The Settlement of Labor Disputes Law of Taiwan modified on June 27, 1988, sorts labor disputes into rights disputes and adjustments disputes. The former shall be settled by conciliation or judicial procedures provided for in this Law and the latter shall be settled through conciliation or arbitration procedures provided for in this Law. However, examining the discussion of the academic articles, explanations of the government authority or the verdicts of court, there is no common consensus on discrimination between rights disputes and adjustments disputes. Even the definition of the term “labor disputes” from the Council of Labor Affairs (CLA) of the Executive Yuan causes debate. All these factors confuse the workers and employers who are trying to settle disputes in accordance with The Settlement of Labor Disputes Law. Based on the constitutional view of ensuring civilians have the right of procedural choice, this article attempts to discuss the necessity of a dichotomy of labor disputes adopted by The Settlement of Labor Disputes Law, and suggests that the dichotomy is unnecessary and should be abolished. The key to settle labor disputes is the acceptance of people’s right to choose disciplinary action in thesettlement of a labor dispute. Thus, this article centers on the authority to choose procedures and looks for a dispute settlement system welcomed and, trusted by the workers and employers and conforming to the Constitution. The conclusion and suggestion of this article also serve as a reference for future revision of the law.