Job Discussion Forums

[tofuman]

Roger, You did an excellent job of editing my post to misrepresent my position.

I did not say that someone with a high school education is qualified to teach medicine. If you can read, which I'm sure you can, there is no satisfactory reason that you should have to ask me what I'm saying. I said that a person from a large family without a bachelor's degree could be better qualified to teach small children than someone with a degree.

Doc, as far as legality goes, you lack the authority to be lording it over other people as to what is legal for them to do. What you did was not legal either, yet you seem none the worse for it. I generally appreciate your remarks, but if you want to ascend the throne of judgment, you had better be beyond reproach yourself.

To suggest that a qualified person without a bachelor's degree is here illegally, even though he or she possesses all documents to the contrary, and has been honest in dealing with any and all officials, is nothing more than self-righteous bluster.

For the record, I do believe that people should be honest in representing themselves to a potential employer. If the PSB of a particular province choose to issue the proper documents to someone who "should" have a bachelor's degree, but does not and is otherwise qualified for a position, then that is the responsibility of the local PSB. They can make a decision in counsel with local school officials to determine how best the intent of the FT regulations can be fulfilled. As for the possibility of lying school officials misrepresenting someone's qualifications to the PSB, that is, at present, only speculation. If discovered, the individual in question should resolve it to the satisfaction of their own conscience.

Intent is the key here. What is the intent of the regulation in question? Should someone a P.E. class short of a degree in linguistics be denied a FT position while the person with a bachelor's in mechanical arts is warmly welcomed?

While the PSB may not be in a position to review individual qualifications, the employing body is. Let them decide what best serves their needs and work it out with the PSB.

[Talkdoc]

[Talkdoc]

In fact Tofuman, I have a sure-fire method for resolving this foolish and destructive argument once and for all (and I believe it needs to be resolved because if it isn't, it will simply reemerge again within two weeks).

Either post or PM me with the particular province you are currently working in. I will take personal responsibility for contacting the director of the provincial FAO and clarifying the matter definitively. Specifically, I will ask the director if the PSB in his/her province is empowered to (and in fact does) make case-by-case exceptions to the degree requirement (as you contend).

I will post the findings of that inquiry on this thread. If I am wrong, I will post a formal correction and an apology to you personally (you can even write it, if you like). Conversely, if you are wrong, you will post a formal retraction (and I don't need an apology).

I can�t speak for anyone else but I am personally going to treat your failure to respond to this challenge as an implicit retraction of your contention that the PSB in your province is empowered to countermand Beijing regarding foreign expert status by making case-by-case exceptions regarding the issuance of a Z-Visa for those not currently in possession of a bachelor's degree, as a matter of law or administrative policy.

Fair enough?

Doc

[tofuman]

Doc You interpret "should" as "minimum." I interpret it as "probably" as in the qualified candidate will probably have a bachelor's degree. Since the PSB of the province in which I reside DO or did issue residence permits, FE certificates, etc. to individuals without bachelor's degrees, your argument is without merit. The PSB issue the paper work, not you. Furthermore, the Chinese embassy issued a Visa Z to at least one candidate under the same circumstances. That individual is in China legally, as a foreign expert, even though that reality does not fit your constricted paradigm.

As for the other elements of the discussion, I believe that FTs should be here legally with a Visa Z and other appropriate documentation. If they are able to obtain that without a bachelor's degree or subterfuge, why should they be deprived of one? Obviously your educational qualifications did not protect you when you arrived here. Did you knowingly participate in a scheme construed by unethical or dishonest people? If you came here in good faith and were unwittingly duped, I can understand your burden to educate others; however, I am not the one giving out false information. It is possible for a person, or was possible, to legally become a FE and teach English without a bachelor's degree.

Perhaps the circumstances are unique, as are the individual's qualifications. I certainly would not want to establish a common practice from what is an apparent exception to the norm.

Regarding your personal situation, I only know of it what you have stated on other threads. I have fought "tooth and nail" to maintain my own sanity here, in the process wiping the asinine smirk and insincere smile off the face of those who were making things difficult for me. Considering your circumstances I'm sure that you did your best . For those here or planning to come who do not the same, shame on them.

[tofuman]

Doc, Have you forgotten where we are? This is a land of duplicity and subterfuge.

For one thing, I'm not interested in making things difficult for individuals who may have flown under the radar and secured legal status irregularly. The fact that a local PSB may, as a courtesy to school officials, issue paper work for those who do not meet the letter of the law, as you understand it, is not the type of thing that they would admit to you, or any other inquirer. And it would be decidedly uncourteous of me to place them under scrutiny for acting in what they believe to be the best interests of local students.

I am willing to concede, as a matter of working principle, that candidates for FE status should have a bachelor's degree. I am not willing to speculate on how that must be interpreted at the local level.

[jeffinflorida]

You guys are REAL A - HOLES.

Get a damn life - you have way too much spare time on your hands.

[Old Dog]

Why, may I ask, are they a-holes because they have time on their hands and choose to use it in a discussion about matters of considerable importance to forum members or potential forum members?

Bored? Then don't read on.

[jeffinflorida]

Don't get me wrong- I like a good discussion like anyone else. But these guys are not discussing anything. They are mast err batt ing in the forum.

Come on guys if you need to do that go grab a Penthouse or put on a Tracy Lords dvd and crank one out in private.

You don't need to verbally mast errr bate in a public forum.

Or is it that you are the type of people that just like to see your name and words in as many places as possible...

What we can't say mast er bating ???

[tofuman]

Does Homer have a bachelor's degree?

[Talkdoc]

[tofuman]

Heinrich Bornkmann, attempting to contribute something to a subject that has had volumes already penned, suggested that Martin Luther's "tower experience" was subsequent to ingesting a purgative in his battle with constipation. Other biographers had already made the case that the "tower" to which Luther retreated was actually a privy. Bornkmann, walking a path prepared by others, required little imagination to flush out the rest of the story. See Luther: Man Between God and the Devil.

If Luther's breakout understanding of the righteousness of God and justification by faith, took place in a privy, purgative or not, there is no reason to belittle what goes on in here.

[Talkdoc]

[tofuman]

People who are here teaching with Visa Z, all other legal documents, and indulged in no subterfuge to obtain those documents, MUST disagree; even though they have no bachelor's degree.

It is laughable that you, the person denies "lording it over " others could then make the following statement:

"In the absence of any substantiation of your anonymous and personal opinion, I do believe for the sake of future discussion and understanding on this forum, the interpretation of the law by a named government official should take precedence over yours. No reasonable person would disagree."

You not only judge others, but you pontificate the standard by which they will be judged: your own constricted paradigm. Sure, it includes a "government official" but since the legal documents are being issued by government agents in other places, how binding is that? Finally, resorting to your own definition of the "high road," you marginalize as "unreasonable" those who disagree with you.

That's rich. No wonder they sent people like you to work out in the fields.

Is a witch hunt next on your agenda?

[Talkdoc]

Tofuman, your argument is a childish one. But I will humor you a little while longer.

Consider the following scenario: You file a completely honest tax return and by some error or unforeseen event on the part of the government, you receive a tax refund (which you weren't legally entitled to) of $1,000. Is it completely legal for you to use it?

(This is a rhetorical question for everyone but Tofuman. Tofuman will spend the money freely arguing that his original tax return, which led to the unearned benefit, was honest to begin with.)

Doc

[tofuman]

Now comes the condescension.... and ridicule.

What other vistas does travelling the "high road" with you entail?

Incidentally, your rhetorical question is irrelevant and misleading, but it demonstrates that you are not above subterfuge and character assasination to "win" at any cost. Disgraceful, but you serve your master well.

I'm done here.