Job Discussion Forums

[alc]

Does anyone have experience working for the Melbourne Institute of Language Studies (MILS)? Looking for good or bad reviews concerning work environment. Thanks

[Ragil]

MILS by name, definitely a mill by nature. A two-bit operation with a glib recruiting facade. One of the least generous remuneration packages you could imagine exacerbated by a 20% cut on your wages during the initial three-month "probation". Tiny, windowless classrooms and a cramped teachers' room. Wireless internet, yes, but no actual computers freely available. A treacherous, maudlin organisation if ever there was one and no teacher is yet to extend an annual contract (if they make it to year's end). It's located in a pretty downbeat part of Jakarta, too. And I was complimenting it by calling it a mill. Given this as an option you'd be better off heading for "the hills"

[Ragil]

MILS accused of negligence by disgruntled former employee.
Below are the contents of an email exchange with (personal) names removed:

This case will now be pursued at every level, initially through the media to ensure would be teachers and students' parents are made fully aware of MIL's true colours, when MIL's is politely requested to do no more than, 'uphold it's contract, signed personally by you.

Representations will then be made to the DGI, MIL'S Australia, Manpower Ministry and local police.

All embassies will be alerted, including the one I have already been in contact with, albeit now, in much greater detail.

Attention will be paid to the readership of every publication contacted. For example, 'The Globe' has a strong Chinese readership and many of your students are at least part ethnic Chinese. If the police or Manpower Ministry do not respond promptly, of course, legal action will be taken against MIL's; seeking full damages consistent with the law of 'negligence'; which on my rough estimates now will exceed RP35M, depending on the advice I now get from newly acquired, 'relatives', prominent in the local legal fraternity. For certain it will be an immensely greater sum that the mere RP5.4M you have repeatedly refused to acknowledge responsibility for these past six months.

In very plain English ...., we both know that your position is unsustainable. MIL'S is an education-provider organization. You are a 'Director' and of course, representing MIL'S as you do, MIL'S is held accountable for what YOU do and don't do.
...... and every other 'permanent' employee is in the same position. MILS is held accountable for their actions. MIL'S acknowledges, quite correctly, that teachers also, whether on probation of as little as 3 months, or the full 12 months temporary contract, are representatives of MIL'S [as all your publicity and employment policy guidelines makes very clear,albeit designed for your protection rather than theirs.]

MIL's guidelines were clearly written, in full awareness of the fact that MIL'S will be held accountable for the actions of it's teachers, however temporary their employment duration may be.[For example, you are of course aware in your, 'undisclosed', policy of premeditated, deliberate and sustained employment of all new teachers, prior to the issue of work permits that, far from being accidental, this policy is exactly that; 'premeditated, sustained and deliberate abuse of local laws', for which; MILS, as the employing organization, will be held fully legally accountable.

When MILS pledges itself to fulfill a contractual commitment, seeking the services of an agent to ensure that this happens, instructing this agent what is required and paying them for their services, the agreement to perform this service, or contract, is no different than any other contract with a full time, or temporary employee. MIL'S,..., is legally responsible for it's actions under contract and employing this agent who failed to fulfill her instructions from MIL'S, largely because of inadequate follow up=negligence, MILS IS RESPONSIBLE for it's actions, decisions and it's failure to fulfill either it's promise to me or it's 100% clear contractual commitment to me.

Honest question for you .....; and one I guarantee you wont dare answer, honestly, if at all. Have any of your newly recruited teachers, who, routinely, undertake teaching duties, prior to the issue of work permits, ever refused to do so because they fear the 'buck will rest with them', or have they always complied with MIL'S instructions to teach as new staff did when I was recruited? [Come on ....., answer me now and save a lengthy process thats going to cost MIL's a lot of money, one way or another]

Do you dare deny that you routinely employ teachers on teaching duties, illegally, prior to issue of work permits? Do you deny that the wording of your contract, including it's piously insincere statements of MIL's commitment to local laws, requires teachers to adhere to Indonesian laws or face penalties from MILS?] Pray tell me; where does your unwritten policy of requiring teachers to work for MIL'S prior to work permit issue routine fit into your contract? [Do we have a case of Richard Milhouse Nixon here, Your Honor?; of,'those phrases are no longer, 'operative', excuse me, 'Your Honor', 'expletives deleted'. [Perhaps a bit before your time ...., like most of, 'case law,' what the law is, 'really all about' ...

Quite frankly, since you play your, 'Pontius Pilate,' primadona routine, ['Oh, but ...., I wasn't here, so I don't know what really happened do I?] in virtually every e mail sent; playing on, 'your absence in Australia'; it is as well for me to mention that these comments, far from being a reason for me to, 'feel sorry for you', perhaps even commiserate; support my arguments of MIL'S negligence, very nicely, as did ...... subsequent departure to join you, with no one, then being left in senior management to ensure MIL's contractual obligations were met. 'Negligence', ' an open and shut case', I'm reliably advised, by my Embassy and legal contacts in both Australia and locally.

What are these, 'contractual', obligations ......? Do they, for example,include MILS agreeing to act to, 'ensure the legal status of all teachers is safeguarded at all times? [Even when;'under instructions from you, and those you delegate authority to, they are obliged to work, before work permits are issued? I have made repeated references to these obligations and presume; since,you have never sought to deny them, this IS because you know you cannot. They are there in black and white, signed sealed and soon to be delivered, as that is precisely what the dispute between MILS and myself is all about and the reason why I am fully confident of success against MILS, posing as a, 'reputable charity', or not.

Let me just respond to your newly raised points, designed no doubt to, 'try and make me feel guilty', 'sorry for myself', or something like that? All the points you raise are, 'completely irrelevant', to our dispute but I'm responding anyway because, ....., your abusive manner in these matters, deserves an appropriate response from a person who can match and better anything you throw. I presume you are trying [desperately??] to divert my attention from the one track path that is now going to be pursued, without mercy, to it's, 'probably inevitable,' conclusion since flexibility, morality and principle seem to be missing somewhere from your, 'Victorian', education.

I have chosen to respond to your points amidst your text below in, 'bold type', before giving your last e mails to me the, 'roasting,' they deserve, before having them, very carefully, professionally translated, before their submission to all the appropriate authorities, in print media, Embassies and, 'control bureaucracies', both locally and abroad, to place your credibility where your words have taken you, squarely in the, 'of no credit', camp, with ominous implications for, what looked to be a, 'promising career'.



From: .........
Subject: Re: Overstay Fine Receipt Requested by ........
To: ..............
Cc: ...........
Received: Thursday, 24 March, 2011, 8:30 PM

Thanks for sending this through ............

As stated before, it is my opinion that the dispute is between you and the agent.[Point adequately covered repeatedly already, ......., ad nauseum, 'you', meaning both MILS, and, you, as the local responsible person for MILS, are fully legally responsible, acting for MIL'S, when signing a contract with me, or any other, 'contracted employee', for the actions of that employee, when carrying out instructions YOU gave yourself, or instructions that were given by those with your duly delegated authority, in your absence.] I'm sure I didn't instruct, or, 'pay', the,'agent', to act on MIL'S behalf, so who DID ......? [Father Christmas? ,'The Tooth Fairy?' Alice in Wonderland?]

Do you really believe in the absence of DGI testimony [which obviously they cannot give, after 'fining me'] your 'agent', [yes, I mean, the one MIL'S instructed and paid for her MIL'S specified services, on behalf of me, your then loyal employee,] will have any credibility under cross examination, in maintaining, 'she saw DGI officials give me documents, apparently just 2 days before my departure, ' when it's obvious to anyone, let alone a duly constituted, 'court authority' that Mr ...., would have, on all the odds, have used these documents, presented them to DGI officials at the airport, rather than pay a fine and attendant costs excedding, in total, Rp6m!

Isn't it also obvious, or at least reasonable to assume, ...., that any competent, professional agent, would have ensured, for her own protection, that she kept a copy of these documents to ensure she had the, 'evidence' she needed, to get paid by MILS?

Isn't it further obvious, ....., that consistent with professional procedure, YOUR agent would have ENSURED MILS also got a copy of these documents, as part of the process of ensuring MILS were aware, she had, 'fulfilled her duties, instructions from MILS', so she could be sure of getting her service fee?

Isn't it also obvious, that when ..... called your agent company [at my insistence], on the Tuesday, to demand they sent documents THEY HAD PROMISED to give MILS, that their response, either indicated, that they didn't have the document at that time, or wrongly ASSUMED I had been given the document [which you yourself are previously on record as claiming, may well have still been at DGI]; which means that YOU yourself are of the view I never got them, which is 100% consistent with MY not taking them to the airport and being FINED for Alice in Wonderland's sake!

It doesn't take a genius ......, to work out, which obviously in your case you are, so you can work it out, that the agent, having already been paid for her,' supposed services', to MILS [another example of MIL'S NEGLIGENCE, through NOT ensuring they had a copy of the much coveted documents, BEFORE, MILS paid for her services]; that the agent NOW insists they were given me to make sure she evades any obligation to REFUND fees for services that WERE NOT RENDERED.

Alice in Wonderland forbid, ....., WHAT then, are HER strong grounds, [yes, I mean, YOUR agent's grounds] for saying I AM AT FAULT, if 1. She didn't keep a copy of the documents herself, 2. Never, apparently asked me for a copy, AFTER she allegedly saw them given me, to ensure that SHE, HER AGENT COMPANY, AND MILS HAD A COPY ON RECORD TO ENSURE SHE WAS PAID FOR A 'FULFILLED SERVICE'! 3. Didn't finally produce them for MILS, WEEKS LATER, after your, 'exhaustive', efforts to obtain them from DGI had drawn a blank! 4. Didn't ensure that 4 critical entities had the documents BEFORE, AND ON TIME FOR THEIR USE AT THE AIRPORT BY ME. Those entities are a] herself, b] the agent company she worked for, c] MILS and d] myself.

You, ......!; KNOW full well at what point the documents FINALLY came into MIL'S possession, but instead of having the honesty and integrity to admit it, knowing full well, I NEVER got them, you are playing, CHEAP SKATE in refusing to honour your contract and destroying both your and MIL'S credibility in the process for TODAY'S RP5.4M that won't only become possibly as much as RP35M but will be presented in a very forthright manner to ALL the organizations upon which the future existence of MIL'S depends. Consider your options VERY carefully, ...... The time for polite pleasantries is now OVER. MIL'S owes me a mininimum Rp 5.4m for, AS YET UNFULFILLED, contractual obligations. MILS was clearly NEGLIGENT in not ensuring those obligations were fulfilled and your current stance will be seenBY ALL for what it IS, COMPOUNDING this negligence repeatedly, 6 months after the event WITH Alice in Wonderland Fairy Tales.
Both of you claim that the other is at fault and both have strong grounds. As I was not there, I will not be acting as arbiter in this case. I have read and I understand the arguments you have written.

....., I would like to remind you that the reason you were at the airport under these circumstances is because you had your passport stolen,[...., for give me for saying this, but many people have passports stolen here, as well as other valuables, as you yourself mentioned had happened to YOU here, in apparently sincere commiseration WITH my plight, which YOU and MILS pledged to FIX, consistent with your contractual obligations BUT NEVER DID, AND, AS YET, have REFUSED to do, which MEANS you are blaming me for a passport theft as IF it WERE relevant, when you KNOW it is not! Since when have truly charitable organisations stooped so low as to, 'blame the victim of injustice' for criminal acts AGAINST them! and also because you were unable to do the job we required due to a disability that you failed to disclose to us. That one ......., seals your fate. You interviewed me on the phone for just on one hour [during which time you NEVER mentioned, you wondered if I had a hearing problem because we could hear each other perfectly well, couldn't we .......? Neither did you mention MILS would routinely require all teachers to breach Indonesian law [despite your saying in your contract it is a dismissable offence] by working without work permits, and YOU ....., approved me for appointment, on the phone, when I arrived, after a day or two when you signed the contract and finally after a teaching demonstration with YOU.

As was made clear to you on numerous occasions, I was plagued by hearing aid battery faults AFTER I arrived and right up until your departure for Australia, including during YOUR observations of my teaching, you said THINGS WERE FINE. Quite apart from a charitable organization, so called, blaming the victims of crimes for crimes against them [rape also perhaps? I don't suppose you are a feminist who condemns males who claim, 'that', are you ......?]

As we both know full well, ......, I was advised after 3 MONTHS, that my probation was up and I wouldn't be confirmed for the full 12 months. I was duly given notice, consistent with contract, of 10 days, ALL OF WHICH OCCURRED AFTER THE AIRPORT DEBACLE YOUR NEGLIGENCE CAUSED, and for some, may have been seen as RELEVANT, that is, an effort to get 'rid of me' rather than 'pay the fine', which both morally and legally under contract as I keep reminding you, MILS is legally obliged to do.

Have you really run out of, 'RELEVANT TO THE DISPUTE', things to say ......, such that you have to stoop so low, as to blame me for a crime against me and a disability that WASN'T declared as a problem by MILS until after it became obvious you were liable to pay my Rp 5.4M fine? I would therefore invite you to consider all the factors in this case rather than directing your monetary requests directly at MILS, a not-for-profit organisation. If we were a well-resources university of the type you had been previously employed by, I am sure that we would be able to assist you better, and I apologise that MILS has been involved in your unsatisfactory experience.
......., there is only one thing which will satisfy me. You ...... and MILS honouring your contract and paying what you owe NOW, rather than millions in related expenses later, consistent with MIL'S contract and your NEGLIGENCE in not ensuring it was fulfilled.

The next e mail will address YOUR comments about an alleged DGI letter in your e mails at the end of last year.

.......... [MA Hons, Class 1, MPP, NZ Certificate of Investrment, British Council TEFL]
Thank you for getting this to us so efficently .......,

[travelNteach]

???????????????? nice rant but what happened?

u lost your passport and had to pay 5.4 million rupiah in overstay fines?

and u didnt pass or probation period? or they notified you after your probation period was over?

or they used your hearing aids and battery issues as an excuse to terminate you?

without any clearly stated background informaton leading us step by step thru what happened, i think it is difficult to understand what happened to u and why u feel the school treated you poorly when your post starts in the middle of events, rather than the beginning.

anyway, best wishes to u in resolving your situation.

[Ragil]

Quite right. I should add, the communication is posted on behalf of an acquaintance who is both riled and, yes, verbose (and, if nothing else I think, an entertaining / cautionary read). My impression is that the hearing aid / passport loss (and even the dismissal itself perhaps) were evasive tactics. In any event, with the issue yet to be resolved, the following takes it back to the beginning:

................ 9th November, 2010
Academic Director
Melbourne Institute of Language Studies(MILS)
JL Dukuh 11 No 4A
Tanjung Duren Barat VI
Jakarta Barat 11470 For Email-MILS [Jkt.], cc MILS[Melbourne]
Dear ...., Delivery MILS [Jkt]

Two months ago I was forced to pay a 5.4m cash �fine,� before I was allowed to fly to Singapore. The alternative was detention centre. I withdrew the maximum RP 500,000 x 12 from an ATM using my credit card. At $8.00 each time, costing $96 in fees, my total, �exit cost�, was 6mRp, a MILS monthly salary.

A �fine�, should never have happened. Neither MILS, or MILS representatives had ever mentioned a fine, even as a possibility.

1. Repeated assurances were given between the first week of August & September 7, MILS' arrangements for a visa extension were, �under control�.

2. As late in proceedings as the morning of 7 September, I was again assured, as I had been on several previous occasions, a visa extension had been granted.

3. Assurances came directly from MILS, from their Immigration Agent Company [IAC] & from their advocacy agents [AA�s].

4. On 7 September, MILS' new AA proclaimed, to both 'Admin' & myself that a 30 day extension had been granted.

5. When returning my passport at approximately 12.30pm on the 7th, she assuring me, �the stamp,� dated 7 September, meant, I had a valid 30 day extension until 7 October.

6. The MILS staff member responsible for visa arrangements was ......... who coordinated all MILS' efforts to obtain my visa extension.

7. ......... arranged appointments at the Director General of Immigration Office [DGI] for AA�s. She acted as liaison person at MILS for the IAC, AA�s & for myself.

8. In the month between early August and September 7 I spent almost 9 hours at DGI, meeting AA�s arranged by MILS, then waiting outside offices to find out what had been achieved.

9. Both DGI appointments in August & on 7 September, were arranged for AA�s & myself through ......... from MILS.

What Were MILS Legal Responsibilities To Me; An Employee?

1. As my employer, under contract signed 19 July, MILS accepted responsibility for, my legal employment in Indonesia, including, �permits to stay & work�, �exit visa�, costs, �of all visas to live in {Indonesia}� {Sections 2.2.1, 2.3}.

2. In addition, as MILS employee, I was contractually obliged, �to obey all {Indonesia�s} laws & regulations� {section 3.4}.

MILS Breached These Contractual Obligations As Follows:-

1) Requiring me to teach in Jakarta, without legal �permits to stay and work�, within the meaning of Section 2.2.1.

2) Failing to ensure under Section 2.2.1, I had an appropriate, exit visa�.

3) Repeated assurances of a visa extension being granted, resulting in my remaining in Indonesia, illegally under Indonesian law.

4) By forcing me to breach Section 3.4 of our contract.

A. MILS' negligent management of visa commitments to me resulted in 3 major breaches of contract & Indonesian law.

B. Had MILS successfully managed visa obligations I would have been spared 9 September, personal losses of 6m RP.

C. ........, as CEO, promised reimbursement, if losses resulted from MIL�S negligence in managing my visa arrangements.

D. ......... undertaking was given by e mail replying to my 9 September text, outlining my airport departure experience.

Was Obtaining an Extension & Avoiding A Fine That Difficult?

1. In principle, there was every reason to succeed.

2. Why would a professional employee, advised by MILS to exit Jakarta, 45 hours earlier, be, forced to pay �fines� on leaving, when MILS & all parties acting for MILS had assured him, a valid 30 day visa extension had been granted?

3. If records of MILS' claimed visa extension had existed the imposition of a fine defied logic, in any language.

4. Why was I fined before being allowed to leave on September 9? What had gone wrong? How had it come about? Did MILS' promised visa extension, really exist? If not, why not? Who was responsible? Why had the visa application failed?

What Happened Prior to September 9 at the Airport?

1) MILS accepted a contractual obligation to meet all my visa requirements as a MIL�S employee.

2) My computer bag, complete with passport was stolen in a footpath �snatch�, by two helmeted motorcycle riders, after classes on Thursday night, 22 July.

3) MILS immediately took charge. ......... checked the British High Commission website to download passport loss & replacement application forms& requirements {as I had immediately done, independently, myself}

4) ......... next arranged for a junior assistant, ...., to accompany me to 3 progressively higher levels of police station, until a police report of �theft� had been secured, as required before an application could be lodged.

5) I went to the BHC, without assistance, lodged an application, complete with courier charges to expedite, totalling 2.4m RP.

6) I undertook teaching duties as expected& continued to do so, as per schedules arranged by ........, until 3 September.

7) MILS arranged my first visit to the DGI, where I met up with MIL�S first AA, in the first week of August, allowing ample time prior to the expiry of my first 30 day visa on arrival, occurring on August 15th, after one month in Indonesia.

8 ) Documentation of my first 30 day visa approval had been given to ......... As per contract, I was reimbursed the US$25.00 fee paid, also paid by ........., just before she departed in August for two weeks with MILS in Australia.

9) After this DGI visit, MILS, meaning ........, assured me, my visa extension application, had been successfully arranged. {Ihad no way of knowing this, without ....... telling me, as MILS' AA spoke very limited English & all proceedings took place, between DGI officials & MIL�S AA. At no stage was I asked to contribute in any way. MILS' AA,never asked me any questions, never asked me for any documents & neither did any DGI officials.

I assumed, rightly, or wrongly that any documentation or briefing MILS' AA may have needed, had been arranged through ........, who had sought from me one letter from BHI, confirming a replacement passport application was in progress, duly obtained by me from BHI & given to ........., before this first DGI meeting. I was very much a, �non-participant observer�, at DGI, sitting for the most part in foyers & outside offices, while proceedings continued, as they did, on this first occasion, for approximately 4 hours,a morning from 8.30 onwards}

Nothing of importance appeared to occur during August until ........�s return in the last week. She asked me about passport issue. I said I had heard nothing after one call from HK BHC confirming my application was for a 48 page passport. I asked if there had been any new developments on the claimed visa extension granted. ......... assured me matters were, �in hand�.

10.Finally, on Thursday, 23rd August, .......... advised the BHC had called to say my passport could be collected the following day. Getting from MILS in West Jakarta to the BHC was typically a taxi ride of one hour or more, depending on traffic conditions. By that time I had been there and back twice.

11. I was unaware that the BHC closed at 10.30am on Fridays, instead of normal closing of 2pm on other weekdays.

12. I arrived, {Using a taxi I arranged myself, as all my visits to BHC had been} at 11am, half an hour too late for issue.

13.Determined not to repeat the mistake on Monday 27th, I checked into the IBIS hotel, much closer to the BHC, on Sunday 26th, walking to the BHC & back to check out in under one hour, returning to MILS with my passport, {required by ........ for a prompt work visa application} shortly after 1pm. I was again given ..........�s assurances of visa extension arrangements, being, �under control�. I wanted to be sure, before surrendering a newly issued passport for an unknown processing period.

14.On 6 September, when advised by ............, another meeting had been scheduled on the 7th, with a new MILS' AA, I was a little concerned. Why was another meeting needed if my visa extension was already, �in the bag�? Why was it necessary to go to the DGI in person again, when not required to participate in any way, on the previous early August occasion visit, as well as being assured, my visa extension had been granted?

15. .......... was not happy with this, saying, �she was trying to help me�, suggesting I was, �less than polite�, by raising & expecting answers to my questions, all of which to me, seemed, �reasonable� & �perfectly legitimate�, given I had never seen any visa extension, or even as much as a receipt, to verify the extension being applied for. {When later revealed in one of ..........�s e mail replies to me, {after 9 September, when things had gone horribly wrong,} this meeting had been sought at DGI, shortly after .........�s return from Australia, meaning, at the time my passport was lodged for work permit processing on August 27th, I was, not happy.}

On 27 August I had been strongly assured, once again, �matters were in hand�, before surrendering my passport, I felt annoyed, to put it mildly, that whatever doubts .......... had about my visa extension, giving rise to her seeking this, extra, meeting, had never been discussed with me. Why weren�t they? Why hadn�t they been discussed with both ......... & myself? Obviously it was important.

16.I went to DGI, again making my own �ojek� arrangements to get there, met with the new AA, decided to do the rounds with her, as she offered {but pleased to have heard from .......... this AA had claimed to have sorted an extension soon after her arrival & before we had met up.}

17. Finally at about 12.30 pm she returned my passport with the date stamp previously referred to, which wasn�t a visa extension but she insisted was one, claiming it granted me 30 days from the date stamp of 7 September, meaning until 7 October. I was extremely doubtful that this was true but never at that stage, having ever seen a 30 day extension, let alone been granted one, I didn�t rule it out.

Possible Explanations For Visa Extension Failure.
� MILS promised & failed, to ensure a visa extension.

� It appears MILS lacked both the time & experience to successfully monitor & manage, tasks delegated to outside agencies {your IAC & AA�s} to ensure timely performance.

� External agents hired, instructed & ultimately paid for, through MILS, were not successfully managed, to ensure timely performance & full accountability in set tasks.

� MILS, was �negligent� in failing to keep a contractual obligation it promised to deliver.

� MILS, was negligent in failing to establish, clear & timely performance guidelines; external agents knew they were required to both follow & meet, before payment.

� MILS, was, �negligent�, in failing to adequately monitor progress & to hold an IAC & AA�s accountable, to MIL�S performance standards, for achieving set objectives.

� MILS was further, �negligent� in failing to systematically ensure procedures were in place, to independently check claimed performance successes of an IAC & AA�s, working on MILS' behalf, through insisting on receipts & other, verifiable, documentation, as �proof� of performance.

� MIL�S, was �negligent� in failing to appoint one, fully accountable, staff member for the duration of set tasks to secure a visa extension. ..........., effectively, �acting CEO�, while ............., MIL�S Indonesia CEO, was absent, took charge of all visa matters, including the promised securing my legal visa extension within the required period.

� MIL�S was also, �negligent� in failing to back ..........., as chosen staff member for visa matters, up, with another, buddy�, staff member, who could be briefed to ensure the continued adequacy & �due diligence� of MIL�S performance monitoring of an IAC & AA�s were maintained, when key, experienced staff members were absent from Indonesia.

� MILS, finally, was �negligent� in both failing to independently verify claimed IAC & AA successes & in according such claims unwarranted credibility, by confusing unsubstantiated claims, with proven, verifiable performance; which MILS, uncritically, appears to have both accepted & passed on, as if it were �truth�, to both MIL�S senior management & clients, with whom MIL�S had contractual obligations.

Consequences of �Negligence�& System Failures:-

� My losses could & should have been, limited to 2.4m for replacing a stolen passport. Instead my personal costs quadrupled to 6mRp in avoidable �fines,� which resulted directly from multiple �negligence� to manage, monitor, verify & adjust, subsequent task performance.

� MIL�S working relationships with their IAC & AA�s, appear to have been very limited. Both IAC & AA�s made promises to furnish documentary evidence to MILS, which they didn�t keep. Their promises should have been followed up. They should have been required to ensure timely delivery to MILS. Claims that I, �had what I needed�; �had enough documents�, as MIL�S IAC was able to get away with on 7 September should have been, totally unacceptable, at a point 6 weeks into their supposed, �task fulfillment�, on MILS' behalf.

� MILS' chosen representatives, an IAC & AA�s were delegated responsibility, for achieving MIL�S promise, the issue of my 30 day visa extension through DGI, consistent with MIL�S contractual obligations.

� Their failures ended up being MILS' failures, as a consequence of MIL�S negligent oversight, of tasks & working relationships, critical to ensuring success.

AA�s failed to succeed in their delegated tasks. I met MILS' 1st AA I on my 1st DGI visit early August, over a week before my first 30 day visitor visa expired. MIL�S AA claimed through ....... at MILS, he had sorted my visa extension. Clearly he had not but it shouldn�t have taken weeks to confirm this.

....... is MILS' CEO in Jakarta. .........., an English fluent Indonesian is MIL�S next most experienced Jakarta staff member, who in effect, acts as .........�s Executive Assistant, assuming, � an acting CEO role�, in .......�s absence, as she was throughout most of the period when MILS was attempting to obtain my visa extension.

...... returned to MILS Melbourne, Australia, headquarters in early August, followed soon after, by ......., who was absent for two weeks, returning to Jakarta, late in August. In this quieter, Muslim, �fasting month�, period local support staff shared managerial tasks in consultation with a newly appointed, Acting Senior Teacher, an Australian, .........., who had joined MILS from overseas, in July, a few days earlier than myself, arriving on 15 July.

Following theft of my computer bag & passport on July 22, ........ took charge of MIL�S efforts to secure my 30 day visitor visa extension. ...... assumption of responsibility for organizing a visa extension was natural.

......... was the most experienced & senior Indonesian staff member with a variety of multi-tasked responsibilities- finance, travel arrangements, scheduling of teachers & classes,& organizing work permit, visa extension & exit permit applications for MILS' core staff of foreign teachers.

..........arranged a first DGI visit in early August long before my first visa expired on August 15. When she left to visit Australia for two weeks no visa extension had been issued.

& I had been advised by the BHC a replacement passport issued from the U.K; via H.K. could not be expected to be ready for collection in less than 4 weeks.

My first 30 day visa had been adequately documented, with MILS refunding my $ US25.00 receipted application, through ......., a day or two before her departure.

........ There appeared to be no undue grounds for concern. Computer records would show I had been granted a visa until 15 August. Only 3 possible issues remained:-

1. No documented evidence of MILS' first AA�s claimed success in obtaining a 30 day extension had turned up, at the point of .......�s departure. MILS had not even been sent a receipt & in so far as I am aware,& had not been advised of application cost of a supposedly successful application. I later established it should have been about 1.5m, the cost of this week�s one, issued in 4 days [copy attached]

2. Concerns that if proof, receipts & related documentation of the claimed extension wasn�t forthcoming, nothing would eventuate until later in the month on ...........s return, by which time my visa would have expired .

3. An apparent absence of any delegation of follow up responsibilities to other staff with ...... away for 2 weeks.

On ........�s return, it became clear that, while no verifiable evidence had turned up, she remained outwardly confident the claimed extension �was in hand�& the focus of MILS' attention was now passport & work permit issue.

I sought assurances before surrendering my passport. I was a newcomer to Indonesia, apart from having visited Jakarta once & Bali several times. I knew nothing of 30 day extensions for visas, a new policy this year.

I accepted assurances given by MILS on the, �they must know best principle�, remaining confident that if anything, was amiss, surely MILS itself, handling visa issues for a year or more, MILS' Immigration Agent Company {IAC} which had been handling the requirements for large operators, English First included, would be closely enough connected with DGI, to alert ......... & MILS long before events got out of control. {I was sadly mistaken. As I found out September 9th, I had been accumulating �overstay fines @ 200,000 Rp daily since August 15, an inexcusable level of negligence, on the part of MILS & all their representatives, in not independently verifying my legal status, well in advance of the eventual 6m Rp in fines & related expenses I eventually had to pay in cash, before being permitted to leave for Singapore}

I was concerned to find out from ........, on 6 September, another visit to DGI, evidently requested much earlier, soon after her return, was now required. What new evidence had come to hand on her return to request this meeting? Had anyone representing MILS ever alerted ........ or MILS in any way, about the possibility of �overstay fines�? Well ........? Well ........? Had they,& if so, why was I never told? Why hadn�t I been told about it, before surrendering my passport for work permit processing on 27 August? Why didn�t MILS use the same agent as previously? What new information has come to hand about him? Did any receipts, documents, proof of payments to substantiate my original allegedly approved extension from early August ever surface? If not, why didn�t MILS ensure I had exit tickets & bookings available just in case?

MILS final AA, I met on 7 September, at DGI. We were both sent to the DGI at a ............ arranged DGI appointment, made days earlier. This AA had been entrusted with my passport by .........., 2 weeks earlier for work permit processing, commencing on August 27th. My passport was apparently given her, without receipt, as MILS trusted her. This AA obtained a, �stamp in my passport�, added after being at DGI almost 5 hours & dated 7 September. She claimed it meant, �You have a 30 day extension from 7 September. You won�t need to leave until October 7.�

MIL�S new AA had spoken to ........ soon after her arrival at DGI, when she reportedly, claimed to have, �sorted� extension arrangements. I took this to mean arrangements were nearing completion but when she offered me the option of sitting in the foyer, or accompanying her in finalizing her rounds, I chose to accompany her, resulting in our both sitting outside different offices for a further 3 hours. My passport was finally returned with, �stamp�, at about 12.30pm.

As Airport Immigration confirmed, just two days later, this stamp was not a visa extension in any shape or form. MIL�S AA had either, been grossly misled {as had MILS by suggesting an extension had been granted} or had deliberately concocted a complete fabrication. I had never seen a 30 day extension before, so I didn�t rule validity out.

Alternatively, her claims were a total fabrication, which seems more likely given that I now have, my first legal visa extension stamp, not to be confused with the one she was making emphatic claims about, even shaking my hand in the process, to convince me her claims were genuine.

Either way, she was MILS' replacement AA representative. With hindsight she was equally as incompetent & dishonest as her predecessor. In contrast it took me just a few daysto find a competent, visa experienced, English speaking woman, who completed my current 30 day extension in 4 days, trouble free, for an appropriately receipted 1.5mRp. I believe in receipts as verification.

Your AA�s gave no evidence of being professionally prepared for anything. They never asked me a single question. There is no evidence they had prepared letters or submissions of any kind for DGI.

To the best of my knowledge, they sought no documentary evidence of any kind from MILS; certainly they didn�t from me, [for example, police report, statement from me concerning theft, receipt from BHC, briefing from me, or in writing from BHC about my replacement passport]

One resorted to complete fabrications {outright lies-} about a DGI letter, given directly to me, granting a 30 day extension, when it�s obvious for many reasons distinct from my personal integrity,[ in stating emphatically, their claims are outright lies& fabrications], that this letter couldn�t have existed.

They have never produced any receipts, or any other evidence to substantiate claims they even formally applied for my visa extension, let alone claims they succeeded.

I am curious to know on what basis, ......... paid your AA�s, or your IAC, which may have paid AA�s on MIL�S behalf, given that they have never produced documentary evidence of any description? I�m sure MIL�S donors would share my concerns, if they ever knew payments were being made without documentary proof of services having taken place?

You said your IAC was a good one, also used by EF.
If your IAC is so good, I ask, why was it they promised to send ........ all their copies of documents for my 30 day extension application but 5 weeks later, before a one week break, commencing September 9th they had sent nothing?

Why, when ......... asked them for their documents on September 7th, was her request declined? Why did they say it was no longer necessary? �I had all the documents I needed?� Is it because they knew I was going to be fined because no extension had been granted? Was MILS relationship with your IAC so bad they didn�t tell you, or worse, someone at MILS knew, but wasn�t saying?

Do you or ........, really think your experienced IAC was naive enough to believe your AA, claiming DGI had been kind enough to place a 30 day visa letter in my hands which somehow I lost, or forgot to use? Do you really think they, �just couldn�t be bothered� to send MILS as their client, scanned documents, a fax perhaps, documents by post??

One other option is, there was nothing to send, perhaps they were even surprised at the naivety of someone asking for something promised weeks earlier? The outcome to your IAC, highly experienced with EF etc, was obvious, ............ is in for a big shock on Thursday when he tries to leave?

Why do you think with my repeated calls to both IAC and your AA while at the airport, no one answered? They may not have known me or my number but for sure they knew my departure time & that every foreigner at MILS uses �3� as their phone provider?

What about the phone call ......... received from the DGI on 7 September? The one which she checked with IAC, who said something to the effect, �well, we suppose if the DGI says so, he should go in the next couple of days, holiday or not, he should do so�.� Why didn�t IAC offer to check it out for MILS as a valued client? Why didn�t they call their DGI contacts, through fear of looking na�ve and negligent in not knowing themselves perhaps?

Why do you think your investigation at the DGI end over two weeks got no response?

Why do you think .........�s last communication with me was on September 9th? Why do you think she has ignored all my e mails & a few text messages?

Why do you think IAC as a competent service company did not offer to check for ..... with all their undoubted contacts at the DGI? Wouldn�t that have been the response of a professional, client-centred service company? Well wouldn�t it, unless the answer was obvious?

Perhaps they even said how can MILS be so negligent as to not know, or understand what�s happening? Exactly the question I am asking both you & ........ right now? Why didn�t you know? If you did know, either of you, why didn�t you tell me as soon as you found out? Finally if you claim not to have known, or even suspected, do you now finally accept MILS' negligence in not knowing?

My loss would have been limited to about 2.4m for a replacement passport, as it should have been & could have been, if MILS had only managed my extension in a competent & professional, �hands on� way, where those acting for you, were monitored, held accountable& knew this was happening.

� 2 months after your promised reimbursement had MILS been �negligent� & 3 weeks since your October 21st, �give me 7 days�; I�ve heard nothing more from you. Why?
� It�s appropriate to ask for results of your investigations with DGI in Jakarta. Exactly, what did happen with my 30 day visa extension? Does it meanmy main complaints are essentially unchallenged?

The �facts� must prevail, almost, no matter what the cost, as far as I am concerned. To give credit where due, I think you tried to neutralize, �personality issues�, with a, �time line,� which helped to limit liabilities attributed by me, and my anger over what happened, to events from August 27, onwards.

To be fully frank and fair about ........�s involvement, I have needed to remind myself she was in Australia for 2 weeks, and, I was near certain she was as convinced, as I was, that the 30 day extension had been given the OK in August. This appeared to remain her belief until early September, until scheduling of a meeting for the 7th came up and I made it clear, a/, I was annoyed about my being, �misadvised� on August 27, b/ the necessity of my �personal attendance�, yet again, when I had spent 4 hours at the DG�s office earlier in August, without actually seeing any DG official, while being told, the 30 day extension had been sorted, when clearly it hadn�t been, if yet another meeting was needed.
It�s fair comment some of my annoyance was directed to......... over this, because she had clearly sought this, �new� meeting, days earlier, suggesting she �knew� things were not,�fully sorted�, as I had been assured they were [by both her and your agent], but had �chosen� not to share any �misgivings� she had with me, while at the same time, I submitted my passport for a work permit, at her request. I make no apologies for my annoyance. I believe my annoyance at not being told, was justified, as subsequent events, eventually costing me a lot of money, underline. I was being deprived of the full information I was entitled to have, to make a fully rational choice and I believe, important enough, to have warranted consultations with yourself, as well as with me, [instead of being, �fobbed off� in, �Asian style�, [not prejudice, 23 years of my living experience], with, �I didn�t want to trouble you�, �I�m just trying to help you�, comments that �pop up�, like clockwork, every time you really, �need to be worried�,( as when Computer No 7 is �stolen� from MILS, how did they get in this time?� There is prejudice from �hear say� in my comments because I was not present, until the last theft)

16. I also believe that reimbursement is consistent with MILS
�legal obligations�, as well as, �ethical ones;� given MIL�S staff actions and, �negligent�, �uncritical acceptance�, of what they were told, by your agent company / those acting for your agent company, which gave claims made, �an aura of credibility�, they clearly did not deserve.

17. I also believe your contract with teachers implies, and can be interpreted, as meaning, MILS accepts responsibilities of the type your staff effectively took for granted, MILS should be responsible for, without discussion, in my case. In past precedents, my guess is you have been taking on such responsibilities.

18. Current and prospective employees, would, view broadly similar things, as being a MIL�S responsibility.For, �foreigners�, in a new culture, MILS has and does fulfil a, �cradle to grave�, �safety net function�, providing accommodation, lunch, sim cards, cash advances, �help topping up sim cards�, �airport �pick ups�, exit visas, tax payments, �exit bookings, work permit applications, subsidised gym fees, Sunday outings;� �virtually a complete settler adjustment to new culture service�. It meets no credible purpose seeking to deny this. No one begged MILS to take responsibility for my situation. They simply did.

Staff in a broad sense, including yourself, have had important things lost/or stolen before. Your staff moved into this support role without consultation, seeing their key role as keeping the school open and functioning, no matter what. I was then seen as part of this necessary process. This became evident while you remained away. Power outs saw classes functioning, without air conditioning, almost no natural light,[meaning, almost none, in some classes] Staff see keeping classes running as a �duty� to school & fee-paying parents. Teachers had no problem with this, myself included. It�s a �norm� in many smaller schools.
Support and administrative staff, see supporting teachers, for as long as they are still teachers, as an extension of this, �open no matter what commitment�, that students and parents, expect.

Many of these, �expectations�, could not be, �contracts� conceived, or written up by Western lawyers seeking �limits� on education provider�s �liabilities�. Instead, these, �expectations�, function as, �unwritten norms�, in many Asian work places.

19. MILS staff took on my 30 day visa extension, free of duress, in good faith. Experienced staff, were few, coming & going, when this challenge needed continuity, �hands on, follow up�. �Negligence�, can be a brutal legal term. However kind we try to be, assurances given, were not adequately monitored and ultimately, could not be kept. I paid the price. Now I want MILS to pay it�s fair share. In Lord Denning�s words, �fairness & natural justice�, are required, to resolve this amicably.

Yours sincerely,
(..................) [Jakarta, Sunday, 31st October, 2010].

[travelNteach]

a bit more readable but probably more effective if they had written it via timeline in the order events happened. very repetitive and rambling to say the least. perhaps 75% could be deleted and a more concise, logical posting would resutl. and there seems to be some hints at missing information, such as the teachers anger issues and the reason the work permit processed was stopped and why they didnt make it off probation. although these issues may be related to the teacher's overstay issue, they may not be entirely relevant.

however, i can empathize with this person. at one time or another, we have all had to rely on schools to handle issues we dont entirely understand or feel comfortable with. and althought the school is ultimately responsible for handling visas and immigration issues, the doesnt make the teacher blameless. the teacher should know the immigration procedures of the country they are entering. if they have questions or concerns, they should immediately contact their own embassy for clarificatoin or help. this person was at their embassy to retrieve their new passport and should have asked for help at that point. ramblings by the poster on being late, taking their own taxi, or staying at a hotel are completely irrelevant and off topic as retrieving thier passport was their own responsibility. does a british passport really cost over $250 dollars? also, they the BHP is able to issue emergency passorts with 24/48 hours if needed. the poster said it took 4 weeks but then stated they retrieved it in less than 2 weeks.

also, ATM will allow you to take out 1,500,000 to 3,000,000 per transaction so he/she could have mitigated their losses.

finally, if the teacher in question had really consulted lawyers as they claim, they would have been informed that 3 month clauses are illegal under indonesian manpower laws. so unless they were terminated for just cause vs. "failing probation", they can sue for the entire value of the contract, including salary, housing allowance, 13th month salary, airfare, and any other benefits named in the contract in addition to this loss of 6 million rupiah. it is the responsibility of the teacher to educate them on the laws and their responsibilities if they choose to live in a foreign country, not just bury your head in the sand and blame the school for everything. having said this, i do believe that the school is responsible and should reimburse the teacher for his losses. i wish him the best in getting his due

[Ragil]

Thank you very much for taking the time to read the previous, tNt. Much appreciated. It's not an easy read I know. Couldn't agree more with your recommendation about distilling it into a timeline - - I've suggested as much myself to the author. Anyway, for that and your other insights, thanks again.

[travelNteach]

you are welcome. i hope things work out for the author

[Ragil]