因部分工時勞動所衍生之法律問題雖然為數不少，但我國現行勞動法制卻少有規範。相對地，日本之部分工時勞動較我國為普遍，法令、學說研究及實務處理經驗均已相對成熟，應可供吾人作為參考。有關部分工時與正職勞工間之差別待遇問題，學者通說認為此乃該國產業社會特性所致，故「同工同酬」原則尚難直接適用於日本之勞資關係中。日本部分工時勞動法於2007年修正時有限度地導入均等待遇原則，使合於該法要件之部分工時勞工，於工資之決定、教育訓練之實施、福利厚生設施之利用及其他待遇不因部分工時勞工之身分而受到差別待遇。然該法對得適用此均等待遇原則之條件設定極為嚴格，實際上得享有保障者恐不過全體部分工時勞工中之一小部分耳。我國則因不存在如同日本之產業社會特性，故而於制定相關均等待遇原則之法律時應可適用於絕大多數之部分工時勞工，使其得免除受到差別待遇，同工不同酬。至於工時甚短之部分工時勞工，本文則提出可僅參加職業災害保險之大膽建議，以確保其可於不幸發生職災時得到最低限度之保障。

Although a number of legal issues concerning part-time labor has occurred in Taiwan, they are not well-regulated in current labor law. On the contrary, part-time labor is much common in Japan. Their regulation, legal discussion, and practical experience are relatively mature so that we can draw lesson from. Concerning the different treatment between official labor and part-time labor, most scholars believe that equal-labor-equal-pay principle cannot be directly applied to Japanese labor-management relationship due to the particular character of Japanese industrial society. The newly-revised Part-time Labor Law of 2007 has partly introduced equal treatment principle, treating legally qualified part-time labors not differently from official labors regarding to their salary, education and training, as well as welfare benefits. However, the strict conditions for applying this equal treatment principle benefit only a very small part of whole part-time labors. Since we do not share the industrial character in Japanese society, the equal treatment principle should be applied to most part-time labors, making them immune from unfair treatment--same-labor-different-pay. As for those part-time labors who work for only very limited time, this article boldly suggests that they can only enjoy occupational accident of labor insurance, which offers them the minimum protection in case of occupational accident.