成年觀護人工作中運用非典型人力之研究－以觀護佐理員為例

Abstract

成年觀護人長期以來工作負擔沉重，囿於中央政府機關總員額法規定，預算員額無法增加，故自2009年起即大量運用非典型人力來協助觀護業務，觀護佐理員加入成年觀護工作團隊雖有助部分業務推展，但同時帶來更沉重的行政負擔。 本研究主要採用次級資料分析法及深度訪談法探討成年觀護人工作中運用非典型人力觀護佐理員的問題，提供上級機關將來在規劃成年觀護策略性人力資源運用時參考。本研究獲致之主要結論如下： 一、觀護佐理員進用方式從派遣轉為約用人員是配合國家政策要求，與Lepak and Snell的人力資源架構模型理論之動態流轉有落差。 二、觀護佐理員出缺地檢署會依規定辦理公開招募及甄選，但多數地檢署遇到招募困難情形。 三、新進佐理員到位後會希望其儘快分擔業務，所以直接在職訓練，沒有所謂職前訓練。 四、地檢署每年會辦理觀護佐理員在職訓練，但只是完成被規定的事項，成效不佳。 五、地檢署會依規定定期考核觀護佐理員，但流於形式，沒有實質意義。 六、觀護佐理員成為各地檢署約用人員後，工作負擔並未過重，但人員異動頻率並未降低，主因是比較心態及薪資相對較低。 七、觀護佐理員由派遣轉為地檢署約用人員，佐理員的勞工權益被嚴密周全保障，但觀護人須兼辦人事、總務、會計等工作，工作負荷更加沉重。 八、公部門中的勞工管理是一門大學問，主任觀護人的領導管理能力是影響觀護人室輔助人力穩定性的重要因素。

Adult probation officers have undertaken heavy workloads in Taiwan. Relevant staffing quota regulations stipulated by the central government prevent increasing the number of budgeted positions. Consequently, numerous atypical workers have been recruited to assist with probation tasks since 2009. While adding probation assistants to adult probation task teams has facilitated the implementation of specific operations, this approach imposes a heavier administrative burden on probation officers. This study primarily employed secondary data analysis and in-depth interviews to explore problems concerning probation assistants, who are considered atypical workers, in adult probation operations. The findings may serve as a reference for higher authorities to plan the strategic utilization of human resources in adult probation. The main conclusions of this study are as follows: I.The transition of probation assistant recruitment from dispatched worker to contract employee employment aligns with national policy requirements. However, this approach differs from the dynamic human resources architecture model theory of Lepak and Snell. II.In the case of probation assistant vacancies, prosecutors offices shall arrange public recruitment and selection of probation assistants as per relevant regulations. However, most offices have encountered difficulties recruiting probation assistants. III.New probation assistants are expected to quickly share the workload upon arrival; consequently, they undergo on-the-job training rather than pre-service training. IV.Although prosecutors offices organize annual in-service training for probation assistants to meet mandated requirements, such training focuses solely on meeting these requirements, and its effectiveness is low. V.Regular evaluations of probation assistants are conducted as per relevant regulations, but these assessments are often mere formalities with little substantive value. VI.After probation assistants are transitioned to contract employees by prosecutors offices, their workloads are not overly burdensome. However, frequent personnel changes persist, primarily due to comparative mindsets and relatively low salaries. VII.The transition from dispatched to contract employees has ensured comprehensive protection of the labor rights of probation assistants. Nevertheless, probation officers must now handle additional duties associated with personnel management, general affairs, and accounting, resulting in an increased workload. VIII.Labor management in the public sector is highly complex. The leadership and management abilities of chief probation officers exert a notable effect on the stability of the auxiliary workforce in probation offices.