b[/b] The Employment Services Act was promulgated on May 8, 1992. The immediate effect of this legislation was to severely restrict work rights to many US citizens and foreigners who had lived in Taiwan for five, ten, or more years, including those married to local Taiwan island citizens… In many cases, they were not allowed to continue in the types of work which they had engaged in the past, and for which they held both experience and other qualifications. Nor was the fact that they were paying income taxes in Taiwan taken into consideration.
[list]1. Another effect of this legislation was that many Taiwanese employers were denied their rights to manage their businesses as they saw fit, and to hire the personnel which they determined could help their businesses grow and prosper. In fact, under the ESA, the
Can a work permit be applied by the applicant himself and not the employer? I am an Architect from the Philippines and a passport holder of both countries but without ROC ID. I used my ROC passport to enter Taiwan.
I have gone to the CLA before and I was told that I can not secure a work permit because I am still considered as a Filipino and not a Taiwan National.
In any case, If I will be able to secure a work permit through any means possible using my ROC passport, will I be qualified for a resident permit? or ID? I have only the sister of my father as my closest relative here in Taiwan.
Further more. is the “365 days continues stay without a more than 30 days exit from the island” still applicable as an eligibility for a Taiwan ID as poster in the Oriented Legal Matters? or is it out dated now?
Please advice on the possible solution for I would like to bring my family here, and would like to buy a scooter in my name and apply for a driver’s license.
From my reading, one of the major problems with the current system is that the penalties for abuses of the system are overwhelmingly directed towards the foreigner, even when the employer bears some or all responsibility for the violation. This leads to situations where the unscrupulous employer is more likely to try to hire a foreigner which they can have more control over than a local. Even when the employer has provably contributed to a violation, the foreigner has usually been deported before any action against the employer can be taken. This sets up a vicious cycle where unscrupulous employers continue to abuse the system, and good employers are scared off because the process is just too complicated. Thus, violations of the law increase, and the perception of foreigners as troublesome increases.
This is compounded because a foreigner has few options when in an abusive situation: 1) Tough it out or 2) Leave the country either willing or by deportation 3) Get lucky and find another employer who can do the required paperwork in the right amount of time, get all the releases done etc. or 4) Go underground and work illegally. It is therefore not at all surprising that there are so many “runaway maids” because option 4 is often the only one available.
It seems to me that a better system would be one where an ARC remains valid for 60-90 days after your circumstances change for whatever reason, where an employer could take out a new work permit without the old employer’s consent, where employers would face some consequences for their contribution to any violations, and where there was some due process to challenge deportations.
Specifically in regard to employer abuses, it might be useful to sruvey or interview employees after their employment ends and document abuses by employers. In large companies it is common for the human resources department to do exit interviews of departing employees and one of the reasons why is to find bad management.
The US Constitution’s Fifth Amendment rights to life, liberty, property, and due process of law are considered “fundamental”, and apply in all overseas US territories even without specific legislation being enacted by the US Congress.
I agree, much more attention to “due process” is sorely needed in Taiwan.