|
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 |
teacha
Joined: 25 Aug 2005
Posts: 186
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:24 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Exactly. Well said Frankie, well said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
clark.w.griswald
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Frankie as I have said before and will say again you have my sympathy with all of this. I agree that with your sentiment that your punishment far exceeds the crime, and I feel that you were incredibly unlucky to have been the first to be blacklisted in this way. I have a sense about you that if this discussion were about someone else and you were reading it then you are a reasonable guy and would be thinking what probably most of us are thinking and that is - 'Poor guy. Geez, I'mglad it wasn't me, and now that I have the heads up I won't let it happen to me.' Your story is a very valuable one, and it is great that you have shared it with us all.
A lot of what I say in relation to your blacklisting has the value of 20/20 hindsight. Had you approached me prior to your blacklisting I am sure that my answers would have been different than they are now, but having spoken to the CLA about the situation I feel that I have a pretty good understanding of how things tick.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Look I will happily admit that the way in which I resigned was not the most respectful or proper way to leave. |
You may have been the best teacher in the world while you were teaching at that school, but unluckily for you the blacklisting is entirely based upon the way that you left the school. Had you done it any other way then you may have avoided the blacklisting, but that is of no consequence now.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| However, let's not forget as I told you before my employer was guilty of breaching the terms of my contract by not providing me with the minimum amount of hours that were stated on my contract. When I approached the supervisor she was not willing to properly listen to my concerns and the problems just continued. I just felt that if my contract clearly stated that I am guaranteed to receive a minimum amount of hours per week then I am entitled to receive those hours and the salary that I have been promised. |
Of course a contract goes two ways and as you suggest you are entitled to the benefits outlined in the contract. Unfortunately you took the law into your own hands when you broke the contract over this. For anyone else in a similar position I would really encourage the CLA first and outlining your concerns to them. They will either mediate with the employer to ensure that you receive your benefits, or they may agree that you can be released from your contract. Either way you will be protected from possible repercussions at the hands of the school.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| That is the law in my country and I believe it would also be the law in most other countries including Taiwan. |
I believe that the law here affords you this same protection, the only difference here is that you need to actively pursue these rights.
Since you raise the comparison of back home, let me ask you a question. Faced with this employment problem back home what would you have done:
a. Called upon the assistance of a government work authority to help you resolve the matter.
b. Breached your contract and done a runner without complying with the terms of your contract.
I assume that it is a. as that is the sensible option. I realize that at the time you made your decision you may not have known which government authority to turn to, but that does not take away from the fact that no matter whether you were here in Taiwan or back home in Australia, taking matters into your own hands is not the best option no matter how justified you may have felt.
So if you had have done what you did here back home what would have been the repercussions? I suspect that there are two likely repercussions. One is that you would either not have received a reference from that employer or a less than attractive one. Secondly, if there was any monies outstanding from the contract as I believe that there may be in your case then the company would quite possibly pursue through the small claims court. It is for these two reasons that most of us would never do what you did here back home. The relative anonymity that we foreigners are afforded in Taiwan gives a sense of security in some regards, and in fact encourages teachers to do a runner if they are not happy, and it seems to me that this is the reason of the teacher blacklist. It is the only way that such contempt for the system here can be dealt with.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| When I spoke to a CLA employee on the phone earlier this year when I first enquired about my situation she told me I was blacklisted because according to my former employer I went missing for 3 days. |
Yes that is my understanding of the only reason people are blacklisted.
This is in line with employment legislation which requires employers of foreign workers to notify the CLA immediately if a worker fails to show up for work for three consecutive days. This worker is then automatically deemed as being a run away. In order to avoid this situation we need to give our employers notice of our absence. So in your case the three day absence and the failure to give appropriate notice are two ways of saying the same thing. The three day thing is all about picking up on workers who abscond and this is followed up by workers who breach their contracts without the appropriate level of notice outlined under the law.
I suspect that in your case the fact that as you gave notice while on vacation and possibly on a vacation that was taken shortly after a pay day that the school knew exactly what you were doing. They may certainly have been very quick to have reported you the CLA (I am unsure of the exact time frames), but in light of what transpired it does seem that they were correct in that you do seem to have been planning to leave them without the appropriate amount of notice and not pay the penalty.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| In Australia if I am given a contract by an employer that states that I am guaranteed to receive $3000 per month but after working there for the first month they decide to give me only $2500 then I have a right to issue legal proceedings against that employer and I would no doubt be successful in such a case. I am fortunate in that I come from a family of lawyers so legal costs in this country are not really an issue for me. |
You have the same rights here but you chose not to exercise these rights. You chose to meet breach with breach, tit for tat. That is not legal procedure and I am sure that you lawyer family will confirm this.
If you chose not exercise these rights and follow appropriate procedures then why do you feel that the government and laws here should protect you now?
From a legal standpoint you need to prove your case and have a third party adjudicate this for you. This is what the CLA would have done had you approached them, and if as you claim your contract was clearly being breached then there seems no reason that you would not have received a fair judgement. I believe that there are past precedences that show this to be true.
I suspect that you had had enough of working at that school, and possibly wanted to move to a school that offered a higher wage, as you mention that the wage at that school was quite low. I suspect that you had no intention of working through the problems and saw a possible out. It is an out that many have taken before you, the old collect your pay and then take a vacation during the 'paid in arrears' period, and then just never return. Unfortunately it appears that you pissed the school off enough for them to have decided to ensure that the CLA knew about your actions.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I was successful not that long ago in a case against my former employer here in Melbourne...I resigned and then shortly after I issued legal proceedings against the company and soon after was paid several thousand dollars in back pay. |
So having had that experience where you followed the appropriate protocols and then were successful in action against an employer in breach, why did you choose to do a runner here in Taiwan and throw all protocols out the window.
I mean your complaint seems to be based upon utter disgust that your employer didn't abide by the terms of the employment contract - but then on the other hand you seem to be suggesting that it is ok for you to choose not to abide by those terms. Surely it is one or the other. If you really believe in doing what is right and the concept that people should honor their word and abide by contracts etc then surely you should have too. I am confident that had you done this then you would still be able to work here, and may well have been successful in action against your employer no matter how big they are. It has been done before with successful action against one of the big four buxibans.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| It is really quite amazing what can be achieved when you stand up for your rights. |
I agree and that is why I go to such lengths to promote these rights here on this forum.
I too have had wins in the past, but you have to keep your nose clean if you expect to receive a judgement in your favor.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Why should I have been expected to obey my schools contract when it is clear they had no respect for the contract they created?? They clearly breached the terms of the contract before I did. |
Of course you are expected to comply with any agreement that you enter into. If you feel that the other party is in breach and you cannot resolve the matter then you must refer the matter to a third party for mediation. This is standard legal protocol.
What is the alternative? A situation where either party can decide for themselves that they feel the other party is in breach and therefore walk away from the contract just as you did. What would stop a school from arbitrarily deciding that you were not meeting their 'smart casual' attire requirements and walk away from you by offering your position to another teacher without notice? An agreement goes both ways and is legally enforceable against the party who breaches. I am surprised that you are so unwilling to accept this simple concept, and the root of your current situation.
You breached and the school was able to show the CLA this. Had you shown the CLA the schools breach first then I am sure that the CLA would have acted. You didn't however, so neither did they.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Is it really fair to pay a 20,000NT fine under those circumstances??? I believe most people with half a brain would think not. |
From the above I take it that there was a breach penalty of NTD20,000 stated in the contract and you have refused to pay this. I suspect that this is one of the reasons that the school was so willing to provide the CLA with relevant information about you. I wonder whether it was worth it for you. It might have been a lot less trouble to have just bitten the bullet, paid the fine that you had agreed to and then moved onto a higher paying job elsewhere.
Who are you to make the determination as to whether or not you need to abide by certain terms of the contract? As I have stated above, if we allow the parties to contracts to decide arbitrarily that the other party is in breach then what would be the value of such contracts.
Legal protocol is to pursue breaches through mediation. You chose not to do this and in doing so you were relinquishing any rights that you may have had under that contract and the relevant contract legislation.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Why on earth in that situation should I have to pay 20,000NT to an employer that had already cheated me out of pay I was entitled to because they didn't pay the salary that was stipulated on the contract. That is completely absurd!!! |
Because you agreed to do so when you signed the contract. Whether or not the school breaches does not give you the permission nor right to breach yourself. This was your mistake and this is the reason that you are now blacklisted from ever teaching in Taiwan again. It is also the reason that you have no rights for appeal. Had you abided by your responsibilities under the contract, regardless of whether or not the school did, then you would have placed yourself well for action against the schools breaches.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| The school kept money that I was supposed to receive and then I am expected to pay them 20,000NT for the pleasure of being ripped-off. |
What monies did they keep and what were the terms of the contract?
I assume that the breach penalty was NTD20,000 from what you have stated above and that the school held some of your pay upon your breach to cover this penalty. Is that correct?
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Clark, how could you support a system like that?? |
For the record, I am against the fact that teacher blacklisting is permanent, but I do believe that the teacher blacklist serves a necessary purpose. If none of us ever ran away from jobs then there may be no need for this list, and in fact the very presence of this list is most likely entirely due to the actions of a few undesirables before us. I believe that teachers who do the right thing and abide by their contracts here in Taiwan have nothing to fear from a blacklist, and in the unlikely case of a malicious blacklisting I believe that the appeals process would aid in determining this.
I support a system that ensures that both parties to an employment contract abide by the terms of that contract, and a system that gives an aggrieved party the right to seek action against the party in breach. I don't see what your problem is with that?
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I am surprised sometimes how you can be so defensive of lawless employers in Taiwan. |
And I am surprised that you can call employers in Taiwan lawless when it is you who breached the contract and you who chose to ignore the written agreement that you entered into because after agreeing to it you didn't feel it just. I guarantee that you would never have done the same thing back home as you would have feared the implications of debt recovery and the fact that doing so may have affected your chances of securing future employment.
I really don't see how foreigners who act 'lawlessly' can really sit in judgement of the laws of Taiwan.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| They continue to take advantage of employees because they know that more often than not they will get away with it. |
Yes some employers do take advantage of their staff, but these problems are not restricted to foreign employees, nor are they restricted to Taiwan. You yourself have mentioned a case of an employer back home taking advantage of his workers so why heap all the poo on Taiwan?
I think that what I have quoted you as saying above could easily apply to some foreigners in Taiwan such as yourself:
| Quote: |
| Some foreign teachers continue to take advantage of employers because they know that more often than not they will get away with it. These foreign employees know that they can walk out on one job and then find a job down the street, or in the worst case scenario and do a runner to another country or back home. |
I don't believe that the above is true in more than a minority of cases, just as I believe that your statement applies to no more than a minority of employers.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| These problems exist in Taiwan because for too long authorities haven't done anything about it. They don't care about the little guy, it's not part of their culture. |
Let me ask you this, how did the CLA treat your enquiry when you contacted them after finding out that you had indeed been blacklisted? Did they hang up on you? Did they insist on speaking Chinese with you? Did they refuse to help you as you were a nobody? Did they ignore you?
The answer is no. They helped you as best as they could, but at the end of the day you were in breach of the law and the blacklisting stood. I understand that you are annoyed at that, but please don't try to suggest that the whole system failed you. You failed yourself but not exercising your rights, but instead by taking matters into your own hands.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I never expected it would either but I think I expected slightly better standards. |
You chose to break your contract. You chose to resign while on vacation. You chose to refuse to pay a monetary breach penalty that you had agreed to.
How can you expect better standards when the standards that you live by are so self-serving?
Sorry mate, I am sympathetic to your situation, and I am glad that I am not in your shoes, but I don't agree that you have been wronged. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frankie Knuckles
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Clark, you asked why I didn't exercise my rights in Taiwan as I did in Australia. Maybe because it is much easier for me to resolve these kinds of problems in Australia because my father is a lawyer. It is also my belief from past experience that employers will continue to take advantage of employees in situations similar to those I have experienced until they are threatened by legal action or bad publicity or a combination of both. They will only buckle when they are threatened with serious financial and legal obligations. In Taiwan I don't know any lawyers and I really don't think it would be worth it financially pursuing my former employer. It wasn't really a substantial amount of money that I was owed by my former employer in Taiwan so if you were to include legal costs then I don't think it would have been worth my time. In Taiwan if I was to formally complain to the CLA while I was still working at my former school I think it may have been an awkward situation. Do you really think it would be feasible for me to continue working at a company while I had them investigated through the CLA? I don't think I would feel very comfortable going to work everyday and seeing the managers after they were informed that I had made formal complaints about their management and about the school to a government authority. I felt that my only realistic option was to resign under those circumstances. Perhaps if visa requirements allow former ARC holders to remain in Taiwan for 30 days or so after my ARC was cancelled then perhaps I may have pursued it further. However, because there is no provision to stay in Taiwan after an ARC has been cancelled I wasn't really presented with many options.
In the case in Australia where I took action against a former employer it would also not have been feasible for me to continue working there after I had issued a summons against my boss and demanded he pay me the thousands that I was owed. Do you really think I could go to work after I had issued proceedings against him and just smile and say, "Good morning, How are you today?". He would have probably tried to kill me. I think it maybe possible to take action against some employers and continue working for them but I would think the vast majority of employees would choose to leave before taking action or at least after they were granted compensation. Why would any sane person wish to continue working for an employer that had already taken advantage of them and broken the law? How could you trust them not to do it again??
Clark, if they CLA are such a wonderful and reputable department as you believe, then why would they decide that permanent blacklisting is a suitable punishment for the actions I took? A permanent disqualification from working in country simply because the notice I gave my employer wasn't quite long enough. How can you respect a governing body that creates such a ridiculous draconian law such as that? Why did they suddenly bring back a form of punishment that had been supposedly outlawed in the past? Why did they increase the blacklisting time from 1 or 2 years to a permanent listing? Why wasn't anyone informed of this change in policy? I think it would be sensible for employers to explain to employees that is possible to be blacklisted if they do not give the required notice. If employers did not know about the blacklisting or refused to say anything then there is something very wrong with the system. Why is there a need for a blacklist in Taiwan? How many other countries have blacklists?? I don't recall there being any kind of blacklist in Japan when I was working there. Japanese laws were alot more flexible in that you were able to change jobs much more easily and there were no fines written into contracts. I seriously cannot imagine someone here in Australia signing a contract which enforced a fine for breach of contract. In fact I think it may even be illegal to do so. I seriously believe as I think most sensible people would also, that in order to retain good staff you must treat them with respect. Threatening employees with fines and stupid blacklists will not help any kind of business survive. It is commonsense that if an employee is paid what he or she is owed and he or she is given responsibility and trust by their employer more often than not the employee will return that respect and loyalty. Why is there no fines or blacklists in Japan? Maybe because Japanese employers realise that mutual respect and loyalty is much better for their business in the long run. I think they also realise that the average working conditions in most Japanese schools are much better than in Taiwan so there is no incentive for teachers to leave before the end of their contract. If Taiwanese schools were able to improve their working standards and outlaw there stupid fines and blacklists then I believe there would many more happy teachers and happier employers. It is commonsense that mutual respect between employers and employees improves productivity and is beneficial for any kind of business. If I respect my employer and I feel that I am valued by the business then I am going to work much harder than I would if there was no respect. I think that is totally natural behaviour but for some reason it is a bit hard a number of Taiwanese employers to comprehend. If there was no fine and they addressed my issue concerning hours and pay with respect then I would have had no reason take the action that I did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ki
Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 475
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know Clark,
Contracts in Taiwan are pretty much one-sided and useless as far as the foreign teacher is concerned. We are pretty much forced into signing a contract which often contains clauses which are sometimes illegal and sometimes merely morally questionable. I still don't believe that penalty breaches are morally acceptable. (I know we won't ever agree on this point.)
It can be quite scary if and when something goes wrong here. At the end of the day, schools will do whatever they want to get their way and don't expect to be given any notice when you are fired. It isn't always that bad but sometimes it is.
Personally, I have found the people at the CLA to be rather helpful and attentive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
clark.w.griswald
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Clark, you asked why I didn't exercise my rights in Taiwan as I did in Australia. Maybe because it is much easier for me to resolve these kinds of problems in Australia because my father is a lawyer. |
I can't say that you did anything wrong by choosing not to exercise your rights here, but I find it a bit odd that you would suggest that the system failed you if you never really applied to that system for advice, but instead took it upon yourself to act in the way that you chose.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| In Taiwan I don't know any lawyers and I really don't think it would be worth it financially pursuing my former employer. It wasn't really a substantial amount of money that I was owed by my former employer in Taiwan so if you were to include legal costs then I don't think it would have been worth my time. |
Just for clarification, my understanding is that your employer doesn't actually you money, and that if anything you actualy owe them money.
My understanding is that there was a breach penalty stated in the contract, that your employer withheld some salary toward this after you left to cover part of this penalty, and that there is still some of this penalty owing to the school but that you have refused to pay this. Is that incorrect?
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| In Taiwan if I was to formally complain to the CLA while I was still working at my former school I think it may have been an awkward situation. Do you really think it would be feasible for me to continue working at a company while I had them investigated through the CLA? |
I am not trying to tell you what you should or shouldn't do. That is up to you to decide. I am merely trying to explain that while you feel hard done by, as far as I can tell your treatment has been reasonable considering you failed to comply with the laws here, and that your blacklisting seems to me to be legitimate.
Sure, it is entirely possible that involving the CLA could cause friction and therefore it should only be used as a last resort. In your case it could have been the step just prior to you handing in your resignation. The purpose is to get you released from your contract if your school has not been complying.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I felt that my only realistic option was to resign under those circumstances. |
As is your right and no one is suggesting otherwise. If however you choose to break your contract, and you choose not to involve the CLA, then you need to comply with the Employment law as far as giving notice, and with Contract law in as far as complying with any penalty terms stated under your contract. You cannot just decide to leave and expect the laws to be waived.
If you feel that you have justification for the laws to be waved then you need to apply for official permission for this, and this would likely come from the CLA. If successful you could likely be released from your contract free of any penalty. You could either do this before or after leaving the school and/or paying the penalty.
So you took one option but it was not the only option available to you.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Perhaps if visa requirements allow former ARC holders to remain in Taiwan for 30 days or so after my ARC was cancelled then perhaps I may have pursued it further. However, because there is no provision to stay in Taiwan after an ARC has been cancelled I wasn't really presented with many options. |
Yes there is. If you have a case under appeal then you can receive permission from the CLA and the FAP for a visa extension to remain in the country until the appeal has been heard. This has happened before for other foreigners.
You would have to issue a complaint against your employer to receive this extension and you couldn't just get one to remain here until you find a new job. You can however leave, get a new visa, and come back again.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| In the case in Australia where I took action against a former employer it would also not have been feasible for me to continue working there after I had issued a summons against my boss and demanded he pay me the thousands that I was owed. Do you really think I could go to work after I had issued proceedings against him |
I know that it is possible tocontinue to work after such a complaint, my sister did it once, but it is obviouslynot desirable. The choice is yours however.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Clark, if they CLA are such a wonderful and reputable department as you believe, then why would they decide that permanent blacklisting is a suitable punishment for the actions I took? |
I don't know that I would agree that they are that good, but I certainly don't have any reason to believe that they are bad either. They seem pretty competent to me.
I am sure that it was decided by the central government that blacklisting should be permanent, not by the CLA staff.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| A permanent disqualification from working in country simply because the notice I gave my employer wasn't quite long enough. |
You were blacklisted as you failed to abide by this countries laws in regards to leaving your employer. You can argue the length of the notice and the unfairness of it all, but that doesn't change the facts.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Why did they suddenly bring back a form of punishment that had been supposedly outlawed in the past? |
When has teacher blacklisting ever been outlawed?
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Why did they increase the blacklisting time from 1 or 2 years to a permanent listing? |
They didn't. It was the MOE that enforced blacklistings of years, not the CLA. Two different departments. It would seem that the permanent blacklists have been in force since the CLA took over full control of such affairs.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Why wasn't anyone informed of this change in policy? |
Fair question and a fair criticism. I agree that the CLA would have benefited from making us all aware about the blacklisting process so that we could all make informed decisions. I guess that they felt that any foreigner absconding from their employer probably didn't deserve to be warned, but it would have proved helpful for people such as yourself.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I think it would be sensible for employers to explain to employees that is possible to be blacklisted if they do not give the required notice. If employers did not know about the blacklisting or refused to say anything then there is something very wrong with the system. |
I don't agree that it is the employers responsibility to do so. They do not blacklist us, the government does. It is therefore the governments responsibility. I can imagine that if employers mentioned blacklisting then it would be misconstrued as being a threat of blacklisting.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Why is there a need for a blacklist in Taiwan? |
To deal with foreigners who enter into work agreements here and then breach these without notice. If no one did that then there would probably be no need for blacklists.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| How many other countries have blacklists?? |
I have no idea and I really don't care. The fact is that Taiwan has one and if you work in Taiwan it is relevant to you. It is there for a reason, and as far as I can tell some people warrant being blacklisted.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I don't recall there being any kind of blacklist in Japan when I was working there. Japanese laws were alot more flexible in that you were able to change jobs much more easily and there were no fines written into contracts. |
So go work in Japan. I mean seriously what relevance is the Japan situation to Taiwan.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I seriously cannot imagine someone here in Australia signing a contract which enforced a fine for breach of contract. |
You are kidding yourself if you believe that there would be no repercussions to someone resigning from a job in Australia without giving the relevant notice. The situations in both countries are very different and cannot really be compared. If employers in Taiwan find that they need to levy breach fines to deal with the problem of runaway foreigners then so be it. If you know about these fines and agree to the contract then you are agreeing to their implementation. If you don't agree with them then you have no place signing the contract in the first place.
In fact the seeking of penalties due to contract breach is a standard and legal practice in many countries of the world. Just look at what happens if you break a tenancy agreement in Australia. You lose all or part of your bond.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I seriously believe as I think most sensible people would also, that in order to retain good staff you must treat them with respect. Threatening employees with fines and stupid blacklists will not help any kind of business survive. |
Unfortunately not all foreign teachers here in Taiwan fall into the category of good and responsible staff. I think many of them do, but not all. As always it is for the minority that the majority are inconvenienced. At the end of the day though you only need to pay a penalty if your breach. Most contracts here are for one year. If you don't want to pay the penalty then stay for the year. If you don't want to stay for the year then pay the penalty.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| If Taiwanese schools were able to improve their working standards and outlaw there stupid fines and blacklists then I believe there would many more happy teachers and happier employers. |
In theory you may think that this is true but in practice it isn't. It is nothing to do with pay and conditions but everything to do with responsiblity and motivation. This is clear. Penalties don't make or stop people from abiding by contracts, they can merely discourage them from just up and disappearing. If a person is truly motivated to leave then they will regardless. Even people with what many of us would consider fantastic positions leave from time to time and their reasons for doing so are varied. They are not all due to mistreatment and poor pay.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| If I respect my employer and I feel that I am valued by the business then I am going to work much harder than I would if there was no respect. |
Respect goes two ways. If you respected your employer then you likely would have given them your best, and if they respected you then they would likely have given you their best. At least this has been my experience.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| If there was no fine and they addressed my issue concerning hours and pay with respect then I would have had no reason take the action that I did. |
If you didn't take the action that you did then they wouldnt have taken the action that they did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frankie Knuckles
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Clark,
I believe I still exercised my rights to a reasonable extent in Taiwan through my contact with the CLA and my former employer. I made contact with the CLA on a number of occasions both over the phone and through email. I also sent them documents which proved I did not go missing for three days. I sent numerous emails to my former employer and feltt the time that perhaps we could have sorted out the problem. In the end I would have paid a fine if they had asked but they never did. I was ready to kiss and make up but I think I must have hurt their feelings too much. I didn't have any intentions of working in Taiwan again anyway but I still don't like to have a 'record' in any country. If I had plans to stay in Taiwan and continue working there I would have certainly pursued the matter much further. I had evidence of my employer breaking my contract which I thought I could have used if I wanted to take the matter further but the CLA wasn't interested in seeing it. They just wanted to see a copy of the resignation letter I sent to my former employer which proved I hadn't gone missing for 3 days and that my former employer was well aware of my departure.
If you were to go by the terms of my contract then I would say that they owe me a few thousand NT. I worked for about a week without pay before I left which they obviously kept and then if you were to add up the hours I should have been paid considering my contract stated I was to receive a minimum amount of hours, I am owed a few thousand. However, I am not interested in getting any money back but I believe I have paid my 20,000NT fine already if you add up the 7days without pay plus the money I should have received according to the contract. Therefore, I do not owe anything to my former employer.
Teacher blacklisting may never have been outlawed but when I first emailed you when I had found out about the blacklisitng you said that you thought blacklisitng was a thing of the past. Numerous other posters on this site and on forumosa also thought at that time blacklisting was no longer occuring.
Yes, I know that MOE used to be in charge of the blacklisting and that they are two different departments. However, the questions remains why did the CLA deem it fair to increase an original punishment or suspension of work rights from 1 to 2 years to a ridiculous life sentence. Where is the logic I ask? It is like suddenly changing a sentence from a community based order to the death penalty. I think if there is any justification for a teacher blacklist at all then it should be for those teachers that have committed serious crimes ie. things like hitting students, stealing, drug dealing, rape, kidnapping, extortion, fraud, grevious bodily harm etc. I realise that people that may have committed some of these crimes would be ineligible to work in Taiwan anyway but there are a few that may not affect their work eligibility.
No I am certainly not kidding myself that the repercussions of resigning from a job in Australia are often negligable. In my personal experience and the experience of my friends and colleagues the laws in regards to giving notice in Australia are much more relaxed. I know when I was at bit younger doing my undergraduate degree I had several part-time jobs and sometimes would only give a weeks notice and I never had any problems. I also worked full-time for a property firm and left without giving the required notice and there were no repercussions. What do you think a company will do in such a case? It really isn't worth their time pursuing unless the employees sudden departure has really caused alot of problems. However, I am certainly not saying that workers should not respect their employers and just leave when it suits them. I have given the required notice in almost all of my previous jobs because I know that it is the right thing to do in almost all circumstances.
You said that penalties don't stop people from breaking contracts which is correct but why that schools bother with it. I think they can just see another easy way to make some money off their employees. Of course not everyone leaves a job due to mistreatment or poor pay but I would think that alot of teachers in Taiwan leave because there initial expectations and false promises in reference to pay and working conditions were not met. Motivation is definitely affected by pay and working conditions. How can you say that motivation is somehow not reflected by a persons pay and working conditions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
clark.w.griswald
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I made contact with the CLA on a number of occasions both over the phone and through email. |
From my understanding of your situation you only made contact with the CLA after finding out that you had been blacklisted, and in an effort to have that blacklisting overturned.
With the benefit of hindsight it would seem that had you approached them about your problems with your employer before you got blacklisted then you may well have been able to have resolved many of the problems or possibly been released.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| In the end I would have paid a fine if they had asked but they never did. |
If a fine was stated in your contract for breach, and you agreed to it, and then you breached, you can be pretty sure that the school was expecting the money to be paid.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I had evidence of my employer breaking my contract which I thought I could have used if I wanted to take the matter further but the CLA wasn't interested in seeing it. They just wanted to see a copy of the resignation letter I sent to my former employer which proved I hadn't gone missing for 3 days and that my former employer was well aware of my departure. |
That seems logical to me. You ended that contract by leaving, and your only reason for contacting the CLA was to remove your blacklisting. At that stage of the game there was surely very little that the CLA could have done to have helped you. At that stage the blacklisting was the main issue.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| If you were to go by the terms of my contract then I would say that they owe me a few thousand NT. I worked for about a week without pay before I left which they obviously kept and then if you were to add up the hours I should have been paid considering my contract stated I was to receive a minimum amount of hours, I am owed a few thousand. However, I am not interested in getting any money back but I believe I have paid my 20,000NT fine already if you add up the 7days without pay plus the money I should have received according to the contract. Therefore, I do not owe anything to my former employer. |
For someone who comes from a background of lawyers you certainly have an odd way of looking at such matters. You cannot just decide this for yourself and then decide that they have already been paid. You need to seek a judgement from a third party that agrees that the monies you believe were promised were indeed due and owing. Therefore I would have to disagree with you and suggest that you owe the school the penalty outlined in the contract, minus any money that they withheld from you. You cannot arbitrarily decide to include all sorts of incidentals in an effort to reduce your debt.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Teacher blacklisting may never have been outlawed but when I first emailed you when I had found out about the blacklisitng you said that you thought blacklisitng was a thing of the past. Numerous other posters on this site and on forumosa also thought at that time blacklisting was no longer occuring. |
That is correct and I have stated as much on a number of occasions. All of us old timers were very surprised to here that the blacklisting was still in effect when we all believed that it had disappeared with the MOE.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| However, the questions remains why did the CLA deem it fair to increase an original punishment or suspension of work rights from 1 to 2 years to a ridiculous life sentence. Where is the logic I ask? |
I don't believe that this is the case.
Blacklisting has always been exercised by the CLA against blue collar foreign workers. The CLA has always been in sole control of the management of blue collar worker affairs. Therefore the CLA has always participated in the blacklisting of blue collar workers and to my knowledge blacklisting has always been permanent for such workers who abscond from their legal employers.
Upon taking over full control of foreign teacher affairs, the CLA obviously decided to group us in with the rest of the foreign workers that they manage, and therefore we also now face permanent blacklisting for absconding without notice from our legal employers.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| I think if there is any justification for a teacher blacklist at all then it should be for those teachers that have committed serious crimes ie. things like hitting students, stealing, drug dealing, rape, kidnapping, extortion, fraud, grevious bodily harm etc. |
I am pretty sure that any foreigner found guilty of such crimes in Taiwan would indeed be blacklisted. Not from obtaining a work permit as you have been, but from obtaining a visa to come here in the first place. So best rest assured that these sorts of people are not likely to be welcomed to the country again.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| No I am certainly not kidding myself that the repercussions of resigning from a job in Australia are often negligable...I also worked full-time for a property firm and left without giving the required notice and there were no repercussions. What do you think a company will do in such a case? |
Well it would seem to me that most quality employers in Australia would check references from previous employers. Therefore the repercussion of doing a runner from an employer in Australia or failing to pay them monies that were legally owing to them would be that you would need to hide that employment from future employers or hope to god that the new employer didn't ring to check your references. Back home the new employer is highly likely to want to know what you were doing prior to applying for work with them. In fact work history is extremely important for work back home. In Taiwan this is less likely and much easier to hide.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Of course not everyone leaves a job due to mistreatment or poor pay but I would think that alot of teachers in Taiwan leave because there initial expectations and false promises in reference to pay and working conditions were not met. |
Of course some people leave positions due to legitimate concerns, but there are legitimate ways for these people to leave these positions.
I think that it is a little naieve to suggest that it is often the employers fault that the teacher wants to leave. More often than not teachers want to breach for their own selfish reasons - higher pay elsewhere, more hours, better hours, more interesting job, change of scenery, moving house, or returning home. People who have legitimate reasons for leaving their employer tend to give the appropriate notice in my experience as they know that they have the law on their side. It is the people wth less legitimate reasons for leaving who tend to do runners as they themselves know that they don't really have a legitimate reason for breaking the contract.
| Frankie Knuckles wrote: |
| Motivation is definitely affected by pay and working conditions. How can you say that motivation is somehow not reflected by a persons pay and working conditions? |
If you are motivated by pay rates then why sign an agreement for a pay rate that you later consider inadequate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frankie Knuckles
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Clark,
I never considered my rate of pay per hour to be less than adequate. The hourly rate I was receiving was fine but I wasn't given the minimum amount of hours that was stated on my contract. Therefore, my monthly salary was well below what was promised and what I expected to be paid. I thought you understood this before. I was never complaining about the rate per hour. I was complaining that I didn't receive enough hours so therefore my total monthly salary was too low. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
clark.w.griswald
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 2056
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry for misunderstanding that.  Appreciate the correction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ramakentesh
Joined: 05 Mar 2005
Posts: 145
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree whole-heartedly with Ki. |
|
| 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
