|
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 |
YTMND
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Unless you are working at a public school as an employee under the EPIK/GEPIK umbrella. |
I think we should focus this thread on the typical E2 visa holder who just works a hagwon job, doesn't have these exceptions listed (like renting on their own, paying their own airfare, etc..)
Given an applicant is accepted with an E2 visa and given (at least mentioned in the contract):
1. airfare to Korea
2. pension/medical/taxes
3. airfare home
4. apartment rent
5. overtime (as stated in the contract)
What would your conclusions be as it regards the "employee"/"independent contractor" label? Most people are complaining about hagwons not giving them what they are due. I think you have to have a different perspective when it comes to public schools, F visa holders, and E2 visa holders who accept different arrangements to conclude they are an "employee" or "independent contractor". |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| YTMND wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Unless you are working at a public school as an employee under the EPIK/GEPIK umbrella. |
I think we should focus this thread on the typical E2 visa holder who just works a hagwon job, doesn't have these exceptions listed (like renting on their own, paying their own airfare, etc..)
Given an applicant is accepted with an E2 visa and given (at least mentioned in the contract):
1. airfare to Korea
2. pension/medical/taxes
3. airfare home
4. apartment rent
5. overtime (as stated in the contract)
What would your conclusions be as it regards the "employee"/"independent contractor" label? Most people are complaining about hagwons not giving them what they are due. I think you have to have a different perspective when it comes to public schools, F visa holders, and E2 visa holders who accept different arrangements to conclude they are an "employee" or "independent contractor". |
Most likely an employee if the school is providing these things.
And anyway it has to be a properly written contract in order for one to be considered a IC. The school can't just say "Okay you are an IC" and hand you a generic hakwon contract. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
However, for every job you have as an employee, the employer will have to report and make payments on your behalf and will have to pay half of the Pension and Health Insurance.
|
Unless you are working at a public school as an employee under the EPIK/GEPIK umbrella. Then it doesn't matter how many public schools you work at...you still only get ONE pension payment because your employer is the government not the school. Just like I said above. If you work at another P.S you get paid extra (20,000) per class above the 22 contractual limit. But it's not treated as another job per se it's treated the same as if you worked at ONE school and did all those classes THERE. |
Yes it is possible to work at multiple locations for a single employer, such as your example. In this case matters such as income taxes and pension would normally be treated the same as if there were one employer in one location. It is possible that separate payments to the teacher would be made monthly for each location even though all are treated as a single employer for income tax, pension and health insurance purposes.
Public schools have been doing this for a while. Tax, Pension and Health Insurance treat these as a single employer when teachers work at multiple locations. Immigration hasn't required public school teachers to list every location on their ARC either for quite some time.
The same is also true for a private employer. If you work as an employee at multiple locations for a hogwan with a single owner, then it is treated as a single employer for tax, pension and health insurance.
And now, Immigration has caught up on this and no longer requires each location to be listed on the ARC when an E2 teacher is working at multiple locations for the same school and same owner. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2012 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| YTMND wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Unless you are working at a public school as an employee under the EPIK/GEPIK umbrella. |
I think we should focus this thread on the typical E2 visa holder who just works a hagwon job, doesn't have these exceptions listed (like renting on their own, paying their own airfare, etc..)
Given an applicant is accepted with an E2 visa and given (at least mentioned in the contract):
1. airfare to Korea
2. pension/medical/taxes
3. airfare home
4. apartment rent
5. overtime (as stated in the contract)
What would your conclusions be as it regards the "employee"/"independent contractor" label? Most people are complaining about hagwons not giving them what they are due. I think you have to have a different perspective when it comes to public schools, F visa holders, and E2 visa holders who accept different arrangements to conclude they are an "employee" or "independent contractor". |
Paying for airfare, overtime and providing some kind of housing can be done for an employee or an IC.
If the business or organization contributes toward the pension and health insurance payments the IC is required to make on their own, this would have to be handled carefully or it could look too much like an employer/employee arrangement, however, it could be done. It's easier and safer just to pay more money.
Income taxes for ICs should be withheld according to the rules for ICs to avoid contract problems.
The sad, funny thing is that in Korea, many schools withhold the flat 3.3% IC rate from their employees for Income taxes instead of the lower NTS site withholding amounts because they don't know any better and are afraid to underwithhold. Worse, many public accountants don't know any better either and give the schools and owners bad advice while insisting that they are correct. This makes it quite difficult to know if the 3.3% tax rate is a red flag for an IC contract or a red flag for a confused school or public accountant.
To be a legal IC contract it has to be written correctly, and the most clear way to state that is to use the words "Independent Contractor" in the contract and to have clear provisions and explanations so that there is no ambiguity and the teacher is fully aware of what they are agreeing to. The school must also follow up and make sure the teacher is properly registered at the tax office as an IC, and should assist the IC teacher in setting up their own legally required 100% payment of the Pension and Health Insurance.
Contracts that state that the teacher is an employee followed by the school registering the teacher as an IC should be treated as fraudulent.
Ambiguous contracts have to be interpreted one at a time. If the intent is determined to have been to obfuscate and defraud the teacher, the contract should be considered fraudulent. If the ambiguity comes from poor English skills and not intent to defraud then the contract should be judged on the clearest interpretation of the meaning and the understanding of the parties. |
|
| 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
