|
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 |
Piper2
Joined: 13 Jun 2014 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:44 pm Post subject: New regulations adversely affecting teacher supply? |
|
|
jimpellow wrote: |
Schools are extra desperate now that a year of these new regulations are having an adverse effect on the supply of teachers. Raising salaries would be the logical answer. Yet there is resistance to this, along with the hefty overhead schools must pay for the social insurance contribution. Point being the schools are in a bind, and the job seeker should be extra wary now. |
(Jim's quote is from the thread...Public school offer by CITA in Shenzhen - visa question.)
For all I know Jim could be right, however I have not heard the above opinion much before. So if asked I would have said schools might have to move further down a list of applicants but that there were still plenty of acceptable applicants, that schools probably were not finding it too hard.
Do others agree that the tightening of visa regulations over the last year or so is significantly affecting the supply of acceptable teachers, leading to problems for the schools?
If this is resulting in problems for the schools, do you think both private and state schools will raise their salaries/improve their package?
Or do you think schools will continue to expect a fairly steady flow of acceptable new teachers from those 7 or so English-speaking home countries (and so will not improve pay/package)? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
jimpellow
Joined: 12 Oct 2007 Posts: 913
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think there is a common sense to it, but I will use my personal example as I think it is more typical than not.
When I went to Jiangsu seven years ago on a a tourist visa, which was converted in province to a Z-visa, I worked at a Web. My salary was 8000 plus apartment. I did not have to do a pre-medical, have degrees authenticated, submit a criminal background check, etc. Using the present standards of two years prior teaching experience, I wouldn't have even been able to come as I came from a business consulting background.
I don't have a criminal record (though I should) but would have that expense and possibly still the pre medical. Now I live in the Philippines and would most likely need to fly back to the US or work out it out through expensive courier services, etc.
This deal is certainly not looking so good. But maybe they have raised the salary to entice me and help offset all the added time and expense I would need to put up before even arriving? Well, not in the case of the Web I went to.
That Web still offers 8000. But since my first offer I would now have to pay income tax. I would also have to pay social insurance (though almost most I should eventually get back, at least in theory). What abut inflation? Inflation has averaged about 5.71 percent in China over the last seven years. Hence, the current salary to account for inflation alone would need to be 11,801.
Now I have seen salaries rise for subjects I subsequently taught, even though I had a good laugh today at an ad for a physics teacher for 6000.
Anyways, an interesting discussion.
Last edited by jimpellow on Thu Aug 07, 2014 3:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Non Sequitur
Joined: 23 May 2010 Posts: 4724 Location: China
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think it is more complex than just tightening of regs.
The general rebounding of Western economies especially the US, means fewer applicants and this accentuates the regulation problem.
Whether this translates into higher salaries? Mmmmm.
PS I would not have obtained my first job (04) under the current regime. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
kungfuman
Joined: 31 May 2012 Posts: 1749 Location: In My Own Private Idaho
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm in Suzhou now and the largest issue concerning foreign teachers is NOT visa and regulations.
Many of my friends and coworkers have left because the pollution is so bad that they are getting sick.
And I don't mean from crap-ass jobs. Several of them were making 35,000rmb a month as certified BC teachers. They all stated the same reason - they - we - me are sick from the air pollution.
I have never smoked a day in my life but on most days I cough like a 3 pack a day smoker.
As nice as Suzhou is and as laid back as it is the pollution was off the chart more days then it was on the chart.
Right now my school needs about 15 teachers at an average pay of 12-15k a month - not for the BC classes - and according to the DOS he's having a real hard time finding qualified teachers.
Personally I am more worried about my health than I have ever been in my life. Outside I am often gasping for breath. Inside I have the AC set to 20 (or less) and all the windows closed.
School starts Sept 1 or so and I am also seriously consider LEAVING. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Non Sequitur
Joined: 23 May 2010 Posts: 4724 Location: China
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2014 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excellent point Kungfuman. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
SH_Panda

Joined: 31 May 2011 Posts: 455
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Part of my job is to recruit teachers and I have definitely found it much harder this year. The quality and quantity of applications have decreased markedly.
I never even considered that the pollution could be the problem! It makes sense now I think about it, since it's been reported a lot in the western media in the past year or so. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Piper2
Joined: 13 Jun 2014 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
To summarise posts so far...
There has been a reduction in applicants over the last year (in some regions at least).
It seems reasonable to believe this reduction is largely due to the enforcement of stricter regulations and air pollution. Additionally, home country conditions have improved.
But is the situation bad enough yet for state and private schools to improve offers to attract good, qualified applicants?
Do you think some/many schools will react by attempting to employ unqualified FTs illegally? Has there been an increase in dodgy offers? I have the impression that illegal employment is a far greater risk for the (naive/oblivious/negligent/reckless) FT than for the school. But is this changing?
One might think that a continued reduction in applicants is good news for qualified FTs in China. Surely this should eventually result in schools offering better pay/package? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
buravirgil
Joined: 23 Jan 2014 Posts: 967 Location: Jiangxi Province, China
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Piper2 wrote: |
Surely this should eventually result in schools offering better pay/package? |
I am serious...
Supply and demand analysis is a useful precisely formulated conceptual tool that clever people have devised to help us gain an abstract understanding of a complex world. It does not—nor should it be expected to—give us in addition an accurate and complete description of any particular real world market."
Goodwin, N, Nelson, J; Ackerman, F & Weissskopf, T: Microeconomics in Context 2d ed. Sharpe 2009 ISBN 978-0-7656-2301- |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Piper2
Joined: 13 Jun 2014 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
buravirgil wrote: |
Piper2 wrote: |
Surely this should eventually result in schools offering better pay/package? |
I am serious...
Supply and demand analysis is a useful precisely formulated conceptual tool that clever people have devised to help us gain an abstract understanding of a complex world. It does not—nor should it be expected to—give us in addition an accurate and complete description of any particular real world market."
Goodwin, N, Nelson, J; Ackerman, F & Weissskopf, T: Microeconomics in Context 2d ed. Sharpe 2009 ISBN 978-0-7656-2301- |
Um, ok...Thanks for that...
So, just in case anyone thought I was asking for an accurate and complete description of the real world market here in China...no, I am not. I am asking for those who wish to to give their opinion on various questions/issues. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
buravirgil
Joined: 23 Jan 2014 Posts: 967 Location: Jiangxi Province, China
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Piper2 wrote: |
So, just in case anyone thought I was asking for an accurate and complete description of the real world market here in China...no, I am not. |
Piper2,
I responded as I did becuase what you do is repeatedly assert the premise of supply and demand to interpret discussion toward conclusion(s). I quoted your last line to reference the movie Airplane because it was preceded by several rhetorical devices:
It seems reasonable...
I have the impression....
One might think...
To end with the use of Surely...?, a renowned cliché in cross-examination and the basis of an objection: leading. Not that this forum is a court of law, but that your argumentation, though possessed with observant acknowledgment (noting contribution), is as equally possessed with shepherd-like prose. I intended no insult, but sought to interject levity. Having failed that, I apologize.
Cheers,
buravirgil
p.s., Market theory is more readily applied to for-profit enterprise, and such markets are relatively new to our vocation. But their margins are well known and I would submit more will go out of business than offer a significant increase in salary. Educational insitutions are well-known to offer disparate terms based on prestige and state sponsorship. Regulatory controls determine the latter, I would argue, more than trends of supply and demand. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
jimpellow
Joined: 12 Oct 2007 Posts: 913
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
buravirgil does make an excellent point. Thank God I am a political economist by education so I could understand half of it.
As for the improving job market, I personally feel the job market is structurally screwed long term, and hence, would expect an increase in supply from Western countries which has not occurred.
Is pollution a factor? Of course, in particular for retention in cities gagging from it. But I don't personally feel it is the main factor. If it was one would expect that one would see it more often in the postings here. One does not. One sees post after post as relates to medicals, two years experience, visa runs, etc.
I would think there is an increasing awareness too of all that can be ugly about coming to teach in China (recruiters, skimmed wages, horrific housing and on and on). Someone told me that is why South Korean schools have to offer such high salaries in relation to the cost of living. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
buravirgil
Joined: 23 Jan 2014 Posts: 967 Location: Jiangxi Province, China
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
jimpellow wrote: |
Thank God I am a political economist... |
I love that secularly grounded education can produce such expressions...
Quote: |
...I personally feel the job market is structurally screwed long term...One does not. One sees post after post as relates to medicals, two years experience, visa runs, etc. |
100% agreement there, but will relate what a teacher I knew who had come from financials markets in 2008 (ya' know, THAT 2008) observed about growing EsL markets (and attendant wages): Japan was first, then Korea, now it's China's turn. But I think a caveat? Their relative size. Nothing about "growth" in China has a precedent. It's fascinating. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Piper2
Joined: 13 Jun 2014 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
buravirgil wrote: |
Piper2 wrote: |
So, just in case anyone thought I was asking for an accurate and complete description of the real world market here in China...no, I am not. |
Piper2,
I responded as I did becuase what you do is repeatedly assert the premise of supply and demand to interpret discussion toward conclusion(s). I quoted your last line to reference the movie Airplane because it was preceded by several rhetorical devices:
It seems reasonable...
I have the impression....
One might think...
To end with the use of Surely...?, a renowned cliché in cross-examination and the basis of an objection: leading. Not that this forum is a court of law, but that your argumentation, though possessed with observant acknowledgment (noting contribution), is as equally possessed with shepherd-like prose. I intended no insult, but sought to interject levity. Having failed that, I apologize.
Cheers,
buravirgil
p.s., Market theory is more readily applied to for-profit enterprise, and such markets are relatively new to our vocation. But their margins are well known and I would submit more will go out of business than offer a significant increase in salary. Educational insitutions are well-known to offer disparate terms based on prestige and state sponsorship. Regulatory controls determine the latter, I would argue, more than trends of supply and demand. |
buravirgil, it may not surprise you to hear I have not studied economics or business. I am an FT, posting to other FTs, asking them to discuss something. I do not even know what point you are trying to make. I think you are saying that I am wrong. Ok. But my questions and others' answers still interest me. If you cannot bear to read the thread (because of whatever it is you are saying), respectfully, please do not read it
I wrote "Surely this should eventually result in schools offering better pay/package?", hoping it would provoke discussion. But not what you are discussing... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
buravirgil
Joined: 23 Jan 2014 Posts: 967 Location: Jiangxi Province, China
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Piper2 wrote: |
buravirgil, it may not surprise you to hear I have not studied economics or business. I am an FT, posting to other FTs, asking them to discuss something. |
As am I, an FT, who has not studied economics or business, and am participating in that discussion. I offer dissent that (a) a premise of supply and demand (a term of business and economics you introduce) won't adequately answer whether wages will rise or fall, and (b) aspects of your prose stifle as much discussion as it engenders.
Quote: |
I do not even know what point you are trying to make. I think you are saying that I am wrong. Ok. |
Nope
Quote: |
But my questions and others' answers still interest me. |
Except for mine?
Quote: |
If you cannot bear to read the thread (because of whatever it is you are saying), respectfully, please do not read it  |
What's being borne here is a request to cease criticism. How 'bout you post whatever you want, read what you want, and extend the same courtesy?
Quote: |
I wrote "Surely this should eventually result in schools offering better pay/package?", hoping it would provoke discussion. But not what you are discussing... |
Yeah, well, hope implies doubt and your use of surely surely caught my attention as unintentionally patronizing. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Piper2
Joined: 13 Jun 2014 Posts: 146
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
buravirgil wrote: |
Piper2 wrote: |
buravirgil, it may not surprise you to hear I have not studied economics or business. I am an FT, posting to other FTs, asking them to discuss something. |
As am I, an FT, who has not studied economics or business, and am participating in that discussion. I offer dissent that (a) a premise of supply and demand (a term of business and economics you introduce) won't adequately answer whether wages will rise or fall, and (b) aspects of your prose stifle as much discussion as it engenders.
Quote: |
I do not even know what point you are trying to make. I think you are saying that I am wrong. Ok. |
Nope
Quote: |
But my questions and others' answers still interest me. |
Except for mine?
Quote: |
If you cannot bear to read the thread (because of whatever it is you are saying), respectfully, please do not read it  |
What's being borne here is a request to cease criticism. How 'bout you post whatever you want, read what you want, and extend the same courtesy?
Quote: |
I wrote "Surely this should eventually result in schools offering better pay/package?", hoping it would provoke discussion. But not what you are discussing... |
Yeah, well, hope implies doubt and your use of surely surely caught my attention as unintentionally patronizing. |
This thread was always meant to be a simple exchanging of opinions on a topic I think interests many FTs. You introduced a quote from an economics book to prove (I think) that the discussion has no merit. This seems to me unnecessarily confrontational, as is your general tone.
By all means post, but please stop attempting to derail the discussion  |
|
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
|