The Legislative Yuan recently passed several bills regarding the retirement and pensions of public-sector employees. As it is inevitable that higher education will undergo many changes, university presidents and professors want the government to improve academics’ retirement benefits to attract more talent and prevent a brain drain.
According to the pension system, public-school teachers receive the same pension and retirement benefits regardless of performance. Although academics sometimes receive very good retirement benefits, like an extremely high income replacement ratio, it rarely happens.
The Ministry of Education should consider setting down different rules for higher education faculty and researchers at public institutions, instead of applying the same pension schemes and retirement benefits to all civil servants, including public-school teachers. Establishing a separate salary and pension system for academics would bring several benefits.
First, providing more flexible salaries to university faculty and researchers would make Taiwan more competitive in the global market, improve higher education and boost university rankings.
Second, offering salaries to academics based on performance in research or teaching, instead of paying everyone the same, would also be fairer.
Third, while civil servants are supposed to follow instructions and abide by rules, academics need to be innovative and imaginative.
As academic Hu Shih (胡適) said, researchers should “make bold assumptions and try to prove them carefully.”
Being an academic requires an entirely different approach from that of most government employees. Academics who think like civil servants and are resistant to innovation are unlikely to make major contributions.
Fourth, if academics were not bound by rules designed for civil servants, they would be able to enjoy more flexibility in obtaining or using research grants. This could prevent unnecessary legal issues due to flawed regulations — such as the 2013 false receipt controversy in which many academics were embroiled.
To improve Taiwan’s global academic reputation, we must encourage academics and researchers to return to Taiwan and stay here. The government should develop a new reward system to keep academics from leaving.
Kent Lin is a professor at the Institute of Religion and Humanity at Tzu Chi University.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
Weeks into the craze, nobody quite knows what to make of the OpenClaw mania sweeping China, marked by viral photos of retirees lining up for installation events and users gathering in red claw hats. The queues and cosplay inspired by the “raising a lobster” trend make for irresistible China clickbait. However, the West is fixating on the least important part of the story. As a consumer craze, OpenClaw — the AI agent designed to do tasks on a user’s behalf — would likely burn out. Without some developer background, it is too glitchy and technically awkward for true mainstream adoption,
On Monday, a group of bipartisan US senators arrived in Taiwan to support the nation’s special defense bill to counter Chinese threats. At the same time, Beijing announced that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had invited Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) to visit China, a move to make the KMT a pawn in its proxy warfare against Taiwan and the US. Since her inauguration as KMT chair last year, Cheng, widely seen as a pro-China figure, has made no secret of her desire to interact with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and meet with Xi, naming it a
A delegation of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials led by Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is to travel to China tomorrow for a six-day visit to Jiangsu, Shanghai and Beijing, which might end with a meeting between Cheng and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The trip was announced by Xinhua news agency on Monday last week, which cited China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao (宋濤) as saying that Cheng has repeatedly expressed willingness to visit China, and that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee and Xi have extended an invitation. Although some people have been speculating about a potential Xi-Cheng
No state has ever formally recognized the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) as a legal entity. The reason is not a lack of legitimacy — the CTA is a functioning exile government with democratic elections and institutions — but the iron grip of realpolitik. To recognize the CTA would be to challenge the People’s Republic of China’s territorial claims, a step no government has been willing to take given Beijing’s economic leverage and geopolitical weight. Under international law, recognition of governments-in-exile has precedent — from the Polish government during World War II to Kuwait’s exile government in 1990 — but such recognition
RSS