|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:13 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| marsavalanche wrote: |
The funniest part about this thread, is that those who are against criminals being denied an E-2 have yet to suggest a better way for immigration to handle this.
Immigration doesn't have time (nor do they care) to scrutinize every single applicant's criminal circumstances. And since you don't have anything better to contribute other than "it's unfair" I rest my case.
I wouldn't want criminals from other countries teaching my kids. Agree with the law or not, it is what it is, and if you can't abide by the law then that is no ones fault but yours.
Again, get over it. Korea owes you nothing. |
This is not about Korea. This is about how criminal background checks are administered domestically. Is it right that people face such disadvantage in the international labour market for such minor and distant transgressions? Do you want your government screwing its people in such a nefarious way? If you hadn't noticed, the labour markets in at least the US and the UK are decimated. International mobility is as crucial for labour as it is for big business. Irrelevant and distant convictions should never pose such a barrier to employment in other countries.
Sure, there are certain crimes, like child sex offences, which warrant disclosure, but after a certain time has elapsed without offending, people like the OP should be allowed to work abroad without impediment. Basically, these convictions should be expunged. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marsavalanche wrote: |
The funniest part about this thread, is that those who are against criminals being denied an E-2 have yet to suggest a better way for immigration to handle this.
Immigration doesn't have time (nor do they care) to scrutinize every single applicant's criminal circumstances. And since you don't have anything better to contribute other than "it's unfair" I rest my case.
I wouldn't want criminals from other countries teaching my kids. Agree with the law or not, it is what it is, and if you can't abide by the law then that is no ones fault but yours.
Again, get over it. Korea owes you nothing. |
No one has said that Korea is being unreasonable, they've merely said that you're being unreasonable. Chances are that if the OP gets his conviction expunged, Korea will allow him in. There are plenty of people who've been allowed in with arrests on their record for misdemeanor offenses. The problem is that you go a step farther than Korean immigration does and proceed to claim that these people should not be allowed in, as someone who was caught trespassing as a teenager clearly has no business being around children the better part of a decade later. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrwhite82
Joined: 22 May 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:35 pm Post subject: Re: What exactly does a "clean background check" m |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| jrwhite82 wrote: |
| natron81 wrote: |
I'm incredibly annoyed about the whole thing.., and was equally so when it occurred,
|
I wonder how those whose property you were trespassing on felt. I wonder how the police who had to chase you down, or stop what they were doing to catch some stupid senior in high-school who is hanging out on the train tracks felt. I'm sure they were equally or more annoyed than you are. |
The guy trespassed for goodness sake, what do you want to do, hang him? You need to understand proportionality. Guy trespasses - wow - in his teens, so naturally he should be deprived of employment opportunities for life. Yeah, what a great plan that is. The ignorant responses to the OP's post just beggar belief. I wouldn't want someone with such ill-founded and plainly ignorant views anywhere near my kids. If you are a teacher, you should be ashamed kid. |
Someone needs to take a bit of his own advice. YOU need to understand proportionality. Where did I say this guy should be crucified? Where have I said anything close to that? Do you work as a Fox News commentator? You take your rhetoric to a bit of the extreme.
My whole point by this post had nothing to do with the CBC process for an E2. My point is that I don't think the OP has ever even regretted breaking the law. I think at least understanding that he was WRONG might be a good start before expunging his record. I don't want people who can't see how their decisions affect others from teaching my children....call me crazy. (oh wait, you already did 
Refer to my second post about my feelings on CBC. They aren't 100% effective. But what they do is reduce LIABILITY. Sure some will fall through the cracks, but when dealing with a system this large and 30,000 E2 visa holders, plus all the F2/F4 who work at public schools, what would you suggest as a way to reduce liability? No one has been able to answer that in a realistic way yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrwhite82
Joined: 22 May 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| earthquakez wrote: |
jr - I have had to present criminal background checks for employment well before I came to Korea. I do not disagree with them especially for people working with children.
I'm focusing on Chris' comment and no offence to Chris.
| Chris.Quigley wrote: |
Would the USA take a Korean who had even a citation on their record?
|
The fact is our countries do take in Koreans who use the countries' visa systems for criminal purposes, especially the student visas. The US, Canada, UK, Australia all are examples of countries which have had notable problems with the abuse of their student visas by Koreans seeking to work as prostitutes. Tourist visas are another source of human trafficking and also do it your own trafficking of your own body to get quick cash. |
Sorry for misunderstanding part of your post Earthquakez. I don't disagree that the US takes in those who have broken or will break the law. However, they come in ways that there is no safe guard in place. Likewise, there are many ways to come into Korea to avoid the safeguards put in place on an E2. But none of those ways makes it easy to work with children. So I think it is an imperfect system, but it is effective. Would you suggest requiring CBCs for all immigrants, students and visitors to the US? After going through the process to receive my wife's green card, I can assure you, it is already quite a pain in the arse!  Did you know that a SPOUSE of a US citizen is required to have a clean background to get a green card?
edit
Last edited by jrwhite82 on Wed Feb 02, 2011 11:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marsavalanche
Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Location: where pretty lies perish
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| marsavalanche wrote: |
The funniest part about this thread, is that those who are against criminals being denied an E-2 have yet to suggest a better way for immigration to handle this.
Immigration doesn't have time (nor do they care) to scrutinize every single applicant's criminal circumstances. And since you don't have anything better to contribute other than "it's unfair" I rest my case.
I wouldn't want criminals from other countries teaching my kids. Agree with the law or not, it is what it is, and if you can't abide by the law then that is no ones fault but yours.
Again, get over it. Korea owes you nothing. |
This is not about Korea. |
WRONG. This IS about Korea, you're on Korean forums in a thread about obtaining an E-2 visa and are actually trying to convince me otherwise? lol it's just comical at this point.
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
This is about how criminal background checks are administered domestically. Is it right that people face such disadvantage in the international labour market for such minor and distant transgressions? Do you want your government screwing its people in such a nefarious way? |
Nefarious? Do you even know what that means? The FBI does nothing more than print on that piece of paper whether you used poor judgment and screwed up in the past. Yes, the FBI sure is nefarious for not omitting that "outdated" and "unfair" crime you committed.
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
If you hadn't noticed, the labour markets in at least the US and the UK are decimated. International mobility is as crucial for labour as it is for big business. Irrelevant and distant convictions should never pose such a barrier to employment in other countries.
Sure, there are certain crimes, like child sex offences, which warrant disclosure, but after a certain time has elapsed without offending, people like the OP should be allowed to work abroad without impediment. Basically, these convictions should be expunged. |
Criminals without a clean background check should NOT be allowed to work overseas. Korea immigration seems to agree. Sorry I don't make the rules, but submitting a clean CBC to work abroad makes perfect sense to me.
It's funny because Americans were actually privileged in not having to do a nationwide CBC. Now they are complaining because they have to go through the same process as everyone else. But no Americans will touch that one with a ten foot pole.
lol |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marsavalanche wrote: |
| It's funny because Americans were actually privileged in not having to do a nationwide CBC. Now they are complaining because they have to go through the same process as everyone else. But no Americans will touch that one with a ten foot pole. |
A) This isn't relevant to the OP, nor is he (or anyone else) complaining about having to submit a national CBC.
B) Americans are actually at a disadvantage now compared to Canadians, as a Canadian could easily go before the pardon board and get their offense completely wiped from their record, particularly for something as minor as trespassing. I don't know how the other countries do their background checks, but when it comes to America and Canada, a Canadian in this position has a much easier time. My understanding is that in the States an arrest never leaves your record, even if the actual offense is expunged or you aren't convicted of anything.
Look at it this way: I have Canadian friends who have had some pretty serious crimes pardoned (far worse than trespassing), yet the OP will not be able to completely wipe his record. I'm not saying that the system is unfair, just that Americans who commit stupid youthful mistakes suffer the consequences to a greater extent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| marsavalanche wrote: |
| WRONG. This IS about Korea, you're on Korean forums in a thread about obtaining an E-2 visa and are actually trying to convince me otherwise? lol it's just comical at this point. |
I don't think you understand. The Korean government can only demand a clean background check; it cannot determine rehabilitation periods in other countries or the process whereby some records are expunged.
| Quote: |
Nefarious? Do you even know what that means? The FBI does nothing more than print on that piece of paper whether you used poor judgment and screwed up in the past. Yes, the FBI sure is nefarious for not omitting that "outdated" and "unfair" crime you committed. |
Well it's the system itself that is nefarious. The FBI operates within limited partameters defined by legislation. It is the latter which needs examining, because it is simply repugnant that people are denied opportunities in the labour market because of a distant - and in this case minor - transgression. This issue is even more pertinent in 2011, where access to the international labour market is paramount.
| Quote: |
Criminals without a clean background check should NOT be allowed to work overseas. Korea immigration seems to agree. Sorry I don't make the rules, but submitting a clean CBC to work abroad makes perfect sense to me. |
If a process existed whereby candidates could have offences committed many moons ago removed from even the most extensive background check then people would be able to submit a clean background check.
| Quote: |
| It's funny because Americans were actually privileged in not having to do a nationwide CBC. Now they are complaining because they have to go through the same process as everyone else. But no Americans will touch that one with a ten foot pole. |
I have no dog in that particular hunt. I am not from the US but I happen to feel that it is extremely unfair people should be denied opportunities because of a minor transgression or something that happened a long time ago. Now there are a select few offences that justify disclosure in perpetuity, like child sex crimes for example. Beyond that, in an increasingly hostile labour market we ought to make sure that we are not punishing people disproportionately to the offence committed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:24 am Post subject: Re: What exactly does a "clean background check" m |
|
|
| jrwhite82 wrote: |
My point is that I don't think the OP has ever even regretted breaking the law. I think at least understanding that he was WRONG might be a good start before expunging his record. I don't want people who can't see how their decisions affect others from teaching my children....call me crazy. (oh wait, you already did
|
The chances are that you have broken the law during your lifetime. The OP, trespassed on - he claims near - the railway. Is this something he has to express remorse for years after the event? That's what I mean by proportionalty. You see, you are asking all of these really goofy questions like how did the police feel when apprehending him or how did the owners of the land feel.
The truth is that all of the parties involved have in all likelihood completely forgotten about it. Unfortunately for the OP, he is reminded of this one-off and incredibly minor incident because he is limited in terms of where he can sell his labour. That is wholly disproportionate to the offence committed. I am sure that there are people who would rather serve some prison time for trespassing than have their opportunities in the labour market potentially held back for life.
| Quote: |
| Refer to my second post about my feelings on CBC. They aren't 100% effective. But what they do is reduce LIABILITY. Sure some will fall through the cracks, but when dealing with a system this large and 30,000 E2 visa holders, plus all the F2/F4 who work at public schools, what would you suggest as a way to reduce liability? No one has been able to answer that in a realistic way yet. |
See my answer to that in my above post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrwhite82
Joined: 22 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:35 am Post subject: Re: What exactly does a "clean background check" m |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
The OP, trespassed on - he claims near - the railway. Is this something he has to express remorse for years after the event? That's what I mean by proportionalty. |
Check out the OP's original post:
| Quote: |
| I'm incredibly annoyed about the whole thing.., and was equally so when it occurred |
So again...HE is the one inconvenienced by this ordeal? That to me just says he still doesn't think and never has thought what he did was wrong. So in my opinion he has never accepted ownership for breaking the law. Agree to disagree on that point I guess.
| Quote: |
| Refer to my second post about my feelings on CBC. They aren't 100% effective. But what they do is reduce LIABILITY. Sure some will fall through the cracks, but when dealing with a system this large and 30,000 E2 visa holders, plus all the F2/F4 who work at public schools, what would you suggest as a way to reduce liability? No one has been able to answer that in a realistic way yet. |
See my answer to that in my above post.[/quote]
I still don't see a suggestion in your previous post. But in this increasingly competitive labor market, shouldn't the employees take some initiative and stop breaking laws and getting records? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jrwhite82 wrote: |
| I'm incredibly annoyed about the whole thing.., and was equally so when it occurred |
| Quote: |
So again...HE is the one inconvenienced by this ordeal? That to me just says he still doesn't think and never has thought what he did was wrong. So in my opinion he has never accepted ownership for breaking the law. Agree to disagree on that point I guess. |
Well that could mean anything. For example, it could be that the OP was annoyed at himself for breaking the law or perhaps he felt the police were over-zealous. Without more information I think it's rather misguided to second guess.
| Quote: |
I still don't see a suggestion in your previous post. But in this increasingly competitive labor market, shouldn't the employees take some initiative and stop breaking laws and getting records? |
You obviously didn't see the stuff about providing a mechanism for the deletion of old records. If we followed your logic, we could amputate the hands of thieves and simply respond with the 'if they don't like losing their hands they shouldn't steal' line.
The problem here, as outlined before, is one of proportionality. Having to disclose a record in perpetuity is a punishment in its own right, and in my opinion that is completely disproportionate. Someone who commits a crime can be punished in a multitude of different ways, such as fbeing fined, serving prison time, or probabtion etc. Once offenders complete that punishment the focus should be on rehabilitation; you don't acheive that by marginalising these people in the labour market except in the most serious of cases, like child sex offences and murder.
Have you ever broken the law by the way? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:55 am Post subject: Re: What exactly does a "clean background check" m |
|
|
[quote="jrwhite82]
You need to understand proportionality. [/quote]
Indeed. Gotta love how when somebody makes a comment about how people shouldn't get an E-2 others start screeching hysterically about how that means said somebody wants to deny the offenders employment everywhere. And for the rest of their lives to boot.
Get a grip. Stating one's opinion about the suitability of someone for the E-2 visa does not equate to denying one employment for the rest of their lives. And anyway so what? No one has that power...certainly not any poster on Dave's anyway. If Korea is not an option there are lots of other countries...it does certainly say a lot about people's worldview that saying someone shouldn't work in Korea is immediately and hysterically elevated to not being allowed to work at all.
That said, I don't think trespassing(in this particular case) is a major offence and the OP should certainly get his chance to teach here...just like the rest of us. He (or she) should look into getting it expunged or something like that.
Good luck OP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:09 am Post subject: Re: What exactly does a "clean background check" m |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Indeed. Gotta love how when somebody makes a comment about how people shouldn't get an E-2 others start screeching hysterically about how that means said somebody wants to deny the offenders employment everywhere. And for the rest of their lives to boot. |
Let's recall where it is the OP wants to work - Korea. Now he is unable to sell his labour in one of the most advanced economies on earth because he trespassed on someone's property eons ago. That's not just a trifling issue, and it may represent a major obsticle to the OP's plans. Let's not forget that in all likelihood he is seeking opportunities abroad in order to escape from a decimated labour market back home too.
There are a large number of countries which institute extensive background checks on foreigners before granting them work visas. In 2011 this is a major handicap, and represents a disproprtionate response to many crimes where there is no mechanism in place to have records expunged.
In some countries, like the UK, enhanced background checks are demanded by employers as a matter of routine, irrespective of whether you are a foreigner or not, so yes, in some cases people are being impeded significantly for their past transgressions.
Limiting people to their domestic labour market acts as a real restraint on their labour, and if records cannot be removed from background checks routinely required by foreign governments then this reprersents a punishment for life. That's wholly disproportionate.
| Quote: |
If Korea is not an option there are lots of other countries...it does certainly say a lot about people's worldview that saying someone shouldn't work in Korea is immediately and hysterically elevated to not being allowed to work at all. |
That's not quite what was said. There are other countries, but much of the industrialised world has moved to demanding enhanced background checks for foreign visa applicants - Korea is just catching up. It is not the first to require background checks and it certainly won't be the last. The US for example, maintains a particularly puritanical approach to this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wiganer
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:24 am Post subject: Re: What exactly does a "clean background check" m |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
Trespassing is trespassing is trespassing. It's a crime. It's on your report. You're boned.
Your best bet is to try and get the record expunged. As you pointed out, it's a non-violent offense, you probably (i hope) served your punishment, and you've had a clean record since. Of course, this will take some time and effort, but that's probably your only shot. |
You are the biggest pratt on here!
You are just jeaous because the one horse town in Montana (or wherever you come from) doesn't have a railtrack. You would have loved to have walked along the railtrack as a kid wouldn't ya?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrwhite82
Joined: 22 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
double post
Last edited by jrwhite82 on Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrwhite82
Joined: 22 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
Have you ever broken the law by the way? |
I don't exactly see what your point is when you keep asking me. Quite frankly, my criminal background or lack of is none of your business. My point is that the OP is the PROVEN liability because of his tarnished CBC. Teachers with clean CBCs are less of a liability. With the plethora of applicants in this job market there are dozens if not hundreds of people with the exact same qualifications as the OP. The difference between him and the other hundreds is the clean CBC. So in YOUR business or to teach YOUR kids. As a business owner or a parent, who will you choose? Everything is equal, except you can prove one has used bad judgment and the others you can't. Which one gets the job? For me, the answer is simple: one of the hundreds with the clean CBC.
And cutting people's hands off? Where do you make these jumps in "logic'? Again, I ask you to exercise proportionality. Because you totally blowing things out of proportion.
If the OP wants to come here and work, there are a NUMBER of other visas he can get. I'm not sure if you are aware, but an E2 is exclusively for teachers. There are a bunch of other visas that don't require a CBC that he can apply for if qualified. Or, he can follow the advice of other posters and his background expunged. There already is a mechanism in place for that. And it is just for cases like this. So problem solved! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
