In response to the recent discussion regarding work permit laws: One important issue for many foreigners in Taiwan that has yet to be mentioned is "the work rights of foreign spouses."
According to Article 48 of the Employment Services Act (ESA;
At the same time it must be pointed out that the Council of Labor Affairs is the central government agency in charge of work permit matters, and in overseeing the implementation of the ESA.
The original intent of this "foreign spouse" legislation, according to the comments of legislators and council officials in the original June 2000 public hearing at the Legislative Yuan, was to give foreign spouses work rights which are equivalent to those enjoyed by Taiwanese citizens. The foreign spouse advocacy groups in Taiwan had been pushing for this for several years, since, [according to their logic] "We are making money in order to support a Taiwanese spouse, so why should we be limited in the type of work we can do, or specific terms of employment, or any other restrictions?"
The Legislative Yuan mem-bers finally agreed to this reasoning. Unfortunately, at present, a large number of city and county government agencies do not respect the terms of ESA Article 48 in practice.
A good example is in the situation of private teaching academies [language institutes], kindergartens, toddler schools, or even various types of small companies or shops. Again, according to the ESA, if it is legal for a Taiwanese person to be hired and work there, then according to ESA Article 48, a foreign spouse [with a resident visa based on marriage to a Taiwanese citizen] may also be employed there, and they do not need a work permit. At the same time, the "foreign spouse" may also have multiple jobs, whether full or part-time.
I have consistently heard stories over the past few years of local city and county government agencies requiring foreign spouses to obtain work permits in order to work in education or other fields, and have also heard that labor insurance could not be applied for or other government paperwork could not be processed if a work permit was not received.
City and county government officers have also stated that certain categories of work are "off limits" to foreign spouses. Naturally, the majority of local employers are not eager to argue with city and county government agencies, and so this state of affairs continues to exist.
To my knowledge, in the last few years there have been many foreign spouses who have left Taiwan with their families precisely because of this reason, ie, they were unable to obtain "unrestricted work rights" from local city and county government agencies, and hence had a hard time making enough money to support their families.
However, as stated above, the council is the central government agency in charge of work permit matters. If the ESA says that "foreign spouses" do not need a work permit, then they don't need a work permit, and local government agencies have no authority to say otherwise.
If possible, I would hope that the Taipei Times could clarify this matter for the benefit of its readers.
I would also hope that the council would issue the appropriate instructions to all local government agencies to educate them on the content of ESA Article 48.
Name provided
Taipei
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
When a recall campaign targeting the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators was launched, something rather disturbing happened. According to reports, Hualien County Government officials visited several people to verify their signatures. Local authorities allegedly used routine or harmless reasons as an excuse to enter people’s house for investigation. The KMT launched its own recall campaigns, targeting Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers, and began to collect signatures. It has been found that some of the KMT-headed counties and cities have allegedly been mobilizing municipal machinery. In Keelung, the director of the Department of Civil Affairs used the household registration system
RSS