Employers have been facing a serious talent shortage during the post-COVID-19 period, with the manufacturing and service industries calling for an urgent government response and demanding that they be allowed to hire more foreign workers. The Cabinet has set a goal of attracting up to 400,000 foreign workers by 2030 to address the labor shortage, while the Ministry of Labor is easing rules for hiring migrant workers in manufacturing, construction, agriculture and long-term care, with an estimated 28,000 people likely to be admitted under the new policy.
Companies in the industrial and service sectors reported about 216,000 job vacancies in the first half of this year, a Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) survey showed. Most serious was the shortage of 84,000 mid-level technical workers, which includes technicians and associate professionals, craft and trade workers, as well as plant and machine operators. They accounted for about 39 percent of the vacancies, followed by openings for 51,000 professional personnel, and 41,000 service and sales staff.
The shortage of mid-level technical workers has persisted for a long time, but the number of job openings for service, shop and sales personnel reached the highest level in five years at about 19 percent of total vacancies. The DGBAS attributed the rise to people resuming consumption activity after the COVID-19 pandemic, boosting demand for service staff.
Nevertheless, it is the chronic shortage of mid-level technical workers that poses a critical problem to the nation’s long-term development, socially and economically. These skilled workers are vital to technology industries such as semiconductors and non-technology industries such as machinery making, the National Development Council says.
While the nation’s low birthrate is a major factor in the overall drop in the working population, the persistent decline in the number of vocational students in the past few years has contributed to the shortage of mid-level technical workers. The problem did not appear overnight. It reflects a long-term situation in which society values academic credentials over practical skills, while students prefer to attend universities and colleges rather than vocational schools.
The government has in the past few years implemented measures to retain skilled foreign workers after they complete their contracts. The continued retention and employment of experienced foreign workers can greatly reduce the time and cost of cultivating new workers. It can also prevent such workers from being poached by other countries and territories facing shrinking labor pools, such as China, Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea.
The “Long-term Retention of Skilled Foreign Workers Program” launched by the Ministry of Labor last year is aimed at allowing employers to retain foreign workers who have worked in Taiwan for at least six years. The program also provides opportunities for foreign workers to change their immigration status to “intermediate-skilled personnel,” which sets no limit on their work duration, while allowing them to apply for permanent residency after working for five years.
Demand for mid-level technical workers from local industries remains high, and the government must streamline the application process for employers to retain eligible workers. At the same time, it should promote vocational education and improve vocational schools, make vocational licenses and certifications more valuable, and promote the value of professional skills in society.
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent