我國中央政府彈性用人經費之透明度──以法務部行政執行署為例

政府為順應社會環境變遷及政府職能擴張，並有效運用有限公務人力資源，引進彈性用人制度，進用委外及多元人力增補公務人力之不足，以期提升行政效率及效能，惟歷來中央政府總預算或總決算等會計書表均未能完整揭露表達政府用人經費，不利公眾瞭解政府部門實際人事成本。本研究從政府財政透明角度切入，以法務部行政執行署為研究個案，透過文獻分析及深度訪談法探討我國中央政府彈性用人制度的發展歷程，並評析中央政府彈性用人經費揭露表達情形，提出對於中央政府彈性用人經費揭露表達透明度之觀察及論述，作為評估彈性用人制度成效及課責政府用人效率之基礎。本研究結果發現：首先，我國中央政府彈性用人制度係先有「用人」才有「管人」，彈性用人緣起於機關實務上特定用人需求，多由機關自行招聘及管理委外及多元人力，行政院人事行政總處並未統籌建立用人制度規範，直至進用人數迅速成長及政府進用非典型人力正當性等議題，受到民意機關及社會輿論關注，立法院始於審議年度總預算案時，要求人事主管機關清點中央政府各機關運用委外及多元人力情形，並制定相關法令統籌管理。其次，彈性用人經費雖已由行政院主計總處訂定資訊公開規範，要求各機關於單位決算之人事費分析表揭露表達進用人數及決算數，惟揭露內容尚乏一致表達格式，且相關資料僅公開至單位決算層級，未公開於主管決算及中央政府總決算層級，導致各機關透明度不一、中央政府未統籌揭露整體彈性用人經費數額，均不利公眾瞭解政府實際用人成本，亦難落實對於政府彈性用人制度的監督及課責，彈性用人經費之透明程度顯有不足。最後，法務部行政執行署成立之初適逢政府組織精簡，原先編列之正式員額即不足支應龐大業務量，因此持續進用委外及多元人力協助業務推行，致該署近年彈性用人人數超逾機關員工人數實有數，但該署單位決算所揭露之人事費，並未包含彈性用人經費，致無法完整瞭解其人事成本全貌。綜上所述，本研究透過評析彈性用人經費的揭露表達情形，進而發現我國中央政府總決算公開揭露之人事成本並未包含彈性用人經費，亦未統籌揭露整體彈性用人經費數額，且各機關揭露內容尚乏一致表達格式，致彈性用人經費之財政透明程度顯有不足，不利公眾評估彈性用人制度成效及課責政府用人效率，期能為彈性用人制度成效之評估有所貢獻。

關鍵字

財政透明；彈性用人經費；政府人事成本；非典型人力

並列摘要

Facing expanding demands on public services with official but limited human resources, Taiwan's central government has taken the advantage of the flexible employment system to provide efficient and efficacious governance. However, hardly could information on personnel expenditure be found pellucidly in any governmental reports. Hidden but enormous expenditure on personnel is problematic for the public and legislators to check and balance the executive. The thesis first reviews the rationale for the invention of the flexible employment system and the literature on fiscal transparency. By interviewing public servants in the Administrative Enforcement Agency, the thesis further indicates different levels of fiscal transparency on the personnel system in Taiwan's central government. The paper first identifies the rationale of the flexible employment system: recruit then justifying with regulations. The system originates an authorization that allows the executive brand to elastically meet the temporarily human demand. Relative regulations are missing from both Directorate-General of Personnel Administration (DGPA) and Directorate General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS), which leads to problems of transparency. When amounts of such expenditure become too enormous to ignore, the Legislative Yuan begins to request further information on atypical employment with pressures from the public and the auditing section within the government. Even DGBAS requests all agencies to reveal number and budgets of personnel by law, problems still exist and hinder further government accountability: data spreading in each agency’s reports, lacking united budget item, and missing coordinated numbers from the central government. This way, the public tends to underestimate government personnel cost and thus overestimate the efficiency of government performance, especially when the current personnel budget item does not include flexible employment expenses. The Administrative Enforcement Agency is established at the time of small government so that staff number is insufficient to manage growing administrative workload. With increasing atypical employment, the number of contract staff in the agency is even more than the number of civil servant. Since the personnel budget and item in the agency does not include that flexible one, the public is unable to estimate its performance according to its costs. All in all, the paper is expected to contribute to the evaluation of the flexible employment system by providing a comprehensive understanding of overall personnel spending in the government.