Job Discussion Forums

[jonjack]

Exactly how much money does a school pay an agency for finding a teacher?

It would be interesting to know if there is any credence to my earlier assertion to Clark that schools pay less on average to teachers who were acquired via a recruiter to compensate for the money paid out as the recruiters fee?????

My earlier contention was actually the argument of a teacher friend of mine in Keelung who still maintains this position.

Do you know Clark or anyone else what recruiters fees are, range, typical amounts etc ???

Cheers,


/JJ

[Ki]

As far as I know recruiters generally get $20-30,000 for signing a teacher to a school. If you signed with a school yourself you wouldn't get this signing bonus. Maybe you would get a contract completion bonus. I think that job offers through recruiters are more likely to encompas bonds to help ensure that teachers stay, or at least to help recoup some of the losses of the signing bonus.

I was offered a job through a recruiter at a kindergarten. The recruiter wanted me to sign with him instead of the school, which realistically was not going to happen. For good or ill I sort out the school on my own. They offered me $5,000 more per month than the recuiter for the job. Not sure about holidays, etc. Maybe they were going to actually pay the recruiter more money than they offered me and were just waiting for my counter offer. Even after the extra $5,000 it still seemed quite low for the hours they wanted. Maybe not.

[Aristotle]

Agents hired by public schools have to kick back 20% to 50% of the teacher's salary to the principle and other Ministry of Education Officials in order to get the contracts to supply foreign teachers to Public Schools.
The general practice is to hire one teacher but the Ministry of Education pays two teachers salaries usually done through a series of double contracts and pay receipts (over billing and misallocation of goverment funds).
They often ask the teachers to sign two contracts and sign two pay receipts but the teacher only gets one salary.
Agents generally offer the lowest paying salaries and little to no benefits but the school pays a high salary to the agency.
Recruiters get a finders fee usually paid in time segmented increments.
There may be instances where recruiters offer higher paying jobs but they are rare and usually a result of embezzlement or fraud.

[Sheep-Goats]

Of course they pay less to through-recruiter teachers. But it's not really because of the fee they have to pay (20,000 is small taters to a lot of schools to get a year long worker), it's just because they can get away with it then. They know the recruiter has a field of gullible folks who won't take a risk at their fingertips and they exploit it -- and if a school's at the point where it's using a recruiter they're probably desperate to find someone to fill a slot anyway and far beyond caring about getting a quality teacher (who'll want quality money).

[clark.w.griswald]

The typical introduction fee for recruiters is about NTD20,000-30,000. If the teacher leaves in the first few months or doesn't work out for some other reason, then the recruiter generally needs to refund a part of the fee, or find an alternative teacher for free.

I don't agree that the wage offered to a teacher found through a recruiter is less than that of a teacher who goes directly. Just look at the offer of any chain school and this will become evident. If you deal directly most schools will offer the same as if you went through a recruiter.

The difference is that schools who rely on recruiters to find teachers may fit one of the following criteria:

a. They factor in the cost of the recruiters fee when working out the offer for the foreign teacher. In this regard I guess the recruiters involvement may come at a cost to the teacher, but many of those positions are available only through a recruiter anyway, and would not be available directly.

b. Recruiters often tend to help schools in rural areas, as most schools in the large cities have a plentiful supply of foreign teachers to choose from. Schools in rural areas often offer other benefits such as free accomodation, and a scooter etc., that schools in the cities do not offer. This coupled with the fact that the cost of living and the earnings in these areas is generally lower than city areas, and it becomes apparent why schools that offer positions through recruiters may offer less than other job ads offered directly through a school.

c. Finally, there may be less room for negotiation when an agent is involved. This is not based upon the expense of the recruiters fee, but more upon the fact that the recruiter just wants to close the deal in order to get paid. If you deal direct, you may be able to negotiate a wage that is higher than what the agent is willing to negotiate. Then again, in some cases an agent will work extra hard to get you the deal you want in order to close the deal, so it could go either way.

Overall, there is no evidence that schools offer positions at a lower rate of pay when these positions are offered through recruiters. In fact there is direct proof that many schools offer the same through a recruiter as they do directly.

As to Aristotles comments - none of that is supported.