Whether pension reform is described as a top-down or bottom-up process is just a matter of formality. Those in charge of reform must look squarely at the issue at hand and answer: Why have public school teachers been falling over each other in a rush to retire in the past few years?
It is related to pension reform.
Welfare allowance for senior farmer, which is similar in function to the annual retirement pension, has already had the required insurance period extended from six months to 180 months. The Government Employee Insurance Act (公教保險), in reference to the Labor Insurance Act (勞工保險), has extended the basis for retirement payments from being based on the premium paid on the last month before retirement to the average premium paid over the 120 months up until, and including, the final month of payment.
One reason why this is easier said than done is that annual pension reform must differentiate between which part of the pension is part of the social insurance system, and which part is made up of payments by an employer and an employee within the contributory system. The two systems must not be mixed up. If money paid by an individual is mixed up with money paid by the public, those who have paid money would be unhappy, because that would be money that they had paid.
How can this be accomplished? The government can resolve the crisis of an aging population through three layers of guaranteed annual pension systems.
First, the foundation: This is the government’s responsibility and it guarantees basic social security. It is not intended to provide a good life during retirement, but rather to provide the ability to maintain a decent life. For this, social insurance is fine.
Second, the house: This is an employer’s responsibility and because it is of a different character, the Labor Standards Act requires that employees contribute 6 percent of an employee’s salary.
Third, interior design: This involves using voluntary commercial insurance, such as savings insurance, disability insurance or long-term care insurance, to provide economic guarantees in old age.
The first level includes several social insurances, such as labor insurance, government employee insurance, farmers’ insurance, military insurance and national pension insurance. These meet different standards. Just because a worker enters labor insurance does not mean that they will remain with labor insurance all their working lives, as people often switch between different insurances.
Why not take this opportunity to simply divide social insurances into labor insurance for those who work for a living and national pension insurance for those who do not.
The former would incorporate the government employee and farmers’ insurances into the labor insurance, including the years insured and the payments made into respective insurances.
At the next level, where employer and employee contributions are made, the employer of the workers engaged in public or educational jobs — referred to as government employees — is the Taiwanese public, the taxpayers. The appropriate way to resolve this would be to calculate how much the workers have paid during their working lives and then look at the economic situation and the nation’s finances. Based on this, a few concrete solutions would be proposed that would be handed to the employer — the public — who would then decide in a referendum. This would truly be a bottom-up process.
Cash Chang is the founding chairman of the Republic of China Labor Consultant Association.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing