有勞資關係就難免發生勞資爭議，因此，建立一個健全的勞資爭議處理機制自有其必要性。我國勞資爭議處理法修正案於2009年經立法院修正通過，並自2011年5月1日起施行。雖然調解和仲裁均為我國勞資爭議處理法的主要機制，然依勞委會統計，絕大多數的勞資爭議是透過調解和協調的方式解決，仲裁機制則乏人問津。我國的仲裁機制是否適於處理勞資爭議，自非無疑，因此，本文擬先概述仲裁的性質和類型，並討論仲裁此種訴訟外紛爭解決機制的利弊，其次討論為何台灣的勞資爭議仲裁機制乏人問津之原因，再以考察美國的勞資爭議仲裁機制之方式來檢視該國機制能提供我國參考之處，最後，則提出本文就健全我國勞資爭議仲裁機制之建議。

Since it is inevitable to avoid labor disputes at the workplace, it is important to establish an efficient and professional labor dispute resolution mechanism. With the domestic economic and social changes, the original system framework and content of the Act for Settlement of Labor-Management Disputes in Taiwan have become insufficient for current needs. The Council of Labor Affairs (CLA) therefore proposed an amendment to the Act, which was considered and passed by the Legislative Yuan in 2009 and came into effect on May 1, 2011. While mediation and arbitration are designed to be the main means to resolve labor disputes in Taiwan, the vast majority of disputes are settled through conciliation and mediation instead of arbitration according to statistics from the CLA. This now raises the question of whether arbitration is an appropriate and sustainable system for resolving the labor disputes in Taiwan. The article initially outlines the nature and types of arbitration, and discusses the pros and cons of selecting arbitration as an alternative means of dispute resolution. The article further analyzes why the Taiwanese labor arbitration system is not effective and efficient as expected. As a point of reference, the article also briefly introduces the arbitration system in the United States, and examines the benefits it provides in practice. Since arbitration has its advantages over litigation and mediation, recommendations for improving the arbitration system in resolving labor disputes are in the end of the article.