Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Contract]

I would like to explain a situation to you. Names here are not important for me, just your advice, preferably if you have experience with this type of thing or know someone who does have this type of experience.

I will give you the general lines of this bad situation. I already got some advice, but wouldn't mind hearing more especially if you've seen this type of thing etc.

A teacher was hired by a director in September 2014. The teacher got along with this first director and had some touch-ups to do with his/her teaching. The teacher got positive feedback from this director even if he/she got some negative feedback. That said, the teacher saw that the director wasn't too strict and agreed to work at his/her teaching. Things got better, but the director announced that he was leaving. Another director replaced the first one. This time, the second director wasn't as friendly. He did nothing but criticize the teacher's teaching and saw nothing good in her/his teaching. The new director officially was in the school in September, but was officially the boss after Oct. 31st 2014.

This second director was supposed to have all of the teachers sign a new contract, but that didn't happen so fast as expected. The teacher who was picked on (for teaching errors and as mentioned above), had to follow his/her original contract inside which one could find something like this: The employer can dismiss the employee if the employee receives three (3) written warnings from the Employer.

This teacher/employee didn't get 3 written notices about his/her teaching issues. This teacher was fired after having gotten 2 verbal warnings. This was during the last week of Oct.2014. The teacher called a labour attorney for support and wanted the labour attorney to talk to the employer, but the employer refused to talk to the labour attorney. Also, the employer had his mind set to let the teacher go and didn't want to follow the contract or even negotiate somehow with the teacher. The employer and the teacher thought it wise that that a list of things owing etc. be written up before the teacher had to leave. The teacher didn't agree with the idea of leaving, but couldn't defend him/herself since the employer wasn't interested in hearing about it and since the employer didn't want to talk to the labour attorney (teacher's labour attorney). The list of things that the employer had to do for the teacher before the teacher left the school (i.e. last payday date, tax slip, etc.), did not include anything to do with teaching, just financial items that the school had to settle with the teacher before the teacher left. This itemized list of things owing was just to avoid disputes. The employer wrote this financial list, but told the teacher to sign the sheet. Also, unlike what the two discussed, the employer wrote the title: Written Agreement of Termination at the very top of the financial and itemized list. The teacher found the title to clash with the content of the list, but overlooked it and signed the sheet because she/he didn't talk about this with the employer beforehand and so she/he thought that the employer was just being casual and just had bad English as far as the title goes (it had nothing to do with the monetary things in the middle of the sheet). After the teacher left the school, he/she found out that what he/she signed was going to weaken her/his defense. The teacher spoke about this with a labour attorney and found out that the employer made her/him sign a sheet with a bad title, a title terminating the contract even if the content of the sheet was primarily monetary totals to be owed to the teacher. The signatures didn't help. The title of the summary sheet of things owing to the employee weakened the defense to the extent that at the court hearing, the teacher lost the case.

The new director who didn't have the teacher sign his new contract and who didn't follow the first contract's clause about 3 written notices, told the teacher to sign that so-called itemized list of things owing etc. which was entitled: Written agreement of Termination Letter." The teacher and the employer did agree to have a list so that there wouldn't be any disputes. However, they didn't talk about the legal title nor did they talk about the signatures beforehand. That's why the teacher found it a bit strange to sign the sheet and to read such a title: "Written Agreement of Termination." The teacher just listened to the employer who told her/him to sign the sheet. The teacher was naive and innocent. The teacher just followed the rules without questioning enough. The teacher couldn't get any support in the workplace. The employer refused to talk with her/his labour attorney in order to solve the problems calmly.

Again, the teacher didn't win the case. The judges spent a lot of time discussing that signed sheet and why the teacher signed the sheet. The teacher did say honestly that it was intended to be a summary of money owing etc. not a legal breach of the contract.

Question: Would you appeal or would you simply forget it?
What would you do in this case? I feel sorry for that innocent teacher who thought that the employer was honest when adding details like the title and signatures to the summary of money owing etc.

Is there justice for such a teacher or for teachers like this one out there?



Thanks,
Contract

[Troglodyte]

In answer to your questions
1. yes
2. forget it
3. move on
4. yes

For more detailed answers please summarize your original post a bit.

If you want more replies, change the thread title to something which describes the thread (and your request) in one short sentence. When reading forums, most people skim through the titles and only read them based on the thread title. Something as ambiguous as "Can you help?" could be just about anything.

[schwa]

Forget it & move on sounds about right.

[Contract]

HI,

Thanks for your feedback. It's enough for now. If I need more details, I'll write back.

I have a question for Troglodyte. Are you by chance a lawyer? I'm just curious.


Contract

[Chaparrastique]

Your post needs to be truncated. Try to be brief and succinct.

Your boss did not do anything illegal.

You need to familiarize yourself with labor law. He can fire you for any reason by giving you a months notice. Warning letters are not a legal requirement.

If he fired you in the 11th or 12th month then you might have a case.

Sucks when a great boss gets replaced by one that doesn't like you. You got fired simply because your lack of personal chemistry. Unfair and unprofessional, but we've probably all been there.

[Died By Bear]