The Research on Policies on the Revolving Door Regulations

鑒於現行主要規範公務員離職後就業限制（或稱旋轉門條款）及處罰之公務員服務法第14條之1及第22條之1條文，自民國85年1月17日施行迄今，各界迭有未達其防杜利益輸送之立法目的、過度限制離職公務員工作權，以及阻礙政府相關部門推動公私人才交流政策等疑慮。是以，如何使公務員離職後之就業限制趨於合理，適切可行，殊值探討研究。 本研究主要係探討公務員離職後就業限制之方式、期間、範圍、處罰樣態及適用對象之不同或寬窄，與旋轉門條款所欲達到防杜利益衝突之立法目的、有無過度限制離職公務員工作權及阻礙政府相關部門推動公私人才交流政策之關聯，進而檢視現行務員服務法第14條之1及第22條之1條文所採就業限制之方式、期間、範圍、對象與處罰是否妥適，並據以提出具體改進建議。 本研究主要係採文獻探討法、比較研究法及問卷調查法；經由公務員與國家關係之演進，旋轉門條款與公務倫理、工作權、公私人才交流等相關文獻探討與法理分析，以及我國與美國、英國、法國、德國、日本、加拿大等國家之旋轉門條款立法規範之比較，並藉由現行旋轉門條款之立法緣由、實體規定、歷次提案修正情形、相關司法案例與主管機關研究情形之檢視與分析，以及透過與中央二級或相當二級之主管機關、直轄巿、縣、巿政府、議會等人事主管之問卷調查及現行旋轉門條款之SWOT分析，共提出8項研究建議及4項後續研究建議，以期提供政府相關部門立（修）法決策或學界後續研究之參考。The research explores reasonable and feasible restrictions on employment of post-employment civil servants (also called the revolving door regulations) due to the existing regulations, article 14-1 and 22-1 in the Civil Service Act, have long been questioned that they serve little legislative purpose of preventing transfer of benefits, over restrict post-employment civil servants’ right to work, and hinder the relevant government departments from promoting the human resource exchange between public and private sections since enforced on January 17th, 1996. In response to these questions, the research first scrutinizes the elements of the restriction on employment of post-employment civil servants including its methods, periods, range, types of penalty, and the difference and range of applied objects, studying their relevance to those problems above, then examines those elements in the current regulations mentioned above, and finally makes specific suggestions. The research mainly adopts the document analysis-to review literature and analyze the legal principle on the development of the relationship between civil service and their nation, on the revolving door regulations and ethics of public affairs, on the right to work, and on the human resource exchange between public and private sections, the comparative approach-to compare the revolving door regulations in our country with those in the U.S.A., the U.K., French, Germany, Japan and Canada, and the questionnaire survey-to analyze the questionnaires filled out by personnel chiefs of central second-level competent agencies or the equivalent, the municipal governments, county governments, city governments and councils as research methods. Besides, the research examines and analyzes the existing revolving door regulations’ legislative reasons, articles, amendments, relevant judicial cases, and studies of the competent agency. Furthermore, adding the analyses of SWOT of the existing revolving door regulations, the research makes 8 suggestions and 4 follow-up ones. Hopefully, these suggestions could be reference to the relevant government departments and the academic fiel