Reforming Public Sector Human Resource Management Regulations to Accommodate New Employment Models in the Gig Economy Era
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article examines the constraints inherent in Thailand's public sector human resource regulations within the context of the Gig economy and proposes pathways for reform to accommodate flexible employment arrangements. The methodology encompasses documentary analysis, literature review of contemporary public administration theories, examination of relevant legislation and regulations, and comparative analysis of practices from countries that have developed diverse flexible employment mechanisms.
The analysis reveals five critical limitations in current regulations: inflexibility in workforce allocation frameworks, complexity in recruitment procedures, ambiguity regarding employment status and entitlements, uncompetitive compensation structures, and inadequate performance evaluation mechanisms. The article proposes a four-dimensional development framework comprising legislative amendments to support emerging employment models, development of digital platforms for personnel management, establishment of compensation and welfare standards, and creation of skills development systems. These findings hold significant implications for public policy development across multiple dimensions, including enhanced governmental efficiency through access to qualified specialists, long-term reduction in personnel expenditure, career opportunities for talented individuals seeking work flexibility, and preparedness for future workplace transformations. Implementation requires careful consideration of socio-cultural contexts within organizations, alongside sustained communication and continuous monitoring and evaluation.
Keywords: Gig Economy, Public Sector Human Resource Management, Flexible Employment, Civil Service Reform, Public Policy
Article Details
References
ภาษาไทย
บวรศักดิ์ อุวรรณโณ. (2563). ความท้าทายของระบบราชการไทยในยุคดิจิทัล. วารสารรัฐประศาสน
ศาสตร์, 18(2), 45-68.
พิมพ์ใจ หล่อโลหะกุล และคณะ. (2565). การดึงดูดและรักษาบุคลากรที่มีความสามารถสูงในภาครัฐ
ไทย. วารสารพัฒนาทรัพยากรมนุษย์, 12(1), 23-45.
ปรัชญา เวสารัชช์. (2562). การปฏิรูประบบบริหารงานบุคคลภาครัฐ: ทิศทางและความท้าทาย. วารสาร
รัฐประศาสนศาสตร์, 17(1), 89-112.
สมชาย ภัทรธนานันท์. (2564). ปัญหาและอุปสรรคในการจ้างผู้เชี่ยวชาญในภาครัฐไทย. วารสารบริหาร
รัฐกิจ, 15(2), 67-89.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการข้าราชการพลเรือน. (2563). คู่มือการประเมินผลการปฏิบัติราชการ.
กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงาน ก.พ.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการข้าราชการพลเรือน. (2565). รายงานประจำปี 2564. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงาน ก.พ.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการพัฒนาการเศรษฐกิจและสังคมแห่งชาติ. (2564). แผนพัฒนาเศรษฐกิจและ
สังคมแห่งชาติ ฉบับที่สิบสาม พ.ศ. 2566-2570. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงาน สศช.
สำนักงานพัฒนารัฐบาลดิจิทัล. (2565). รายงานสถานะการพัฒนารัฐบาลดิจิทัลของประเทศไทย
ปี 2564. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงานพัฒนารัฐบาลดิจิทัล.
วิจารณ์ พานิช. (2564). ค่าตอบแทนข้าราชการไทย: ปัญหาและทางออก. วารสารเศรษฐศาสตร์
การเมือง, 28(2), 112-135.
Translated Thai References
Bunyopas, P., et al. (2565). Attracting and retaining high-ability personnel in the Thai public sector. Journal of Human Resource Development, 12(1), 23-45. (in Thai).
Digital Government Development Office. (2565). Thailand digital government development status report 2021. Bangkok: Digital Government Development Office. (in Thai).
Office of the Civil Service Commission. (2563). Performance appraisal manual. Bangkok: OCSC. (in Thai).
Office of the Civil Service Commission. (2565). Annual report 2021. Bangkok: OCSC. (in Thai).
Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council. (2564). The thirteenth national economic and social development plan (2023-2027). Bangkok: NESDC. (in Thai).
Panich, W. (2564). Thai civil servant compensation: Problems and solutions. Journal of Political Economy, 28(2), 112-135. (in Thai).
Pattadhananan, S. (2564). Problems and obstacles in hiring experts in the Thai public sector. Journal of Public Administration, 15(2), 67-89. (in Thai).
Uvanno, B. (2563). Challenges of the Thai bureaucracy in the digital age. Journal of Public Administration, 18(2), 45-68. (in Thai).
Wesarach, P. (2562). Public sector human resource management reform: Directions and challenges. Journal of Public Administration, 17(1), 89-112. (in Thai)
ภาษาอังกฤษ
Australian Government. (2020). External talent scheme guidelines. Canberra: Australian
Public Service Commission.
Australian Public Service Commission. (2021). APS Reform: One year on. Canberra:
Australian Government.
Brown, A., Fishenden, J., Thompson, M., & Venters, W. (2017). Appraising the impact and
role of platform models and Government as a Platform (GaaP) in UK Government public service reform: Towards a platform assessment framework (PAF). Government Information Quarterly, 34(2), 167-182.
Cabinet Office. (2020). Digital Marketplace: Supplier guide. London: Cabinet Office.
Cappelli, P., & Keller, J. R. (2013). Classifying work in the new economy. Academy of
Management Review, 38(4), 575-596.
Clarke, A., & Margetts, H. (2014). Governments and citizens getting to know each other?
Open, closed, and big data in public management reform. Policy & Internet, 6(4), 393-417.
De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the "just-in-time workforce": On-demand work,
crowdwork, and labor protection in the "gig-economy" (Conditions of Work and Employment Series No. 71). Geneva: International Labour Organization.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is
dead—Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467-494.
Fair Work Commission. (2019). Workplace determinations and enterprise agreements.
Canberra: Australian Government.
Friedman, G. (2014). Workers without employers: Shadow corporations and the rise of
the gig economy. Review of Keynesian Economics, 2(2), 171-188.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014). Being smart: Emerging technologies and
innovation in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 31(S1), S1-S8.
Government Digital Service. (2019). Digital, Data and Technology Profession Capability
Framework. London: Cabinet Office.
Government Digital Service. (2020). Government as a Platform: Annual report 2019-2020.
London: Cabinet Office.
Government Digital Service. (2021). About GDS. London: Cabinet Office.
Government of the Republic of Korea. (2022). Digital platform government initiative.
Seoul: Ministry of the Interior and Safety.
Government Technology Agency of Singapore. (2020). Annual report 2019/2020.
Singapore: GovTech.
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19.
Institute for Government. (2021). Civil service interchange: Evaluation report. London:
Institute for Government.
International Labour Organization. (2021). World employment and social outlook: Trends
Geneva: ILO.
Kalleberg, A. L., & Dunn, M. (2016). Good jobs, bad jobs in the gig economy. Perspectives
on Work, 20, 10-14.
Katz, L. F., & Krueger, A. B. (2019). The rise and nature of alternative work arrangements
in the United States, 1995-2015. ILR Review, 72(2), 382-416.
Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2021). Digital transformation of public human resource management in
Korea. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 87(3), 612-629.
Luna-Reyes, L. F., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2014). Digital government transformation and internet
portals: The co-evolution of technology, organizations, and institutions. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 545-555.
Mergel, I. (2016). Agile innovation management in government: A research agenda.
Government Information Quarterly, 33(3), 516-523.
Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from
expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385.
Ministry of Personnel Management, Republic of Korea. (2020). Open recruitment system:
Annual report 2019. Seoul: Government of the Republic of Korea.
National Audit Office. (2017). Digital transformation in government. London: National
Audit Office.
National Audit Office. (2020). Managing the Civil Service Interchange. London: National
Audit Office.
National Information Society Agency. (2021). Digital government platform:
Implementation guide. Seoul: National Information Society Agency.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Public employment
and management 2020. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit
is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Podger, A. (2020). Reform of the Australian Public Service: Progress and challenges.
Australian Journal of Public Administration, 79(4), 467-483.
Smart Nation and Digital Government Office. (2021). Smart Nation Fellowship
Programme: Impact report. Singapore: Prime Minister's Office.
Standing, G. (2011). The precariat: The new dangerous class. London: Bloomsbury
Academic.
Stone, D. L., Deadrick, D. L., Lukaszewski, K. M., & Johnson, R. (2015). The influence of
technology on the future of human resource management. Human Resource
Management Review, 25(2), 216-231.
Sundararajan, A. (2016). The sharing economy: The end of employment and the rise of
crowd-based capitalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tan, C. W., & Neo, B. S. (2021). Building digital government in Singapore: The GovTech
journey. In A. Anttiroiko (Ed.), Successful e-democracy (pp. 145-168). London: Springer.
UK Civil Service. (2019). Civil Service Interchange: Programme handbook. London:
Cabinet Office.
Webster, J. (2016). Microworkers of the gig economy: Separate and precarious. New Labor
Forum, 25(3), 56-64.
