公立就業服務機構功能定位探討

Abstract

本研究係探討我國公立就業服務機構之功能及定位，自2003年起國內失業率攀升，並促使公立就業服務機構進行一連串變革，推行三合一服務流程，在變革之中我國公立就業服務機構，也面臨一些功能及定位上的挑戰，為能釐清公立就業服務機構本身的定位及功能發展，本研究採用文獻探討、比較研究及深度訪談法，探討我國公立就業服務機構與美國、英國、澳洲等國在公立就業服務中心的組織、功能及定位上的異同，最後並就差異處採深度訪談方式，訪問我國就業服務相關人員，以檢視我國公立就業服務機構現存問題及可能的辦理方向。\n \n我國公立就業服務機構經與美國、英國、澳洲等國家的公立就業服務機構進行比較，有以下發現：\n一、我國在業服務據點綿密，但就服通路與失業者人數比例、人力配置與失業人數比例、投入經費的於GDP比例，重要國家仍有差距。\n二、我國自三合一就業服務流程實施後失業率下降，但求職就業率遠低於美國及澳洲。\n三、就業媒合、就業諮詢的個別化服務及個案管理、整合公、私部門資源、對雇主提供全面服務等公立就業服務功能，與美國、英國、澳洲相比仍待改善；但提供勞動市場資訊、辦理積極性勞動市場方案等則不遜於前開三個國家。另外，失業給付業務對我國公立就業服務機構，造成業務排擠。\n三、我國公立就業服務機構應採中央設置或地方政府辦理，為應解決問題；另外，公私立就業服務機構的競合亦為應關注焦點。\n \n就我國與其他國家差異處，以深度訪談方式訪談我國就業服務人員後，有以下發現：\n一、就業媒合中的自助服務應再充實；媒合技術受：失業給付領取者不願就業、專業關係難以建立、過度追求就業服務績效、服務人力不足…等問題干擾。\n二、辦理失業給付業務使公立就業服務機構重要性提升，但也帶破壞原本公立就業服務機構體制、形成福利依賴；受訪者認為失業給付應與公立就業服務機構分離，僅在就業促進研習等業務上進行適度連結即可。\n三、個案管理服務可仿美國英澳洲國家與個案簽定工作計畫；在個管員介入失業給付請領者的處遇方面，不贊成比照英國模式給付個管員給付裁量權。\n四、我國公立就業服務機構已具區域就業資訊的聯絡功能，然而實質功能有限，在結合公部門部分，並非長期穩定的關係。採英、美夥伴結盟方式雖然可行，但仍需注意地方的負面影響。\n五、雇主服務未特別設定服務理念，另外雇主服務時因為績效及人力不足，無法提供細緻性服務，又公立就服中心肩負審查責任，故與雇主意向相左。另外，外勞業務應與就服機構脫勾。\n六、公立就業服務機構定位問題方面，受訪者主張中央統籌、地方政府設立，以及維持現行中央與地方並存模式，兼具有之，但均主張避免資源重疊。\n七、與私立就業服務機構可採合辦活動或業務外包等方式合作。\n八、多數贊成英國減少福利依賴的公立就業服務機構理念，澳洲的私有化模式被認為不適合我國執行。\n \n經由以上研究發現，筆者有以下建議：\n一、 積極進行公私部門整合及雇主服務。\n二、 就業媒合、個管服務已具基礎，應再強化其服務內涵。\n三、 失業給付與公立就業服務中心服務脫勾，避免業務干擾。\n四、 採用中央集權方式辦理公立就業服務機構業務，使全國性勞動業務推動有一致性標準。\n五、 將弱勢就業對象設定為主要服務對象，並結合私立就服機構技術。\n六、 公立就業服務機構的設置理念除仿效英國解決福利依賴外，另可參考美國模式將公立就業服務機構定位為協助區域經濟發展的重要成員。

This study focuses on the function and orientation of public employment service in Taiwan. Since 2003, the unemployment rate has been increasing. This urged a series of reformation in the public employment service and the promotion of three-in-one employment service. In the process of reformation, the public employment service in Taiwan also encountered some challenges concerning the function and the position. Therefore, in order to clarify the development of the orientation and function in the public employment service , this study introduces the document analysis, international comparative and intensive interviews to investigate the similarities and differences in the structure, function, and orientation between the public employment service in Taiwan and the public employment service in the United States, British and Australia. At last, according to the differences, the intensive interviews will be introduced to interview the people in charge of domestic employment services as well as to examine the problems and the possible way to resolve in the public employment service in Taiwan.\n\nThrough the comparison in the public employment services between Taiwan and the United States, British and Australia, we made the following findings:\n\n1. The density of public employment service centers are high in Taiwan. However, Taiwan still has much room to catch up with these important countries in the ratio of PES and unemployed rate ,the ratio of staff and the unemployed. \n\n2. The unemployment rate has decreased after the three-in-one service procedure was put into practice in Taiwan. But the rate of seeking for employment is far lower than the United States and Australia.\n\n3. Compared with the United States, British and Australia, the functions of public employment service such as job broking , employment consultation , customized service and case management, the integration of sources between public and private sectors, and the Omni-directional service toward the employers in Taiwan still need to improve; however, as for providing information of the labor market and conducting the positive projects of labor market, Taiwan may not be inferior to the above three countries. Furthermore, the unemployment benefit service creates pushes other services asides in Taiwan.\n\n4. The system of public employment service in Taiwan should adopt centralization or decentralization is an important issue; moreover, the competition and cooperation between public agencies and private organizations should also be another concern.\n\n Based on the differences between Taiwan and other countries, the intensive interviews for the people in charge of domestic employment services made the following findings:\n\n1. The self-helping services should be reinforced; the matching skill is interfered by the problems like the accepters for unemployment supply are not willing to work, the professional relationship is hard to establish, the over pursuit for employment servicing efficiency, and the staffs is inadequate.\n\n2. Unemployment benefit affairs enhances the importance of public employment service. However, it also destroys the original system of public employment service and causes the welfare dependence; the interviewees suggest that the service of unemployment supply should be separated from the public employment service and only has appropriate connection for the management such as employment improving research.\n\n3. The case management may follow the United States, British and Australia to sign the working plans with individuals; as for the interference from the case manager to heal with the unemployment benefit receivers, we disapprove of following the example of Britain model to confer the case managers with jurisdiction.\n\n4. The public employment service in Taiwan have formed the linking function for the regional employment information. However, the substantial function is limited. Especially for the connection between public and private organizations, it cannot maintain a long and stable relationship. Although we can adopt the approach like the alliance between British and United States, the negative effects should still be taken into consideration.\n\n5. The employer service doesn’t have any specially servicing conception. Besides, the employer service cannot provide omni-directional services because of policy orientation and insufficient staff. At the meantime, the inspection responsibility taken from the public employment service agencies makes the other way round from employers’ intention. In addition, foreign workers affairs should also be separated from the employment service agencies.\n\n6. In terms of the position of public employment service, the interviewees argue that the authorities concerned makes the overall plan, the local governments takes the responsibility to establish them, and the present combinative model of the authorities concerned and the local governments should be maintained, but they all suggest the prevention of resources overlapping.\n\n7. The public employment service agencies can adopt the cooperative methods such as activities co-holding and service outsourcing with the private organizations.\n\n8. Most of interviewees approve of the reduction of welfare dependence in Britain public employment service agencies while disapprove of the privatization model in Australia to implement in Taiwan.\n\nThrough the above research findings, we have the following suggestions:\n\n1. The integration between public agencies and private organizations and the employer services should be conducted more effectively.\n\n2. The employment matching and the case management have formed the foundation, so their servicing content should be reinforced.\n\n3. The unemployment benefit service should also be separated from the employment service to avoid the managing interference.\n\n4. The centralized management of public employment service should be taken by the authorities concerned to promote the coherent standard for national laboring services.\n\n5. The disadvantaged minority should be set up as the major subject of the service and should combine private employment organizations’ advantages.\n\n6. The idea for establishing the public employment service can follow the settlement of welfare dependence in British. Besides, it can also refer to the United States model to regard the public employment service as the important member for assisting the regional economic development.