|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Black_Beer_Man
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 453
Location: Yokohama
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:35 am Post subject: The National Healthcare Insurance Scheme Is Unfair |
 |
|
As I understand, employers in Japan are not obligated to contribute even 1 yen to a part-timer's national healthcare insurance costs.
As I know, may ESL teachers work several part-time jobs to earn a decent salary. But, despite working full-time hours between 2 or 3 jobs, these teachers have to pay-up the full cost of healthcare insurance.
Don't you find that unfair? (Yeah, I know what you're gonna say. It's the same deal back home in your country.)
Does anyone know how many work hours must a full-time job have to qualify for partial payment of national health insurance by an employer?
I've heard that many of the major employers like Interac don't pay any part of their ESL instructor's healthcare insurance. Do correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mitsui
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1562
Location: Kawasaki
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think it is 30 hours a week so of course it means you work just 29 hours or less.
It is an issue. I may go back to full-time work and it would be nice to pay less for insurance. Many foreigners don't pay but as you get older it is a mistake.
Once you are in your 40s it is easy to have problems with your teeth or vision, at least. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TokyoLiz
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Posts: 1548
Location: Tokyo, Japan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kzjohn
Joined: 30 Apr 2014
Posts: 277
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
I could say that the following was unfair, but it's not. It's the price of living in a civilized society. I'm more than willing to have paid other people's way.
On the one hand, there are part-timers or those whose companies do not share the cost of health insurance. To these folks, it looks like they're paying a lot.
On the other hand, there are people like my wife and I. Both salaried employees making a lot of money. Do you know what? Both my wife and I (before I retired) paid/pay a good percentage of our salaries for health coverage. Far more than a reasonable person would judge to be necessary (actuarial tables, and all that).
Do you know what? We are subsidizing you. We're paying a percentage of our salary (along with co-pay by our employers) which some might say is a total rip-off for what we get.
But you know what? We're paying more, so that folks like you don't have to pay more.
I don't care that I'm subsidizing you. I think that it's my contribution to a society as I think it should be--that health care should be available to all.
Sure, it looks high to you, on your end of the scale. But I'd suggest that you are getting an awful lot of healthcare for a bargain price--even if your employer is not paying half.
Again, keep in mind that lots of people are overpaying. People making much more than you, along with their companies, are paying what could be called more than their "fair" share, so that your premiums stay at the level that they are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Black_Beer_Man
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 453
Location: Yokohama
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kzjohn wrote: |
I could say that the following was unfair, but it's not. It's the price of living in a civilized society. I'm more than willing to have paid other people's way.
On the one hand, there are part-timers or those whose companies do not share the cost of health insurance. To these folks, it looks like they're paying a lot.
On the other hand, there are people like my wife and I. Both salaried employees making a lot of money. Do you know what? Both my wife and I (before I retired) paid/pay a good percentage of our salaries for health coverage. Far more than a reasonable person would judge to be necessary (actuarial tables, and all that).
Do you know what? We are subsidizing you. We're paying a percentage of our salary (along with co-pay by our employers) which some might say is a total rip-off for what we get.
But you know what? We're paying more, so that folks like you don't have to pay more.
I don't care that I'm subsidizing you. I think that it's my contribution to a society as I think it should be--that health care should be available to all.
Sure, it looks high to you, on your end of the scale. But I'd suggest that you are getting an awful lot of healthcare for a bargain price--even if your employer is not paying half.
Again, keep in mind that lots of people are overpaying. People making much more than you, along with their companies, are paying what could be called more than their "fair" share, so that your premiums stay at the level that they are. |
Hmmm? One of us is not on the same page. I was suggesting that the billing of national health insurance was unfair to teachers holding 2 or more part-time jobs.
If I hold 2 -3 part time jobs, I might be making as much money as you (or a typical full-time teacher). As far as I know, the government adjusts my cost of healthcare insurance based on how much I earn.
Now because I do not hold a single full-time job, none of my employers are obligated to pay any part of my national healthcare insurance.
In this situation kzjohn, I don't see how you are subsidizing me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:05 pm Post subject: Re: The National Healthcare Insurance Scheme Is Unfair |
|
|
| Black_Beer_Man wrote: |
I've heard that many of the major dispatch employers like Interac don't pay any part of their ALT's healthcare insurance. Do correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. |
I added the words in bold to make the statement true. Except for dispatchers (and maybe Gaba), I have never heard of a major employer here that did not pay any part of the healthcare insurance for f/t employees.
This, by the way, is yet another reason why one should not work for a dispatcher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Black_Beer_Man
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 453
Location: Yokohama
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:23 am Post subject: Re: The National Healthcare Insurance Scheme Is Unfair |
|
|
| taikibansei wrote: |
| Black_Beer_Man wrote: |
I've heard that many of the major dispatch employers like Interac don't pay any part of their ALT's healthcare insurance. Do correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. |
I added the words in bold to make the statement true. Except for dispatchers (and maybe Gaba), I have never heard of a major employer here that did not pay any part of the healthcare insurance for f/t employees.
This, by the way, is yet another reason why one should not work for a dispatcher. |
No. It's not only dispatch companies, but some (if not all of the major language school. For example: Berlitz Japan. Here's an except from a newspaper article.
"Also in common with other eikaiwa, Berlitz offers contracts of less than 30 hours a week, which means the company avoids having to pay benefits such as health insurance and pension payments. “This is why they don’t offer a ‘full-time’ contract,” reckons Baca.
However, even though standard contracts are for 26.6 hours — supposedly not full-time — working hours come close to 40 when you add in time spent between classes and on lesson preparation, which teachers don’t get paid for", Baca says.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2008/05/06/issues/as-parent-firm-posts-record-profits-berlitz-teachers-strike-back/#.W06G5NIzZdg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good catch. I had forgotten about Berlitz, which has been sued repeated--and often successfully--over this and (many) other issues over the last ten years. I mean, there are at least two unions working directly with Berlitz employees--one (Begunto) contains only Berlitz teachers! From the Wiki page:
| Quote: |
| The GU branch of Berlitz Japan was founded in 1993, and since that time has won a number of improvements for teachers including: Unemployment Insurance and Workers Accident Compensation Insurance enrollment for MG teachers. Health and Pension Insurance (shakai hoken) enrollment for those who work over 30 hours per week. Paid holidays for MG and per lesson teachers. Premium pay of 25% overtime and 35% for work on a set rest day. The right to refuse work on set rest days or national holidays. A pre-consultation agreement with the union before terminating, transferring or changing the working conditions of any union member. Resolving various grievances dealing with dismissals, health insurance, unfair treatment of teachers.[9] |
While a simple Google search finds these (and many other) issues, we need a blacklist for such employers here at Dave's. Here's a partial list from the Union page:
http://tokyogeneralunion.org/locals/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marley'sghost
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 255
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:38 am Post subject: Re: The National Healthcare Insurance Scheme Is Unfair |
|
|
| Black_Beer_Man wrote: |
| taikibansei wrote: |
| Black_Beer_Man wrote: |
I've heard that many of the major dispatch employers like Interac don't pay any part of their ALT's healthcare insurance. Do correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. |
I added the words in bold to make the statement true. Except for dispatchers (and maybe Gaba), I have never heard of a major employer here that did not pay any part of the healthcare insurance for f/t employees.
This, by the way, is yet another reason why one should not work for a dispatcher. |
No. It's not only dispatch companies, but some (if not all of the major language school. For example: Berlitz Japan. Here's an except from a newspaper article.
"Also in common with other eikaiwa, Berlitz offers contracts of less than 30 hours a week, which means the company avoids having to pay benefits such as health insurance and pension payments. “This is why they don’t offer a ‘full-time’ contract,” reckons Baca.
However, even though standard contracts are for 26.6 hours — supposedly not full-time — working hours come close to 40 when you add in time spent between classes and on lesson preparation, which teachers don’t get paid for", Baca says.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2008/05/06/issues/as-parent-firm-posts-record-profits-berlitz-teachers-strike-back/#.W06G5NIzZdg |
Contracts at Interac are for 29.5 hours. Right up to the magic number. I heard that some Interac ALTs get NHI contributions. Was it in Osaka? Not me anyway. I had friends active in the union at AEON. I think they are classed as full-time and get their NHI. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TokyoLiz
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Posts: 1548
Location: Tokyo, Japan
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Taikibansei
| Quote: |
| This, by the way, is yet another reason why one should not work for a dispatcher. |
He said it best. Bam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 1:32 am Post subject: Re: The National Healthcare Insurance Scheme Is Unfair |
|
|
| marley'sghost wrote: |
Contracts at Interac are for 29.5 hours. Right up to the magic number. I heard that some Interac ALTs get NHI contributions. Was it in Osaka? Not me anyway. I had friends active in the union at AEON. I think they are classed as full-time and get their NHI. |
Yeah, I believe the AEON union won full-time classification for them. Something similar happened with ECC too. Berlitz's union won as well...but it was not a complete victory and I don't know what's happening now, quite frankly.
The bottom line is that the 5,200 JET Program hires, the 8,000+ full-time university hires, the direct hire ALTs and a significant proportion of eikaiwa instructors are getting shakai hoken with employer contributions. I'm traveling now so can't give you the exact figures, but seriously, for foreign teachers, it's the ALT dispatchers that remain the primary non-contributing offenders. Not working for them solves that problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kzjohn
Joined: 30 Apr 2014
Posts: 277
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Black_Beer_Man wrote: |
...
Hmmm? One of us is not on the same page. I was suggesting that the billing of national health insurance was unfair to teachers holding 2 or more part-time jobs.
If I hold 2 -3 part time jobs, I might be making as much money as you (or a typical full-time teacher). As far as I know, the government adjusts my cost of healthcare insurance based on how much I earn.
Now because I do not hold a single full-time job, none of my employers are obligated to pay any part of my national healthcare insurance.
In this situation kzjohn, I don't see how you are subsidizing me. |
Okay, the discussion seemed to be focusing on dispatch companies and their contracts & policies. If you indeed hold 2-3 part-time jobs then that is a different case than a dispatch worker being contracted for 29.5 hours/week.
Still, there are some advantages to being such a part-timer. No faculty meetings; no seminars or responsibilities to supervise 4th yr thesis students and insure that they get their work done; likely no term-end testing duties, such as proctoring tests for other faculty; no need to publish (!!), no committee duties (want to be on 2-3 committees? more meetings); no duties such as 海外実習引率 during the breaks where you are responsible for students for 10-30 days, overseas; and, since you are not a full-timer, no need to check in during the breaks.
Part-timers at my uni disappeared at the end of the terms (some didn't even do testing), and only re-appeared for the first class of the next term. OTOH, full timers had to be around every day, from Aug. 8th to Oct. 1st, and from Feb. 5th to April 5th. During the latter break, there was usually a series of faculty meeting the first week of March, where it was hashed out which students would get promoted to the next year or not, or in a few cases, who would graduate or not.
I know a number of people who, by choice, string together jobs a 2-3 schools and are quite happy with that. They don't want to change.
And that subsidy thing? Imagine that you are married, and that both you and your spouse have to pay your own, full & separate health premiums--that one partner's coverage cannot be used to insure the other (because you are both working). Would you think that is fair, when, if your spouse wasn't working, they'd be completely covered at no extra cost to you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inflames
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 486
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kzjohn wrote: |
And that subsidy thing? Imagine that you are married, and that both you and your spouse have to pay your own, full & separate health premiums--that one partner's coverage cannot be used to insure the other (because you are both working). Would you think that is fair, when, if your spouse wasn't working, they'd be completely covered at no extra cost to you? |
That is irrelevant for the discussion here - the health insurance rates for people with kokumin kenko hoken or the health insurance part of shakai hoken are very similar - the big differences are that your employer pays half of it for shakai hoken and that you can get extra benefits from it too.
Certain industries, such as construction and cram schools, try to avoid enrolling people in shakai hoken as much as possible because enrolling someone costs a lot of money - one of the things I dislike about this system is that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harp
Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 46
Location: As far north as you can get, before you hit Saitama
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| That is irrelevant for the discussion here - the health insurance rates for people with kokumin kenko hoken or the health insurance part of shakai hoken are very similar - the big differences are that your employer pays half of it for shakai hoken and that you can get extra benefits from it too. |
I think it's a bit of a misnomer to say that employers pay half. The individual's premiums for kokumin kenko hoken, shakai hoken or a kyosai system will all be roughly the same as they are based on your salary.
Where shakai hoken and a kyosai are different is that the employer has an obligation to pay a portion as well, which is slightly more than the individual's premium; so the employer doesn't pay half your portion, it pays all of its portion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Harp wrote: |
I think it's a bit of a misnomer to say that employers pay half. The individual's premiums for kokumin kenko hoken, shakai hoken or a kyosai system will all be roughly the same as they are based on your salary.
Where shakai hoken and a kyosai are different is that the employer has an obligation to pay a portion as well, which is slightly more than the individual's premium; so the employer doesn't pay half your portion, it pays all of its portion. |
Yes and no, depending on your marital status and whether you have kids. Shakai Hoken is designed to support the Japanese vision of the ideal "family," with a sole breadwinner slaving away at a company, while the dependent spouse and kid(s) wait patiently and lovingly at home. As a result, with Shakai Hoken, the health insurance costs for any dependents are much less, as your employer's contributions are helping to cover them. You can read more about it here:
https://5kuho.com/html/chigai.html |
|
| 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
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
