日本外國人工作法制之研究

Research on the Legal System for Foreign Workers in Japan

日本長期堅持不開放藍領外勞政策，但為解決人力短缺問題，允許若干符合法令規定之外籍人士在日本就業。此種彈性作法雖然可以維持日本形式上不開放藍領外籍勞工之政策，又同時兼顧企業之人力需求，卻也產生了若干弊病並外溢成為社會整體之問題，更無法真正紓解缺工困境。為補足專業人力需求，日本雖然透過簽訂EPA開放東南亞三國護理及照顧人員赴日工作，但申請條件嚴格，故而無法成為日本例外開放外籍勞工之主要途徑。主要仍依賴技能實習制度補充勞動力，但該制度也飽受爭議。直到2019年，日本才透過特定技能制度大規模開放低技術外籍勞工赴日工作。即便日本的外勞政策始終堅守不開前門只開後門之基本立場，但是仍舊會依實務需求而即時制定相關法律規範以為因應，亦在短時間內制定了外國人技能實習法及修訂入管法。此種配合基本政策及時修訂法律之作法，非常值得我國在處理外籍勞工管理政策及法制時加以學習。我國應參考日本法制中有利於爭取優秀外籍人才之規範，及早制定藍領外國人工作管理專法，將就服法既有規定與新經濟移民法草案之重要規範合而為一。如此一來，除了可以解決用就服法管理外國人工作之邏輯上繆誤，亦可將初階外勞與中階外國人才管理合併處理，避免多部法令併行造成適用上之混亂。唯有儘速制定符合時代變化之專法供各方遵循，才能使得台灣的外國人工作管理法制趕上時代變化，不再永遠停留在1990年代之過時思維，達到有利於外勞（移工）、雇主、行政機關之三贏局面。

Japan has long adhered to a policy of not opening up to blue-collar foreign labor. However, in order to address labor shortages, it allows certain foreign nationals who meet legal requirements to work in Japan. While this flexible approach maintains the appearance of not fully opening up to blue-collar foreign workers, it also balances the labor needs of businesses. Nevertheless, it has led to some drawbacks and societal issues, failing to truly alleviate the labor shortage.
To supplement professional manpower, Japan has signed Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) to allow nursing and caregiving personnel from Southeast Asian countries to work in Japan. However, the stringent application conditions prevent it from becoming the primary avenue for opening up to foreign labor. Japan still heavily relies on the Technical Intern Training Program to supplement its workforce, although this program has faced controversy. It wasn’t until 2019 that Japan significantly opened up to low-skilled foreign workers through the Specific Skills Visa system. Despite Japan’s steadfast policy of keeping the front door closed and only opening the back door to foreign labor, practical needs have prompted timely adjustments to relevant legal regulations. Japan swiftly enacted the Foreign Workers’Technical Internship Law and revised immigration laws. This approach, which aligns with the basic policy while promptly amending laws, serves as a valuable lesson for Taiwan in managing foreign labor policies and legislation.
Taiwan should learn from Japan’s legal framework that favors attracting outstanding foreign talent. It should promptly establish a specialized law for managing blue-collar foreign workers, integrating existing regulations with provisions from the proposed New Economic Immigration Law. By doing so, Taiwan can rectify logical inconsistencies in foreign labor management, streamline the handling of both entry-level and mid-level foreign workers, and avoid confusion caused by multiple parallel laws. Only by promptly enacting laws that adapt to the changing times can Taiwan’s foreign labor management keep pace with the era, moving away from outdated thinking rooted in the 1990s and achieving a win-win situation for foreign workers, employers, and administrative agencies.