A recently published report comparing the difference in salaries between university professors and elementary-school teachers has caused quite a stir.
Strictly speaking, compared with salaries for university professors in developed regions of the world, Taiwanese professpors seem to get a relatively raw deal, at least in terms of the salary figures. This has caused a certain amount of concern among academics at Academia Sinica, who see higher salaries in other countries luring the nation’s best researchers abroad. Actually, these fears are not entirely unfounded. A very accomplished former colleague of mine succumbed to pressure and moved to Hong Kong only last year, where salaries are about three times those in Taiwan and substantial housing subsidies are included.
However, how far one can stretch one’s salary has much to do with one’s own values and the place in which one lives. If one really wants to compare the salaries of university professors in Taiwan with those in other countries, one needs to go beyond looking at the numbers on the page and take into account many other variables that apply to those respective countries, such as the average salary, the cost of living, tax and fringe benefits.
Only when these factors have been accounted for can an assessment be made whether university professors’ salaries in Taiwan are too low and, if one thinks they are, where one should look for an adequate comparison. In the US, for instance, university professors’ salaries are not consistent across the board, either between different institutions or for individuals within one university. Some universities do not offer as much money, per se, but they often provide generous perks, such as covering health insurance (not cheap in the US) and providing accommodation and free childcare facilities — things which significantly reduce household expenditure.
Of course, it is also necessary to look at professors’ teaching and research duties at universities abroad and how their workload compares with professors at Taiwanese universities.
The biggest problem with university professors’ salaries — and indeed with the salaries of all public servants — is the lack of geographical or performance-related weighting: Salary levels are the same everywhere for a teacher or professor of a given position, irrespective of what part of the country they live, how high the cost of living is, how local housing prices compare or their own experience and academic achievements.
A friend of mine teaches at National Taiwan University. He bought an apartment of not even 100m2 in area in an old building for NT$14 million (US$483,000). That is equal to about 12 years of his current salary. That same amount of money where I live in Hualien would have bought a free-standing villa of about 330m2.
To make the monthly mortgage payments of more than NT$40,000, my friend has to supplement his basic salary of a little more than NT$80,000 by accepting outside projects, giving talks and grading examination papers. We both do the same job, yet while my friend struggles in Taipei on his salary, I get by on mine in Hualien.
Yes, it is possible to say the salary is too low, but really one should not generalize. Two people on the same salary can have radically different experiences, depending on their individual circumstances.
Nothing is black and white. Therefore, this matter needs to be studied before we can state convincingly whether university professors’ salaries in Taiwan are low or high, how such a comparison should be made, or whether salaries should be raised or redistributed.
Hsu Yu-fang is an associate professor in National Dong Hwa University’s Department of Sinophone Literature.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers