The presidential election is fast approaching. After a series of negotiations, each political party decided its candidates and all of them have announced their agendas. Taiwan has been a democracy for years, and people are encouraged to talk about and participate in public policy. Similar to many other countries, Taiwan has gradually become an aging society. All candidates have acknowledged this issue and offered their proposals regarding long-term care services. This should be applauded.
However, it should also be mentioned that the focus on care service for the elderly would certainly influence other disadvantaged groups who might receive fewer resources than they do now. The policy should not be formulated through a mere redistribution of resources among different disadvantaged groups. In particular, more insightful planning that would include more people with disabilities in the workforce would be welcome.
Ministry of Health and Welfare statistics dated Nov. 30 this year show that the number of people in Taiwan with disabilities has reached 1.2 million — about 5.16 percent of the entire population.
Additionally, the ministry’s Report on Disabled People’s Living Conditions and Demand Survey for 2021 demonstrates that the employment rate of the people with disabilities is at 20 percent, with an unemployment rate at 8 percent. The average monthly salary for employees with disabilities is less than NT$30,000 — about NT$10,000 lower than the overall average. It should also be mentioned that less than 20 percent of these employees’ incomes is earned by themselves, whereas the government subsidies account for more than 20 percent.
As demonstrated by an evaluation report on “Sheltered Workshops for Employees with Disabilities,” a study commissioned by the Ministry of Labor in 2020, the average salary earned by people with disabilities working at sheltered workshops was NT$8,612 — much lower than the threshold for basic living expenses. Their livelihoods and social safety have been severely jeopardized.
The problems of aging and inflation have also made things much more difficult. People with disabilities who are in their prime years are increasingly confronted with a cruel reality: Their parents are getting old, they themselves are growing old, while their income or salary hardly sustains their basic needs. These problems are related to the inclusion of the disabled in the workforce, and this is not an independent social issue. Rather, it might lead to serious economic problems in our society.
Over the past few years, it has been obvious that the Control Yuan and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities international committee have been examining and engaging with the issue of hiring people with disabilities in Taiwan. Yet, so far, little progress has been made. The Ministry of Labor’s investigation shows that, while government departments or public business institutions with more than 34 employees should hire a certain number of people with disabilities, 1,807 agencies or organizations have failed to do so, which means that about 9.9 percent do not abide by the regulation.
It is sincerely hoped that every presidential candidate can take this issue seriously so as to make Taiwan better. The following questions are worth considering for further planning:
The first is whether the principle of “performance-based pay” is in line with human rights. If it contravenes the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the authorities might consider abolishing it and come up with a new measurement.
Second, the function of “sheltered workshops” should be clarified. It is unclear whether they are centers for vocational rehabilitation or for-profit organizations. If they are indeed for-profit, these workshops are not incentivized to transition participants to employment.
Third, it is the obligation of the government and official agencies to include more people with disabilities in the workforce. Professional social work organizations and sheltered workshops are not responsible for undertaking such an enormous task. If the resources are limited for the official agencies to carry out the work, the government should plan more ways and strategies, demanding further participation from social sectors and corporate organizations.
Fourth, the employment rate of people with disabilities is low, and so is the rate of successfully transitioning them to employment. The government might consult with private companies and seek their involvement in improving the situation. This is for the future of Taiwan and to achieve the goal of social sustainability.
Fifth, corporate organizations should consider hiring more staff specializing in vocational rehabilitation and establish sheltered workshops in the companies. In doing so, companies would be able to transition employees with disabilities to other places within a supportive network. This could ensure the ongoing participation of people with disabilities in society.
Sixth, the government and official agencies should help corporate organizations to redesign jobs for people with disabilities. This is to ensure that workplaces could be as barrier-free and stable as possible.
Lastly, private companies that provide vocational rehabilitation services should be subsidized. With government subsidies, companies would be able to hire more human resources professionals with better pay and hence lower their turnover rate. This would allow the vocational rehabilitation services established in the companies to be further developed in a sustainable manner and achieve the goal of stabilizing employment.
When discussing “disabilities,” we should not define it in a clear-cut and fixated way. Disabilities are a product of an entire society. In that sense, we should emphasize the importance of human rights, making sure that everyone could be treated equally. We should respect that everyone is different and that such diversity allows us to respect each other’s distinct experiences, be it with disabilities or not.
Lin Chien-hsu is an employment specialist.
Translated by Emma Liu
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS