A proposed amendment to the Civil Service Performance Evaluation Act (公務人員考績法) that is about to be submitted to the legislature has been the subject of considerable controversy because of a stipulation that 3 percent of civil servants must be given a “C” grade.
However, in many other advanced nations the civil service is being streamlined and underperforming bureaucrats are being shown the door.
New Zealand, for example, passed the State Sector Act in 1988 in an effort to improve the caliber of its civil servants. The act redefined the relationship between the heads of public service departments and their staff as something more akin to private sector employment contracts. Consequently, high-ranking officials in all government agencies are employed on a contractual basis.
The country’s Employment Relations Act specifically states that civil servants are no different from private sector employees in that they have to sign a contract detailing their employment period, job specification and salary. Moreover, agency heads — the employers — have to conduct regular performance evaluations of their personnel, as specified in the contract.
In Australia, the public service commissioner and public service agency heads of the various departments have control over the personnel within their respective agencies. They also have the right to decide the conditions governing the hiring of staff, as well as all things pertaining to the contract, the employment and the termination thereof, in line with the 1999 Public Service Act.
Compared with the situation in New Zealand and Australia, where civil service personnel are treated just like private employees, the recruitment and evaluation of bureaucrats in Taiwan is quite lenient.
In 2008, of 240,000 civil servants evaluated, 75 percent received an “A,” 25 percent were given a “B” and only 0.01 percent received a “C.” A mere three received a “D.”
Of the 20,000 Taipei City civil servants evaluated, only five received a “D” and lost their jobs as a result in the last decade.
Only one person was placed in the precarious position of receiving a “C” four times, and only two got a “C” three times. Could it really be that the caliber of civil servants is this high?
In a survey conducted last year by the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission, only 55.3 percent of respondents said they were satisfied with the overall quality of service provided by the government, with another 35.9 percent saying they were either “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied.” As many as 31.7 percent of respondents said they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the efficiency of government services. Anything under the 60 percent satisfaction mark denotes a failure to satisfy the public.
It does seem, then, that the government needs to do better. The proposed amendment to the Civil Service Performance Evaluation Act is something that the government should welcome as it will be good for reform. The pan-blue camp should be jumping at this opportunity.
Liu Sun-chi is a research fellow at National Chengchi University’s Institute of International Relations.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS