On Saturday last week, National Chung Hsing University caused an uproar among academics over a job advertisement looking for three unpaid part-time “volunteer teachers.” Faced with a wave of criticism, the university quietly removed the word “unpaid” from the ad on its Web site, but still did not specify the salary range for the job openings.
This is not merely a question of whether such an ad is appropriate, because it was an illegal act.
Listing “unpaid” as a condition of service is clearly against the Ministry of Education’s Regulations for Employment of Part-time Faculty of Institutions of Higher Education (專科以上兼任教師聘任辦法).
Article 8, Paragraph 4 of the regulations states: “The hourly pay standard for part-time faculty of public institutions of higher education shall be set by the Ministry of Education and be approved by the Executive Yuan, unless a higher pay is offered to a position in accordance with the related regulations for national university funds.”
This means the hourly pay standard for part-time teachers at public universities is specifically regulated and protected by the government, and cannot be agreed by schools and teachers themselves.
Why did such a well-known public university post an illegal job ad? The prime suspect is the ministry, which has repeatedly failed to uphold teachers’ legally protected labor rights.
It was not the first time that the university has posted an illegal job ad. In December 2015, local media also reported that one of the school’s departments was looking for unpaid teachers.
Instead of punishing the school for doing so, then-Department of Higher Education director Nicole Lee (李彥儀) merely told the media that “each Taiwanese university can recruit its own staff in line with the spirit of university autonomy.”
The issue of so-called “unpaid” or “volunteer” teachers is just the tip of the iceberg that is the chaos in the higher-education system. Although the Teachers’ Payment Act (教師待遇條例) came into effect three years ago, it is common that private schools make illegal deductions to teachers’ salaries.
Meanwhile, as the ministry is opposed to part-time teachers’ calls to grant them the most basic protections provided in the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法), their schools can cancel their contracts at any time without providing a reason or warning.
Taiwan’s public and private universities alike treat running a school like running a company, making cost cutting and profit maximization the highest goals of management. They try to reduce personnel costs, while illegal pay cuts and dismissals are frequent. They also try to increase revenue whenever possible.
Even after the ministry officially rejected a plan to raise tuition fees, Shih Hsin University secretly raised its tuition for master’s and doctoral students. In contracts with faculty, many private schools continue to add an illegal clause stating that teachers’ contracts will not be renewed unless they can bring in “academic-industrial cooperation projects” worth hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
The notion that schools should be run like companies has caused numerous problems in higher education. It has forced teachers to shift their minds and energy from teaching to miscellaneous school affairs, while students’ right to a quality education is sacrificed.
The ministry’s solution is to turn a blind eye to illegal practices. Late last month, it even proposed that the law be amended to allow universities to launch start-ups to increase their profit-orientation. This is unbelievable.
It is absurd that an illegal job ad was exposed on the eve of Teachers’ Day.
Let us forget about whether our teachers were happy on Teachers’ Day. What university teachers and students expect is simply a learning environment that allows them to develop normally and steadily.
If the ministry continues to fail to thoroughly investigate and correct illegal practices, as is required by law, then the declining birthrate will be the least of our schools’ worries.
Chen Shu-han is director of the Taiwan Higher Education Union’s office.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with