我國學說於討論員工獎勵制度時，傳統上多聚焦在員工分紅、員工入股、員工認股選擇權以及最近新增訂的員工限制型股票等制度上，事實上，在這些獎勵制度中，員工所受領者不外是現金或股票，其類型有限。為尋找比較法上的例證，本文以研究德國勞動法上所使用的員工參與法制為開端，接下來探討公司使用這些獎勵工具時所需之公司法上的法規範，以及員工獎勵制度的合法性基礎。其後，本文以德國法為比較基礎研究前述我國員工獎勵的法律制度，尤其是公司欲以自己股票獎勵員工時，公司法提供哪些法規範以達成給付員工股票的目的，以及這些法規範之解釋與適用問題。最後，針對我國員工獎勵制度的未來發展，本文建議廢除公司法第235 條第 2 項強制分紅的規定，而以勞資雙方自行協商的獎勵制度替代之，即使目前基於立法政策之理由，仍有保留員工獎勵制度的強制法性格之必要，仍建議以強制實施多元化的員工獎勵計畫以取代簡陋的強制分紅制度。

While discussing the subject of employee compensation, the jurisprudencein Taiwan mostly focused on the issues such as employee bonus, employeestock ownership, employee stock option or restricted stock, which is recentlyadded in the Company Act of Taiwan. In fact, under these said instruments foremployee compensation the employees are granted cash or stocks. There are noother options for employers, which seems to be insufficient. Trying to find outother legal concepts in comparative law, this essay starts with a research on theemployee participation in German labor law, and then the relating regulations inGerman corporate law are analyzed and its legitimacy as well. Based on theresults of research on German law this essay returns to the regulations regardingto the aforementioned topics of the employee compensation in Taiwan,especially how those regulations are interpreted and applied. Finally, for thefuture development of employee compensation in Taiwan a proposal is madeherein as followed: Paragraph 235 subparagraph 2 of Taiwan Corporate Actcould be abolished. An employee compensation scheme negotiated byemployees and employers could be a better solution instead. Even if it would benecessary to remain the mandatory element of this regulation for certain legalpolitical reasons, it is advisable to replace this legally forced profit-sharingregulation with an employee compensation program including diverseinstruments for employee compensation.