| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
starbunny
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Location: U.S.
|
 Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:41 pm Post subject: No sick days at all?? |
 |
|
| Is it standard practice to have no sick days in your contract? When I asked about it, they said if they gave sick days to me it wouldn't be fair to the other teachers (who, presumably, get no sick days). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tob55
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:47 pm Post subject: Re: No sick days at all?? |
|
|
| starbunny wrote: |
| Is it standard practice to have no sick days in your contract? When I asked about it, they said if they gave sick days to me it wouldn't be fair to the other teachers (who, presumably, get no sick days). |
Whether it is a hagwon or public school, if you are signing a regular contract, The Korean Labor Act requires that the employer provide you with sick leave. If other teachers at the same place are not receiving sick leave then something is wrong. I don't have the link handy now, but the Korean Labor Act can be downloaded with all the pertinent information. I have a copy on my flash drive but not at school with me today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You can take them if you're hospitalised but otherwise it's a very bad idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
br_owen
Joined: 10 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
here you go...
http://atek.or.kr/teachers/88
I personally wouldn't sign a contract which doesn't allow 'sick pay'. However, apparently it's not mandatory (read section 10). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cruisemonkey
Joined: 04 Jul 2005
Location: Hopefully, the same place as my luggage.
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 10:24 pm Post subject: Re: No sick days at all?? |
|
|
| tob55 wrote: |
| Whether it is a hagwon or public school, if you are signing a regular contract, The Korean Labor Act requires that the employer provide you with sick leave. |
There's nothing in the K Labor Standards Act pertaining to 'sick leave' (other than being injured at work or contracting an industral disease). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tob55
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 10:28 pm Post subject: Found it |
|
|
I found my Korean Labor Standards Act here at school. br_owen is right that it is not mandatory, but here is the quote from the Labor Standards Act concerning the responsibility of employers:
| Quote: |
Article 23 (Restriction on Dismissal, etc.)
(1) No employer shall dismiss, lay off, suspend, or transfer a worker, or reduce wages, or take other punitive measures (hereinafter referred to as "unfair dismissal, etc.") against a worker without justifiable reasons.
(2) No employer shall dismiss any worker during a period of temporary interruption of work for medical treatment of an occupational injury or disease and within 30 days thereafter, and any female worker during a period of temporary interruption of work before and after childbirth as provided herein and within 30 days thereafter. Provided that if an employer has paid lump sum compensation pursuant to Article 84 hereof or is not able to continue his business, this shall not apply. |
The next section of the Act states that employers must give reasonable proof before dismissing a worker from their employment. So, what does this mean? It means that while Korean employers are not obligated to give sick leave, they are required to give you time off if you are sick and can provide documentation of the condition and doctor's note. I believe the Ministry of education adopted the provisions regarding sick leave because it was common practice in other countries of the world from which the work pool is comprised. I prefer not to argue and debate over definitions of specific words in the language, but I am reasonably sure that the employer would have no leg to stand on if they attempted to fire an employee who could verify that they were ill and unable to work. It would of course be without pay if the contract makes no provision for sick leave. That is what I am able to surmise from the document.
Also, because the language is so vague and would require the government to compile a list of every potential injury, disease or ailment, the Labor Act simply cites it as an occupational injury or disease. Now you can make whatever you want of that phrase, but in terms of public servants the primary occupational "diseases" are those things related to communicable diseases. Again, this include a myriad of conditions and symptoms that are too many for the K-govt. to list, and as such the vague language. I am not an attorney, but is seems fairly practical in terms of the intent of the language. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
... occupational injury or [occupational] disease ...
Since there is no comma, the above is the actual meaning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If it's a hagwan, it really wouldn't matter if it were in the contract or not..you most likey still wouldn't get them.
The one hagwan I worked that did have sick days also had a stipuation that if I were sick, I would have to pay the substitute teacher's wages out of my own pocket.
People rarely took sick days and they had to be damn near dead to do so.
That's another reason why I don't work at hagwans anymore.
Good luck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobbybigfoot
Joined: 05 May 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My first gig offered 5 days sick leave, and paid out for unused days.
My current gig offers none.
Maybe it's time I re-think my position on sick days, and join the public system and get 15 free extra holidays. Seems this is commonly done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bobbybigfoot wrote: |
My first gig offered 5 days sick leave, and paid out for unused days.
My current gig offers none.
Maybe it's time I re-think my position on sick days, and join the public system and get 15 free extra holidays. Seems this is commonly done. |
Don't expect ever to get a contract renewal if you do that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T-J
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's an unfortunate reality that those that have used "5 sick days" in a contract to mean "5 additional days off." Those that have abused this benefit have forced managers to remove this clause or to modify it as a result of economic realities.
A more common way for sick days to be written into a contract is to avoid the quantification of sick days and leave the language of the contract to read "sick days will be approved at the discretion of the management."
For those that are sick and need the benefit, it is still there in most cases. The control of the benefit has shifted dramatical toward the managers though. Blame the ones that have taken advantage of this in the past not the management. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tob55
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:23 pm Post subject: Comment |
|
|
| T-J wrote: |
It's an unfortunate reality that those that have used "5 sick days" in a contract to mean "5 additional days off." Those that have abused this benefit have forced managers to remove this clause or to modify it as a result of economic realities.
A more common way for sick days to be written into a contract is to avoid the quantification of sick days and leave the language of the contract to read "sick days will be approved at the discretion of the management."
For those that are sick and need the benefit, it is still there in most cases. The control of the benefit has shifted dramatically toward the managers though. Blame the ones that have taken advantage of this in the past not the management. |
Well said, and very accurate about how people may misread things into a contract. For the most part, if it doesn't say it in ink, then don't assume entitlement to additional benefits in the contract. It will only frustrate and anger either you or the boss in the future when you try to negotiate something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicam
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
A more common way for sick days to be written into a contract is to avoid the quantification of sick days and leave the language of the contract to read "sick days will be approved at the discretion of the management."
For those that are sick and need the benefit, it is still there in most cases. The control of the benefit has shifted dramatical toward the managers though. Blame the ones that have taken advantage of this in the past not the management. |
I'm sorry, but I disagree with this wholeheartedly. Letting a Korean hagwon owner with a bottom line profit mentality decide if an FT is well enough to work? C'mon, everyone knows that an FT could be bleeding profusely out the ears and eyes while vomiting and said hagwon owner would require them to work a full day. That's like suggesting that civil rights legislation should be approved at the discretion of white supremacists.
We all work with a cold, but there are illnesses that require rest, and it's inhumane to expect people to work under such conditions. I'm hoping that this harsh aspect of Korean culture will soon change for the better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T-J
Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Location: Seoul EunpyungGu Yeonsinnae
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nicam wrote: |
| Quote: |
A more common way for sick days to be written into a contract is to avoid the quantification of sick days and leave the language of the contract to read "sick days will be approved at the discretion of the management."
For those that are sick and need the benefit, it is still there in most cases. The control of the benefit has shifted dramatical toward the managers though. Blame the ones that have taken advantage of this in the past not the management. |
I'm sorry, but I disagree with this wholeheartedly. Letting a Korean hagwon owner with a bottom line profit mentality decide if an FT is well enough to work? C'mon, everyone knows that an FT could be bleeding profusely out the ears and eyes while vomiting and said hagwon owner would require them to work a full day. That's like suggesting that civil rights legislation should be approved at the discretion of white supremacists.
We all work with a cold, but there are illnesses that require rest, and it's inhumane to expect people to work under such conditions. I'm hoping that this harsh aspect of Korean culture will soon change for the better. |
You need to go back and re-read my post. I didn't comment at all on Korean anything. I was commenting on the management employee relationship as it relates to benefits and how the abuses of those benefits by a few have caused a change in the way benefits are managed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicam
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry if I wasn't clear T-J, but I think that K-managers stronghold on sick leave is a cultural thing, and is not due to FTs abusing awarded sick time.
I don't know if it's Confucianism that shapes the work culture of Korea, but in my opinion it's archaic and a bit inhumane. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
