行政院送立法院之“工會法”修正案，將現行第十二條關於工會會員“強制 人會”改為“自由入會”，並提出是基於保障個人消極結社自由之論說，但作者指出工會 同盟自由與結社自由並不相同，並自工會團結之根本性質及豐工抗爭運動的歷史過程中， 認為所謂“消極同盟自由”概念之出現自始就是被利用來對抗工會的工具，唯有積極同盟 自由才是勞動條件自決之勞工手段並進一步論證“同盟自由之必然不保障消極同盟自由” ，駁斥二者為“一體兩面”之流行說法。 　在我國現行勞動體制下 若採行自由入會制度，則等於是以肯定個別勞工之消極同盟自 由為藉口而實際上卻剝奪工會之生存、存續保障，應屬有悖憲法價值秩序，嚴重構成違憲！ 惟有在工會之生存、行動及協商權均獲得確保之前提條件下，始可改採自由入會制度。

　　　　　Ther Executive Yuan has proposed a revision of the Statute on Unions to the Legislative Yuan. Calling for a shift from "compulsory union membership" to "voluntary membership," the proposed revision is claimed to be a defense of individual freedom of association. The author, however, offers that the notion is at odds with social freedoms. Furthermore, given the context of control in which the proposal are offered and the history of union struggles lead the author to suggest that so-called freedom of association proposal emerging at this time is being used as a tool to oppose unions. The real condition of associative freedom is workers autonomy. Taking the matter a step further, the author contends that freedom of association can be regarded from two different vantage points. Under present conditions of labor regulation in Taiwan, freedom of association of this sort is actually an excuse to take back some of the already existing resources of the unions.