勞動派遣之法律定位及法律選擇，涉及勞動派遣是否為一般的勞動關係或者特殊的勞動關係、以及派遣勞工的保護，是應該由勞工團體負起主要的責任或以勞工保護法為重心。經過探討後，本文以為基於一重勞動關係說，派遣勞工只可加入或組織派遣機構中的工會。派遣勞工之可否加入要派機構的工會，並非是解釋論的問題，而是立法論的問題。惟即使中國勞動合同法第 64 條規定，令派遣勞工可以選擇加入派遣機構或要派機構的工會，其亦忽略派遣勞工與要派機構工會欠缺社會連帶共同體感覺的事實，並且可能引發兩個機構工會的管轄權衝突，立法並不妥當、允宜予以修正。其並不值得我國參考。另外，派遣勞工的廠場歸屬性仍在派遣機構，惟因其在要派機構處工作，接受要派機構的指揮命令，故其亦應在一定條件下，受到要派機構中勞工參與機制的保護。惟在立法的設計上，主要權限的行使仍應在派遣機構及其內之勞工參與機制上，例外始在要派機構及其內之勞工參與機制上。如仍有劃分不清之現象，則應由勞工法院或勞工法庭予以個案認定。

The legal localization of dispatched work and its legal selection is a problem which means that people should regard dispatched work as normal employment relationship or specific (atypical) employment relationship, it also try to point out the dispatched worker’s protection should be taken mainly from laborer’s organization or Worker Protection Acts. After discussion, the author assist the simple employment relationship theory, that means that dispatched workers only can join the trade union in the hirer firm or organize a trade union for him self. From viewpoint of author’s, it is not a question of explanation but a question of legalization whether the dispatched workers can join the trade union in the borrower firm or not. Although the clause 64th of China Labor Contract Law allow the dispatched workers to choose join the trade union in the hirer’s firm or borrower’s firm, but it neglects the facts that there is no feeling of solidarity between dispatched workers and the workers of borrower firm, and it might cause jurisdiction conflict between borrowers firm’s trade union and hirer firm’s trade union, so that the Worker Dispatched regulations in China Labor Contract Law are inappropriate, they should be revised, they also cannot be referred from Taiwan’s legislator. Another problem is, during his/her working time in borrower’s firm, the dispatched worker still maintain laborer’s position by hirer’s firm. Only because he/she work for borrower firm, that’s why he/she should obey the orders come from borrower, under this condition the dispatched workers should also be involved by worker participation mechanism.
But, when we try to figure out jurisdiction conflict problem, we should
concentrate in the hirer firm’s worker participation organization and
give more authority to protect dispatched workers. Only in the extraordinary situation has the borrower firm’s participation organization right to protect dispatched workers. When there still exists
jurisdiction conflict problem, then the labor court should clarify this
problem.