|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
The government regulation is that those who wish to obtain an E-2 visa for purposes of teaching English must submit their CBCs, drug tests, etc.
The E-2 visa regulation does not mandate what employers must do. It mandates what visa applicants must do. |
Commonsense dictates that all teachers irrespective of ethnic background or nationality should undergo background checks as children are equally exposed to them all. I strongly suspect that the Korean government has not put enough thought into their vetting procedures across the board, and so far their arrangements have been rather ad hoc in nature as a consequence. Now it is not possible to argue that this is necessarily the result of a campaign of coordinated discrimination but in essence it is indirectly discriminatory.
Incidentally, we faced the reverse situation in the UK recently whereby foreign nationals working at airports were given security clearances without having to submit a background check from their own country's law enforcement agencies while UK nationals faced enhanced domestic checks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
The government regulation is that those who wish to obtain an E-2 visa for purposes of teaching English must submit their CBCs, drug tests, etc.
The E-2 visa regulation does not mandate what employers must do. It mandates what visa applicants must do. |
Commonsense dictates that all teachers irrespective of ethnic background or nationality should undergo background checks as children are equally exposed to them all. I strongly suspect that the Korean government has not put enough thought into their vetting procedures across the board, and so far their arrangements have been rather ad hoc in nature as a consequence. Now it is not possible to argue that this is necessarily the result of a campaign of coordinated discrimination but in essence it is indirectly discriminatory.
Incidentally, we faced the reverse situation in the UK recently whereby foreign nationals working at airports were given security clearances without having to submit a background check from their own country's law enforcement agencies while UK nationals faced enhanced domestic checks. |
Well in the case of Public Schools (Public Entities) the Korean government requires the same checks of foreigners and Koreans.
In the case of employees at a Hagwon (any Hagwon- Math, English, Science) the terms of employment are up to the individual Hagwon.
Your Hagwon has no say over what the E-2 requirements are. The E-2 is for both Hagwon NETs and Public School NETs.
The Korean government has not decided to pass any legislation regarding English Hagwon CBC requirements. In fact the legislation is regarding E-2 visa holders and what their requirements are, not what the Hagwon has to do in terms of screening.
E-2s are discriminated on the basis of visa status, but it is not based on race. A white F-2 visa holder will not a have to go through the tests while a Korean-Canadian E-2 (And there are plenty) would.
Now some will say this has to do with "being Korean enough". This is false. It has to do with possessing and supplying the appropriate documentation and being registered through Korean government records.
Bureaucracy is bureaucracy. If you cannot provide form THX-1138 then you can't obtain visa X. It's that simple. Think about it in terms of getting a driver's license back home. You need to supply a birth certificate or passport, high school ID, proof of residency, etc. This isn't racist, this is just what is required by law. At some point you have to lay down certain document requirements. Usually these require government seals and records. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
Mosley, go ahead and post away.
Your posts do 'my side' more good than anything I write ever will. |
Indeed they do.
I hope this isn't necessary, but I feel compelled to distance my arguments from Mosley's. He's dancing to his own tune, and I have no idea where the music is coming from. |
Thanks.
I was in the same position as you on another thread. Vagabundo and I were going on about something but there was an apologista who was saying some straight out of left field type stuff which I quickly identified as being incomprehensible and nonsensical and distanced myself from.
Makes you realize how much we're all in the end reading from the same book if we're not on the same page. Some people aren't even reading from the same book. Heck some are reading tea leaves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
The government regulation is that those who wish to obtain an E-2 visa for purposes of teaching English must submit their CBCs, drug tests, etc.
The E-2 visa regulation does not mandate what employers must do. It mandates what visa applicants must do. |
Commonsense dictates that all teachers irrespective of ethnic background or nationality should undergo background checks as children are equally exposed to them all. I strongly suspect that the Korean government has not put enough thought into their vetting procedures across the board, and so far their arrangements have been rather ad hoc in nature as a consequence. Now it is not possible to argue that this is necessarily the result of a campaign of coordinated discrimination but in essence it is indirectly discriminatory.
Incidentally, we faced the reverse situation in the UK recently whereby foreign nationals working at airports were given security clearances without having to submit a background check from their own country's law enforcement agencies while UK nationals faced enhanced domestic checks. |
Well in the case of Public Schools (Public Entities) the Korean government requires the same checks of foreigners and Koreans.
In the case of employees at a Hagwon (any Hagwon- Math, English, Science) the terms of employment are up to the individual Hagwon.
Your Hagwon has no say over what the E-2 requirements are. The E-2 is for both Hagwon NETs and Public School NETs.
The Korean government has not decided to pass any legislation regarding English Hagwon CBC requirements. In fact the legislation is regarding E-2 visa holders and what their requirements are, not what the Hagwon has to do in terms of screening.
E-2s are discriminated on the basis of visa status, but it is not based on race. A white F-2 visa holder will not a have to go through the tests while a Korean-Canadian E-2 (And there are plenty) would.
Now some will say this has to do with "being Korean enough". This is false. It has to do with possessing and supplying the appropriate documentation and being registered through Korean government records.
Bureaucracy is bureaucracy. If you cannot provide form THX-1138 then you can't obtain visa X. It's that simple. Think about it in terms of getting a driver's license back home. You need to supply a birth certificate or passport, high school ID, proof of residency, etc. This isn't racist, this is just what is required by law. At some point you have to lay down certain document requirements. Usually these require government seals and records. |
I think you missed my point somewhat. All teachers irrespective of ethnic background or nationality should undergo criminal background checks in the private and public sectors as children are equally exposed to them in both. Currently, children are not being guaranteed vetted teachers right across the board. Rather than leave these decisions in the hands of private hagwon owners the government could introduce legislation which requires all teachers employed in the private sector to submit a background check irrespective of visa status or nationality. Anything less represents a serious failure in the protection of children. After all, those on F-series visa working in the private sector are just as likely as anyone else to have criminal or even pedophilic histories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
I think you missed my point somewhat. All teachers irrespective of ethnic background or nationality should undergo criminal background checks in the private and public sectors as children are equally exposed to them in both. Currently, children are not being guaranteed vetted teachers right across the board. Rather than leave these decisions in the hands of private hagwon owners the government could introduce legislation which requires all teachers employed in the private sector to submit a background check irrespective of visa status or nationality. Anything less represents a serious failure in the protection of children. After all, those on F-series visa working in the private sector are just as likely as anyone else to have criminal or even pedophilic histories. |
Well that's certainly something to consider.
Now we get into the details- I presume full-time Hagwon teachers should have CBCs. Part-Time Hagwon workers? Students working at a Hagwon 1-2 hours a day? Private Tutors? Private Student tutors? All Hagwons or just Hagwons that tutor minors? Just English Hagwons or All Hagwons? What defines a Hagwon vs. say, a Piano Studio, a Dance Studio, a Taekwondo studio, etc. etc.?
Not that I'm disagreeing with you just trying to get the details down here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
E-2s are discriminated on the basis of visa status, but it is not based on race. A white F-2 visa holder will not a have to go through the tests while a Korean-Canadian E-2 (And there are plenty) would.
. |
This^ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Well that's certainly something to consider.
Now we get into the details- I presume full-time Hagwon teachers should have CBCs. Part-Time Hagwon workers? Students working at a Hagwon 1-2 hours a day? Private Tutors? Private Student tutors? All Hagwons or just Hagwons that tutor minors? Just English Hagwons or All Hagwons? What defines a Hagwon vs. say, a Piano Studio, a Dance Studio, a Taekwondo studio, etc. etc.?
Not that I'm disagreeing with you just trying to get the details down here. |
With any new initiative there are going to be teething problems, but as I am sure any reasonable person involved in ths debate will acknowledge, that is not a good enough reason to allow the status quo to continue - assuming that everyone believes that the protection of children is paramount.
With respect to your questions specifically, you raise some salient points. The Ministry of Justice could begin by examining how other countries deal with teacher vetting procedures. In the UK for example, anyone working with children must undergo an enhanced background check and I believe that the same is true in Canada as well. Now that represents a start. This would include all hagwons and both part-time and full-time workers. Already, on that basis alone, you are affording children significantly more protection than they currently receive.
Inevitably, there will be some areas like private tuition, that are much more difficult to police as it often takes place under ther radar anyway - with respect to both foreigners and Koreans. However, by plugging the aforementioned loopholes the scope of protection will be widened considerably, and any reasonable man could only conclude that this is to the betterment of the child.
Last edited by Gwangjuboy on Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
E-2s are discriminated on the basis of visa status, but it is not based on race. A white F-2 visa holder will not a have to go through the tests while a Korean-Canadian E-2 (And there are plenty) would.
. |
This^ |
Amongst westerners ethnic Koreans currently have more scope than their non-ethnic Korean counterparts to teach in Korea without having to undergo a background check - that's a simple fact. Other westerners can of course secure an F-series visa themselves and work in a hagwon but that is conditional on their marriage to a Korean national. Now I don't think this represents a campaign of coordinated discrimination against other westerners on the part of the Korean government but it is an anomoly that needs addressing. I don't even regard the 'discrimination' angle as being that important anyway - the issue that drives us should be the enhanced protection of children because we all know that nobody is less likely to have a criminal or pedophilic past on account of their ethnicity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
[q
Inevitably, there will be some areas like private tuition, that are much more difficult to police as it often takes place under ther radar anyway - with respect to both foreigners and Koreans. However, by plugging the aforementioned loopholes the scope of protection will be widened considerably, and any reasonable man could only conclude that this is to the betterment of the child. |
Agreed. And even this problem of private tutoring could be somewhat alleviated (though not eradicated) by implementing much stricter penalties for those caught without the proper visa/paperwork. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
E-2s are discriminated on the basis of visa status, but it is not based on race. A white F-2 visa holder will not a have to go through the tests while a Korean-Canadian E-2 (And there are plenty) would.
. |
This^ |
Amongst westerners ethnic Koreans currently have more scope than their non-ethnic Korean counterparts to teach in Korea without having to undergo a background check - that's a simple fact. . |
To teach in a hakwon in Korea that is.
For PS all teachers (Korean and Western) must submit a background check. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
E-2s are discriminated on the basis of visa status, but it is not based on race. A white F-2 visa holder will not a have to go through the tests while a Korean-Canadian E-2 (And there are plenty) would.
. |
This^ |
Amongst westerners ethnic Koreans currently have more scope than their non-ethnic Korean counterparts to teach in Korea without having to undergo a background check - that's a simple fact. . |
To teach in a hakwon in Korea that is.
For PS all teachers (Korean and Western) must submit a background check. |
There are both hagwons and public schools in Korea so they do have more scope to teach in Korea - and arguably significantly more considering the proportion of western teachers working in hagwons (including ethnic Koreans).
Last edited by Gwangjuboy on Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
[q
Inevitably, there will be some areas like private tuition, that are much more difficult to police as it often takes place under ther radar anyway - with respect to both foreigners and Koreans. However, by plugging the aforementioned loopholes the scope of protection will be widened considerably, and any reasonable man could only conclude that this is to the betterment of the child. |
Agreed. And even this problem of private tutoring could be somewhat alleviated (though not eradicated) by implementing much stricter penalties for those caught without the proper visa/paperwork. |
Yes that would represent a good way of reducing the risk with respect to private tuition. In fact, I am not sure how much further the government could go than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Makes you realize how much we're all in the end reading from the same book if we're not on the same page. Some people aren't even reading from the same book. Heck some are reading tea leaves. |
Yeah, the deep end some people here swim in is truly mind-boggling.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Think about it in terms of getting a driver's license back home. You need to supply a birth certificate or passport, high school ID, proof of residency, etc. This isn't racist, this is just what is required by law. |
Of course it's not. Everyone has to do it regardless of race, creed, sex, sexual preference, or nationality. However, Korea's visa regulations do not work the same way.
But, I've already made all my arguments back on page 13, and I assumed the topic was just abandoned because my last last two posts there went completely unanswered. Meh, I guess it's Gwangjuboy's turn to have some fun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fortunately Gwangjuboy seems to be a reasonable sort.
I mean once we get past why the law is the way it is, we all pretty much see eye to eye on how to make it better in the future- expanded checks and all that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mosley
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
|
| 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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
