|
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 |
Kipling
Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 371
Location: ...Ah Mrs K peel me a grape!!!....and have one yourself!!!!
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 09, 2013 2:47 pm Post subject: Steady as she goes |
 |
|
Some points regarding the new deal with IELTS
1. The BC are quite specific that you are NOT employed by them
2. The BC use illegal workers on tourist, business and study visas
who are never asked if they are legal.
3. Even when your employer says you are free to work elsewhere on their
Z visa it is still illegal (arrests were made in Shenyang I believe)
4. The new rates will represent around a 6% cut per candidate examined
and 20% cut to subsistence rates after tax.
If you are NOT employed by a company then what right have they to keep YOUR taxes. Some examiners are not happy with that. Another is the threat of back taxes and for some that might be considerable.
Another issue which someone has mentioned is that those who work for the BC illegally on non Z visas are not required to have a Criminal Record Check (CRC) and many candidates are legally classed as minors. The BC made all the examiners conduct (and sign ONLINE !!!) a child protection course but none of the examiners are asked about their background so they may be employing more than just 'interesting' characters; nobody knows but they will have passed and signed the online course !
If you want to be an examiner for the BC now is the time to apply as they will loosen their recruitment requirements until they have replaced those who will not examine.
Be aware that it can be very tedious. If you want to earn some extra money in your own locale it can be ideal but less so if you travel.
On the whole examiners are nice people and do the job professionally.
Oddballs are found everywhere and this job is no different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NoBillyNO
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The BC is treating the examiners as contract employees who are already legally employable in China. |
Consultancies in china need to be set up as a business as the Labor Department does not recognize the foreign employee as a stand alone consultant.
| Quote: |
| I know that a number of examiners claim that they have consultancies etc set up and pay tax through those. Basically I don't believe most of the people who say that are telling the truth. From those for who it is true, I'd love to hear how having a WFOE (e.g. a consultancy) is somehow incompatible with being a contract employee for the BC. Does the visa not allow it? |
They would in fact need to set up a WFOE or a joint company to make the consultancy legal. Then the company should contract with the BC, issued a receipt and the consultancy would pay tax. They would need a physical address (not a residence) and have yearly inspections.
Isn't the BC a Chinese company in China? Is it registered as a charity in England? Were they accused of violating Russian tax regulations before? In my opinion, the BC will sell itself to the highest bidder and leave it's consultants holding the bag.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawadywady
Joined: 13 Mar 2013
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
herein lies the rub - for every examiner such as El Macho who confidently asserts people on Z visas are allowed to do IELTS, 2 or 3 others (like Kipling) will say it is forbidden.
the BC appears in no rush to clarify. either they don't know or they don't want to put anything in writing that might get them in trouble later.
meanwhile they happily use people on tourist/business visas.
i think Billy sums it up nicely - the BC is leaving it's consultants to 'hold the bag'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El Macho
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 200
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:26 am Post subject: Re: Steady as she goes |
|
|
| Kipling wrote: |
| 1. The BC are quite specific that you are NOT employed by them |
This isn't entirely accurate. In the ITE (at least in the older version; I haven't signed the new one) they say you are not being offered "permanent employment" (e.g. full-time employment that would require them to offer you a Z-visa and Residence Permit). Regardless, as work is defined by Chinese law (see below), what we do for the BC would be considered work and would thus compel taxation.
| Quote: |
| 3. Even when your employer says you are free to work elsewhere on their Z visa it is still illegal (arrests were made in Shenyang I believe) |
Please post the relevant law. I can't find anything about it one way or another and would be interested to know if this is actually the case, or if it's just conjecture. Given that the bulk of examiners that have Z visas work as teachers, it would seem a stretch to say that examining work would be 'beyond the scope' of the work for which the visa was granted.
Similarly, post some proof about the arrests in Shenyang so we can find out about the context. Rumor doesn't help anything.
Here's what an immigration attorney has to say about what constitutes illegal work in China:
| Quote: |
11. How is unauthorized employment defined?
The new law defines behavior that “shall” be deemed “unlawful employment” (非法就业):
First, “work” (工作) in China without obtaining an employment license or work-type residence permit is illegal. (EEAL, art. 43(1))
Second, “work in China beyond the scope prescribed in the work permit” is illegal. (EEAL, art. 43(2)). The draft State Council regulations clarified that this includes working at a different work unit or outside of the geographic area to which one’s work permit is restricted. (Draft State Council regs, art. 40). But the final regulations omitted any definition of the scope of the work permit. Perhaps the draft provision was deleted because it made it difficult for employers to comply for employees who work short-term at remote or multiple locations.
Third, it’s illegal for foreign students to work without authorization or beyond the scope authorized. (EEAL, art. 43(3).) A student with a residence certificate who needs to take a part-time job or internship off campus shall obtain approval from the school, then apply to the exit-entry administration authorities for a notation to the residence certificate showing the part-time job or the location and period of internship off campus. (EEAL, art. 42). The law delegates to the Ministry of Education the obligation to establish a framework for foreign students to obtain work authorization. (EEAL, art. 42.) Presumably, that framework will cover any rules related to on-campus employment.
An underlying issue is how “work” should be defined. Under the draft State Council regulations, a labor relationship can be found to exist without a written labor contract, so long as there is a “de facto labor relationship with a work unit.” (Art. 41). The final State Council Regulations omit this provision. But the Labor Contract Law makes the same point. (Arts. 11, 14, 82). So, for example, merely labeling the foreign national an “independent contractor” or a “freelancer” or an “intern” will not allow an employer to escape liability for unauthorized employment where the facts establish that there is a labor relationship. Similarly, a 1994 government notice warned against illegal employment disguised as “exchange” or “training.”
Nor can foreign nationals escape liability for unauthorized employment by claiming they are self-employed in China. Chinese law recognizes something similar to self-employment, namely, the individual industrial and commercial enterprise (IICE or 工商个体户). A Chinese citizen may register an IICE. (General Principles of Civil Law, art. 26, adopted by the NPC and promulgated by the President on Apr. 12, 1986; Regulations on Individual Businesses, art. 2, adopted by the State Council on Mar. 30, 2011). Hong Hong and Macao residents who are Chinese citizens, as well as Taiwan residents, may also register an IICE. (Id., art. 27). However, foreign nationals do not have this right.
In addition, a foreigner with a foreign labor contract and foreign source of remuneration will count as “working” in China if engaged in work-like activities for 3 months or more. According to a Labor Department order:
| Quote: |
For foreigners working (工作) in China, if the labor contract is concluded with a domestic work unit (in its legal place), regardless of how long the work in China will be, it will be considered employment (就业) in China. If the labor contract is concluded with a legal entity abroad, the source of compensation is abroad, and the work in China is for three months or more (not including foreign engineers and technicians and experts implementing a technology transfer agreement), it is considered employment in China, in which case an employment license should be applied for at the Labor Department’s license-issuing authority according to the Regulations, so a work visa should be applied for, as well as a work permit and residence permit.
|
It’s unclear whether the Labor Department order will be modified in light of the new law, but so far it remains in effect. |
I think the parts I've bolded are relevant to this discussion.
First, at least in the above, there is no definitive statement about working for another danwei.
Second, Chinese law defines "work" as having a labour relationship, which examiners certainly do have with the BC. I think the BC's dodge about "permanent employment" in the ITE is their way of avoiding sponsoring visas, not somehow attempting to claim that examiners aren't working for them at all. Even if it were the case that the BC were trying to claim that examiners aren't working for them, what we do counts as work as defined by Chinese law. Thus, it makes sense for tax to be paid through the BC to the local government.
Third, you can't work if you're on a tourist visa, even if the employer tries to classify you as not an employee.
Fourth, foreigners can't claim to be self-employed in China.
I think these three points put to rest most of the concerns voiced by examiners. The question of whatever or not, as I believe to be the case, you can work for other employers if your "work unit" allows you to is left rather unresolved in the above. I'd love to see evidence (not anecdote) to resolve the question one way or another.
| Kipling wrote: |
| The new rates will represent around a 6% cut per candidate examined and 20% cut to subsistence rates after tax. |
This is the biggest problem, as far as I'm concerned. As we've all said above, examining was barely worth doing before once you took travel time into consideration – now with a pay cut I don't know if I'd want to do it with any regularity even if I didn't have to travel.
The greatest value from being an IELTS examiner may be the ability to charge more for your own teaching or tutoring.
| shawadywady wrote: |
| the BC appears in no rush to clarify. either they don't know or they don't want to put anything in writing that might get them in trouble later. |
A very astute observation, and one that potential examiners might want to take into consideration when deciding whether or not to work for the BC.
| Quote: |
meanwhile they happily use people on tourist/business visas.
i think Billy sums it up nicely - the BC is leaving it's consultants to 'hold the bag'. |
This clearly is a problem and wrong on the part ofthe BC…and I think most people would agree with you that the BC would happily cut ties and screw over the folks working illegally if things got hot. But isn't that a risk that you take when you work illegally?
That being said, for those examiners who are here legally and for whatever reason (insanity?) want to continue examining despite the pay cut that the tax will cause, I think the tax scheme isn't anything to worry about. It won't affect them, and examining for the BC doesn't contradict the terms of their legal work status.
Again, if there's any proof (China law) to the contrary, let's make it public. I certainly don't mind being wrong.
Edit: added a missing 'that' in the first paragraph.
Last edited by El Macho on Tue Dec 10, 2013 9:24 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NoBillyNO
Joined: 11 Jun 2012
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Please post the relevant law. |
You would need to check the labor law, but in most countries visas are tied to employment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theoriginalprankster
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 895
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting - an anonymous caller phoned the police in Guangdong to report that there were illegal workers at a test venue.
The entire weekend was cancelled (loss of money, face, credibility)
BC play their games, retaliation rears its head.
Dangerous game BC has decided to play..
EDIT: and as of today all BC examiners on tourist, business and spousal visas are SOL - no more work for them till BC has sorted out this mess they created. Or that may potentially be a permanent thing.
Those on work visas (with uni's, schools etc.) are good to examine, but for how much longer who knows.
BC screwed up good and proper on this one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikeologist
Joined: 07 Sep 2009
Posts: 600
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What does SOL stand for? (S@@@ out of luck?) Is this just in your region, or across China? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theoriginalprankster
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 895
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vikeologist wrote: |
| What does SOL stand for? (S@@@ out of luck?) Is this just in your region, or across China? |
Yes. SOL is just that.
My region for sure, not sure about the other three.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Volver
Joined: 27 Sep 2013
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So here is the latest as of a few hours ago.
First, everyone gets an e-mail stating the test in ZZ has been canceled but with no explanation. Then I get a phone call from the BC asking about my visa. I tell them it is a Z and they say go ahead and report for work on Saturday. They can't tell me what the exact hours are but not to worry as they will cover any extra train fares. Hmmm. Turns out that we now have another 2+ hours tacked onto our Saturday schedule which means we won't even get to the hotel until around 9 PM. The only place open for dinner at that hour is the 7-11 clone across the street with their delicious selection of instant noodles. We also get a survey asking about our availability for the rest of the month. These morons want us to work 12 hours on Saturday and Sunday with no allowance for travel time Saturday morning or Sunday evening.
It looks like the worst fears of the non-Z visa holders are coming true. They have been left hanging, on virtually no notice, through no fault of their own and it is clear the BC will do this to anyone if it suits them. Screw them. They are no better than the majority of employers in this country. A better example of both ineptitude (BC) and SOL (examiners) does not exist.
V |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
choudoufu
Joined: 25 May 2010
Posts: 3325
Location: Mao-berry, PRC
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Volver wrote: |
| It looks like the worst fears of the non-Z visa holders are coming true. They have been left hanging, on virtually no notice, through no fault of their own and it is clear....V |
i'm confused. you mean tourist visas?
non-z-visa holders are not eligible to work in china, right?
tourist visa holders can't work at all.
business visa holders can't get paid by a chinese entity.
student visa holders likely wouldn't quilify to test.
tax and labor laws are going to be enforced. illegal workers are
getting booted. where does the 'no fault of their own' part come in? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikeologist
Joined: 07 Sep 2009
Posts: 600
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
It seems that I'm getting most of my information from this thread, and given the utter nonsense that appeared earlier in it, that isn't very reassuring.
On the whole I've always had a fairly high opinion of the BC. (You can call them incompetent and criticise them all you want, but I'm at a Chinese university, and it would be pretty damn hard for the BC not to shine as an exemplar of professional practice compared to what I have to put up with during the week).
From a selfish point of view of course, this is great, at the moment. More work for me, but essentially the BC staked their reputation with examiners on the idea that doing this tax thing would solve a range of potential problems, and it seems that isn't true. (Massive understatement).
I don't feel that I have a lot at stake, but for a lot of people, this is their livelihood. Also, the whole reason I have a residence permit is because I have an employer. Maybe I get more money from the BC, but if problems with travelling, changing train tickets, 12 hour days, trouble with the Police etc threaten to cause problems for my primary employer or disrupt my being able to properly do my main job, then that would be problematic.
I hope that examiners aren't getting caught in the crossfire of other examiners' beef with the BC. I think that would be........regrettable.
Last edited by vikeologist on Thu Dec 12, 2013 8:54 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kipling
Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 371
Location: ...Ah Mrs K peel me a grape!!!....and have one yourself!!!!
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:54 am Post subject: What you don't know cane really hurt you.............. |
|
|
Well, if the BC are asking if you have an appropriate work visa it means that they did not know and in the past cared little. So only those with appropriate visas will be able to work which will result in quite a substantial reduction in examiners and the BC are now urgently asking for examiner trainers (freelance of course). Employers don't always give their staff permission to do IELTS, Nottingham Ningbo banned it altogether and some teachers left. I don't blame them as they provide the visa and I also heard some teachers were taking sickies on a Monday to mark scripts or getting back from a test center late and missing classes.
At any rate the BC want their cake and eat it.......using other company's workers and contributing nothing to those companies for visas or employment contracts. If you think what the BC pay is good then you need to consider what they charge for the test and what you receive.........the profit is quite substantial.
Also many examiners with the appropriate visa are NOT happy with tax being withheld and not being legally employed or enjoying any associated rights and benefits that goes along with that.
The BC will rearrange their schedules and try to recruit as many examiners as possible. Entry requirements will lower I should imagine.
| Quote: |
| I hope that examiners aren't getting caught in the crossfire of other examiners' beef with the BC. I think that would be........regrettable. |
Not sure what you mean by that?
The BC have handled this very badly............a swot/pest analysis before making any decisions and openness with examiners might have helped.
Still, more relaxing weekends to enjoy. There's more to life than making the BC rich.
Last edited by Kipling on Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kipling
Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 371
Location: ...Ah Mrs K peel me a grape!!!....and have one yourself!!!!
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:28 am Post subject: What you don't know cane really hurt you.............. |
|
|
Ooops Double Post 
Last edited by Kipling on Thu Dec 12, 2013 10:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lummerlaoshi
Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Location: Kunming, China
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is the only information the internet I've seen regards to the BC fiasco. From my own information network, the Z-visa requirements is for all IELTS test centres in China, though possibly only temporarily.
I think Volver's comment about other examiners being refused work "through no fault of their own" means that they were given no prior warning of the change and that their visa status was not requested by the BC previously. True enough, people shouldn't be working without a proper visa, there are sooo many laws that are on the books but are not followed in China that it is hard to fault them.
From my understanding, vikeologist's comment about being caught in between may refer to ex-examiners or present examiners using the current situation to get revenge on the BC at the expense of current examiners and BC staff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kipling
Joined: 13 Mar 2009
Posts: 371
Location: ...Ah Mrs K peel me a grape!!!....and have one yourself!!!!
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:16 am Post subject: Visa Las Vegas, Visa Visa, Visaaaaaaaa...................... |
|
|
Your visa is very much asked for now as you will not be allowed to test without showing the visa in your passport. I think this must be a response to the PSB getting tipped off and raiding centres for illegal workers. So quite a few regular examiners will be missing. I imagine they saw this coming and will cut their cloth accordingly, You can't blame the Chinese authorities for cracking down on illegal workers and wanting to collect taxes (if only the UK government would do that too) but the BC have made a pigs ear of everything. In 2007/8 they refused steadfastly to recognize that examiners were employed by them (still do) because it would mean they would have to withhold taxes and give examiners employment rights. They absolutely maintained that freelance examiners were responsible for their OWN taxes knowing full well that most would not probably pay them. They then went on a recruiting drive for any eligible examiner regardless of their legal or rather non legal status. All of that was a response to the Russian government's crackdown on the BC.
You as an examiner or an individual matter little when it comes to the goals of the the BC and you can be dispensed with accordingly. The BC is a UK publicly financed (90 million per year) Charity (but part of the Foreign Office) All charities must have open, transparent accounts and finances.
Ask yourself whether the finances and the accounts of the BC in China are open to scrutiny and draw your own conclusion.
The BC will embark on a major recruitment drive and those with a Z visa and minimum requirements will be eligible to work for them. Most will approach it as an opportunity to greatly supplement their salaries or pay for holidays or just to save. You should approach it as such and be under no illusion about your role, status or meaning for the BC. |
|
| 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
