依現行勞基法之規定，除勞工事先預告而自行辭職外，雇主依勞基法第十六條預告終止勞動契約、第二十條事業單位改組或轉讓，以及依企業併購法第十七條公司進行併購而終止勞動契約，甚至勞工未經預告而終止契約，雇主均應給付資遣費，給付額度則依勞基法第十七條之法定額度計算之。依此制度即使雇主遵守預告期間且出於法定事由，合法終止勞動契約，仍有給付資遣費之義務。從資遣費給付之目的來看，除一方面給予勞工過渡期間獲得經濟支持以安心另覓新職外，同時對於有意解雇之雇主，因解雇必須支付資遣費，促其審慎思考解雇之必要，然而依現制「合法解雇」要支付資遣費，「違法解雇」要回復原職，此種成本差異對於雇主是否真能收促進雇主謹慎思考解雇必要性之效，而具學說強調之警戒作用，令人質疑。 此外，長期以來，資遣費一直與退休金以及失業給付混為一體，在八十八年勞工保險開辦失業給付以及九十四年依勞工退休金條例開始實施勞退新制之後，資遣費與退休金或失業保險之間，是否因資遣費已經完成其階段性功能，應劃清界限回復其原有之功能，學說看法莫衷一是，故資遣費制度之存廢亦為本文探討之重點。最後，九十二年公佈實施之大量解雇勞工保護法賦予勞工於雇主大量解雇時有協商之權，協商不成，主管機關可以組成協商委員會，就解僱計畫書內容進行協商，並適時提出替代方案，此等規定在實施上卻出現若干矛盾之處。對前述問題本文擬以德國終止保護法對於勞動契約之終止以及大量解雇相關規定為基，並參酌企業組織法勞工之協商制度等，比較分析我國現行關於資遣給付制度，並提出若干建議。

The regulation of the base law in accordance with working currently, except that the labourer predicts in advance that but resigns by oneself, the 16th advance notice of employer's base law in accordance with working stops working in agreement, the 20th public institution and reorganizes or transfers, and merge the 17th company of France and merge but stop working the agreement in accordance with enterprises, even the labourer is not predicted that stop the agreement, the employer should send the fee for Fu Zi , pay the legal amount of article 17 of the base law in accordance with working of amount and calculate it. Even if the employer , when being in accordance with the advance notice and out of the legal origin of an incident of system according to this, stop the agreement of working legally, give Fu Zi an obligation of sending the fee. From dismiss with severance pay purpose that fee pay is it watch to come , except offer labourer transition to obtain economy support in order to settle down and look for the new duty separately on one hand, at the same time to the employer intending to dismiss, because must pay and dismiss the fee with severance pay to dismiss, urge its discretion to ponder over the necessity that dismisses, but in accordance with making 'dismiss legally' paying and dismissing the fee with severance pay now, ' dismiss illegally', want former post of replying, the cost variance can is it promote employer to be prudent to is it dismiss result of necessity to think to charge really employer, and have function of warning that theories emphasize , make people query. In addition, for a long time , dismiss the fee with severance pay to pay and lump with the retired pay and unemployment together all the time, labourer insurance run unemployment pay and is it is it is it retreat after making in accordance with labourer retired gold bar example newly to work to implement to begin 1994 in one year, dismiss it with severance pay among the fee , retired pay or unemployment insurance , dismiss the fee with severance pay and already finish its phased function, should draw a clear line of demarcation and reply its original function , the theory view is unable to decide which is right, so dismiss the depositting and abolishing the focal point that also probes into this text of system of the fee with severance pay. Finally, is it is it dismiss labourer protect law entrust to labourer have right consulted when a large amount of employers are dismissed in a large amount to implement to announce 1992, can not resolve through consultation, the competent authority can make up the consultative committee, the prospectus content is consulted on dismissin g, and propose scheme of substituting in good time, these is it appear several place of contradiction on not implementing to stipulate. Is it stop law of protecting for work lapse of agreement and dismiss relevant regulations as the base in a large amount to aforesaid question this text with Germany to plan, considering negotiation system of the labourer of rules of organization of enterprises, etc. in light of actual conditions, our country of comparative analysis is current about dismissing the system of paying with severance pay, propose several suggestions.