近年來勞工意識抬頭，面臨國際間縮短工時的趨勢，台灣的工時對比OECD國家仍屬工時偏長者，使得工時制度備受爭議。2015年修法縮短每週工時至40小時，並於2016年再次修訂勞動基準法，掀起所謂「一例一休」的政策之辯論，這些爭議的出發點皆為修訂的法令是否能落實縮短工時，本研究目的即檢視我國工時政策調整對於企業工時制度之影響。
經由個案研究，「一例一休」政策確實使得企業工時制度有所調整，且勞工年總工時比修法前更加減少，延續超過一個年度以上，亦未對企業產生經營上的負面影響。然而本研究亦顯示，雖然減少工時的政策及立法方向正確，應給予肯定及支持，但修法過程未注意立法策略、未建立適當之緩衝或設定階段性的目標，以致於社會爭議影響立法目標，同時由於各產業必須一體適用，在執行面亦產生過於僵化之效果。必須增加勞資政三方社會對話機會，加強彼此對法令制度及市場變遷的認知，並應以開放的心態面對改變，才有辦法落實立法的目標。
In recent years, the reduction of working hours has been hotly debated due to the increasing workers’ consciousness. Taiwan is among the country with the longest working hours in the world, if compared with the OECD countries. As such, the government initiated to amend the law to reduce working hours from a bi-weekly 84 hours to a 40-hour week in 2015. Subsequently, in 2016, the labor standards act amended again, to adjust the legislation to resolve the problem created from the previous amendment, in particular the issue of “One mandatory day off and one flexible rest day” dispute. This study aimed to investigate whether and how the amendment of the national working hour’s policy has affected the corporate working-hours arrangement.
Through a firm-based case study, the changing legislation have substantially resulted in the reduction of working hours at corporate level. The policy change also induce no negative impact on business management. While the changing policy has positive perspective, this study also found that the process of the policy change should have better prepared to reduce negative impact in the society, in particular the hostility between the labor and management. The negligence of the legislative strategy to establish a step-by-step process and setting agenda at different levels has created chaos in the society and thus may hamper the objective of the policy. Meanwhile as the policy change is universally applied on different sectors, implementation rigidity created in practice. This study suggested that to promote social dialogue among labor, management and the government, to comprehend the substance of the institution and market, and to have an open mind-set, are all essential.to fulfill the objective of the policy change.
