The controversy over year-end bonuses for retired military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers has ignited debate throughout Taiwan, and can even be said to have deepened opposition between social classes. In response to the backlash from retirees and legislators close to the military, the government, in a display of insincerity and lack of good faith, now seems ready to change its mind and make the payments this year, despite earlier statements to the contrary.
At its core, this issue is not about encroaching on the dignity of government employees, nor is it about who has contributed more to state and society. It is about whether the distribution of resources is appropriate and fair. It is an issue that must not be treated lightly, for the following reasons:
First, it is imperative to avoid further expanding the wealth gap. Everyone has to shoulder the nation’s debt and help make up for the fiscal shortfall that has resulted from the government’s differential treatment of government employees and private-sector workers. The majority of the population is now paying off the debt accumulated for the welfare of a minority. In the long term this will contribute to a widening wealth gap.
Second, the principle of legitimate expectation is not immutable. Government employees believe this principle means that the government must continue to provide welfare measures it has pledged to them. However, legally speaking, there is also the principle of changing circumstances. If, after a situation has changed, adhering to the original plan means that fairness can no longer be upheld, courts may increase or decrease benefits, or change the effect of a law by changing its interpretation.
When the welfare system for government employees was established, the nation’s economic situation, demographic structure, workforce and government finances were different from how they are today. If this legacy system were to remain unchanged, it would cause a worsening of the government’s fiscal situation and could even lead to a default, which would be unfair on the public. As a result, the principle of changing circumstances should be applied.
Third, professions should not be divided into valuable and less valuable ones. The reason that the government is giving particular protection to military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers is that these people for a long time have sacrificed themselves for the country, and therefore should have a comfortable retirement guaranteed. This is not entirely unreasonable, but in democratic societies, all professions should be respected. Although salaries differ, there should be no difference in post-retirement care. The income substitution rate following retirement should be the same across the board to satisfy requirements of fairness.
The question of whether the treatment of military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers should be given an overall review involves not only the issue of the national financial burden, it also concerns social justice. Article 7 of the Constitution clearly stipulates that: “All citizens of the Republic of China, irrespective of sex, religion, race, class, or party affiliation, shall be equal before the law.”
This principle of equality lies at the heart of the values to be implemented through social justice. Even if the burden of the nation’s financial situation is still bearable, that does not mean people of different professions should receive differentiated treatment upon retirement.
Long-term distortion of resource distribution may result both in social infighting and expand the wealth gap between social classes. That would not be in the best interests of the nation as a whole.
Tim Hsu is a professor of law at Chinese Culture University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and