and below |
7 |
41.2 |
4 |
23.5 |
6 |
35.3 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
2 |
40.0 |
2 |
40.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
3 |
27.2 |
1 |
9.1 |
7 |
63.6 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
8 |
500 and below |
8 |
47.1 |
4 |
23.5 |
5 |
29.4 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
1 |
20.0 |
3 |
60.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
4 |
36.4 |
2 |
18.2 |
5 |
45.5 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
9 |
500 and below |
4 |
23.5 |
3 |
17.6 |
10 |
58.8 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
2 |
40.0 |
1 |
20.0 |
2 |
40.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
3 |
27.3 |
2 |
18.2 |
6 |
54.5 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
|
10 |
500 and below |
3 |
17.6 |
4 |
36.4 |
10 |
58.8 |
17 |
100.0 |
|
|
501~1,000 |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
5 |
100.0 |
||
|
1,000 and above |
1 |
9.1 |
3 |
27.3 |
7 |
63.6 |
11 |
100.0 |
||
Source: The author.
Implications for Employment Relations and Policy
Many macro and individual factors contribute to the development of dispatched work.For instance, transformation of economic structure, global market competition, undertaking of labor flexibility strategies and change of value between employers and employees are all directly or indirectly conducive to the development of dispatched work.[8]
Labor unions in some OECD countries were defensive, negative and even repulsive in attitude toward dispatched workers.Nevertheless, in recognition of the irreversibility of dispatched work, labor unions have adjusted their attitude and tried to find an appropriate strategy and method to cope.
Like their counterparts in OECD countries, labor unions in Taiwan always express openly their hostility against dispatched work and dispatched workers.Labor unions in manufacturing and construction industries and small-sized labor unions are indeed more inclined to be exclusive to dispatched workers.Nevertheless, labor unions in general are not inclined to be as exclusive, the majority of them even agreeing on the question of their ability to offer more protection to dispatched works if membership is allowed.
Most of the dispatched workers are female workers and none of them are labor union members.Since job insecurity is the major concern of dispatched workers, their inclination to join labor unions seems to be very high.
Though both dispatched workers and labor unions are not hostile to each other, there still are obstacles to the former to join the latter.One of them is legal.The Labor Union Act precludes dispatched workers from joining labor unions in user enterprises, of which they are not employees. The act must be amended to provide dispatched workers with more opportunities to join or participate in either user enterprise-based or dispatched work agency-based labor unions.
There is no doubt that job seekers may use dispatched work as a stepping stone to longer-term and more secure employment.Their motivation is to reduce the time and cost to look for jobs in the triangular arrangement.Female workers, in particular, find dispatched work to satisfy their demand for flexibility in work.[9]However, to some unskilled workers the possibility of being “permanent dispatched workers” does exist, since skill deficiency make it difficult for them to land longer-term and more secure jobs in the labor market.[10]
Dispatched work has become widely accepted by enterprises in Taiwan, especially those engaged in service industries and with a foreign capital background, in enlarging their flexibility in human resource employment.Under such circumstances, employment relations are bound change.For instance, the number of workers lacking job security would increase owing to the development of dispatch work, and labor-management relations in individual enterprise would become tenser when many peripheral jobs are filled with dispatched workers. In the face of this transformation, however, the government in Taiwan cannot make up its mind where it should stand in the process of legitimizing dispatch work, either being pro to employers or con to workers, or vice versa.Undoubtedly, if the legitimizing of dispatched work were delayed, rights of all parties involved in the triangular arrangement would be heavily impaired.
Besides, how to help female workers not to become permanent dispatched workers is of much concern to the government.Generally speaking, education and training are the most important means of facilitating labor mobility.Accordingly, the responsibility of dispatched work agencies for giving education and training to dispatched workers should be clearly stipulated.Otherwise, dispatched workers will find it difficult to develop their career and further development of dispatched work might also be hindered.
Conclusion
Dispatched work has been a product of modern economic and social environments and its development is irreversible.It should not be prohibited by law.However, in consideration of the negative impact of dispatched work on employment security, taking laissez-faire stands on its development is also unrealistic.Since neither regulation nor deregulation is appropriate in dealing with the development of dispatched work, re-regulation turns out to be the way out.[11]As discussed above, amending the Labor Union Act and providing dispatched workers with more flexibility in choosing to join or participate in either user enterprise-based or dispatched work agency-based labor unions serve as an example of re-regulation.
There is no doubt that legitimizing dispatches work would be the most urgent task of the government.Once dispatched work is legalized,, many problems can be easily solved and rights of all parties concerned well protected.Given the interaction among the government, employers and employees, it is not easy to legitimize the triangular arrangement.
Finally, law and regulations are only one of many factors influencing the development of employment relations.Tripartite consensus and support for dispatched work are indispensable to the continued development of dispatched work in Taiwan..
Bibliography
Cheng, Chin-chin, 1998, “A Study on Issues of ‘Dispatched Work,’” paper presented at the Seminar of "Thedevelopment of ‘Dispatched Work’ and Its Impact” organized by the Council of Labor Affairs,March 7, Taipei, Taiwan
Cordova, Efren. 1986. “From Full-time Wage Employment to Atypical Employment: A Major Shift in the Evolution of Labour Relations?” International Labour Review. 125(6): 646-648
Heery, Edmund & Abbott, Brian. 2000. “Trade Unions and the Insecure Workforce.” In Heery, Edmund & Salmon, John ed. The Insecure Workforce. (London: Routledge) p. 157.
Ong, Yu-chen, 2000, An Evaluation on the Effects of “Dispatched Work” on “Dispatched Workers”.Master’s thesis of the Department of Labor Relations, National Chungcheng University.
Ozaki, Muneto. 1999. Negotiating Flexibility: The Role of the Social Partners and the State. (Geneva: ILO). P. 99.
Polivka, Anne E. & Nardone, Thomas. 1989. “On the Definition of ‘Contingent Work’.” Monthly Labor Review. 12(12): 13.
Standing. Guy. 1997. “Globalization, Labour Flexibility and Insecurity: The Era of Market Regulation.“ European Journal of Industrial Relations. 3(1): 7-37.
Vosko, Leah F. 1997. “Legitimizing the Triangular Employment Relationship: Emerging International Labour Standards from a Comparative Perspective.” Comparative Labor Law Journal.19(1): 44.
Vosko, Leah F. 1998. “Regulating Precariousness? The Temporary Employment Relationship Under the NAFTA and the EC Treaty.” Relations Industrielles/ Industrial Relations. 53(1): 129.
Yang, Tong-shun, 1998, “A Study on Issues of ‘Dispatched Work’”, paper presented at the Seminar of “The
development of ‘Dispatched Work’ and Its Impact” organized by the Council of Labor Affairs, March 7, Taipei, Taiwan.
[1] Vosko, Leah F. 1997. “Legitimizing the Triangular Employment Relationship: Emerging International Labour Standards from a Comparative Perspective.” Comparative Labor Law Journal.19(1): 44.
[2] Ozaki, Muneto. 1999. Negotiating Flexibility: The Role of the Social Partners and the State. (Geneva: ILO). P. 99.
[3] Heery, Edmund & Abbott, Brian. 2000. “Trade Unions and the Insecure Workforce.” In Heery, Edmund & Salmon, John ed. The Insecure Workforce. (London: Routledge) p. 157.
[4] Heery & Abbott, Ibid, p. 155.
[5] Yang, Tong-shun, 1998, “A Study on Issues of ‘Dispatched Work’”, paper presented at the Seminar of “The development of ‘Dispatched Work’ and Its Impact” organized by the Council of Labor Affairs, March 7, Taipei, Taiwan.
Cheng, Chin-chin, 1998, “A Study on Issues of ‘Dispatched Work’”, paper presented at the Seminar of “The development of ‘Dispatched Work’ and Its Impact” organized by the Council of Labor Affairs, March 7, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ong, Yu-chen, 2000, An Evaluation on the Effects of “Dispatched Work” on “Dispatched Workers”.Master thesis of the Department of Labor Relations, National Chungcheng University.
[6] The reason of choosing enterprise-based labor unions as the surveyed is due to that enterprise-based labor unions are usually holding a negative or excusive standing toward dispatched workers. Please see Ozaki, ibid, pp. 108-109.
[7] Usually, there is no such a criterion, but for the purpose of analysis three ranges including five hundred and below, five hundred and one to one thousand, and one thousand and one and above were being used to determine the size of labor unions.
[8] Please see Cordova, Efren. 1986. “From Full-time Wage Employment to Atypical Employment: A Major Shift in the Evolution of Labour Relations?” International Labour Review. 125(6): 646-648
[9] Vosko, Leah F. 1998. “Regulating Precariousness? The Temporary Employment Relationship Under the NAFTA and the EC Treaty.” Relations Industrielles/ Industrial Relations. 53(1): 129.
[10] Polivka, Anne E. & Nardone, Thomas. 1989. “On the Definition of ‘Contingent Work’.” Monthly Labor Review. 12(12): 13.
[11] Standing. Guy. 1997. “Globalization, Labour Flexibility and Insecurity: The Era of Market Regulation.“ European Journal of Industrial Relations. 3(1): 7-37
王順民
劉新圓
