Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Austin]

When there is little or no trust between two people, a written contract can become their best friend. However, it should not be mistaken as an adequate substitute to a trusting relationship, because contracts can easily be broken. Certainly trust can be broken as well, but the motives behind both are entirely different.

I am well aware that many people are overly concerned with the wording and details of thier contracts in Korea. However, for those that are considering Korea, please reflect on your most rewarding relationships in your life. Are they based on a contract, or are they based on trust amongst other things?

I contend that people that are weak and afraid will lean toward the contract as their protector. Therefore, if you do not consider yourself as weak and afraid, I would suggest to you to find an employer that you can foster a healthy relationship with as a means of developing a lasting security built on trust.

It may very well take six months to a year for both of you to prove yourself to each other, but if you invest an adequate amount of your time and energy into creating this relationship, the problems that you read about here will not touch you. Moreover, your stay in Korea will be more rewarding and fulfilling.

I know that some people do not know how to navigate these types of interactions very well, and they will undoubtedly cast negative and disparaging remarks my way, as my suggestion is an insult to them. Regardless of others comments, I am confident that you will do what is best for yourself in the end.

Understand that my motivations stem from my aspirations to create a positive "feel good" life.

[Mody Ba]

Austin(King Rat) just posted his latest load.

Especially his statement that when the owner sees by the teacher's attitude and performance that the teacher has the interests of the school at heart,then"the teacher will be justly rewarded."

What a load, Pieboy.What planet have you been living on, anyway? Ask all of the teachers who have been ripped off by unscrupulous hakwon owners if their efforts and best intentions were "justly rewarded".

Some of The Rat's posts are so outrageous and unbelievable that one is tempted to think maybe he is just a little troll trying to rile people up.On the other hand, maybe that is the way he "thinks"(????).
Give it up, Pieboy.You have become a laughingstock on this board.

[humanuspneumos]

a mild exposition of Korea will surface the concept after watching one or two contract issues come up. However, the hermeneutics of it all (any good hermeneutic has an appropriate application) doesn't lead me to the destruction of the written text. Rather, it leads me to believe that the text can be upheld in a duality of text/relationship. Not a duality of opposites so much as a duality in the same way you have two tracks for one train. Remove the one track the train crashes. That's partly why Korea crashed in 97- yes, saw it with my own eyes. Sinister loans based on relationship- not the text of just business law- were forged.

The destruction of any infra-structure comes with the neglect of policy/contract. You can only have a superficial/arbitrary infra-structure and outputs when policy/contract are neglected. So, you reap an artificial bubble- a fathering of another IMF. N & S Korea will always be on shakey ground until text is wedded with relationship. The removal of text becomes a kind of papacy- I think that's what you like Austin- to be a Pope in your TESOL world. Don't get me wrong I wrote the bla, bla, bla Survival Handbook at a particular school and it included emphasizing the power of relationship in Korea- however, I had little interest in power beyond it providing a measure of stability in a hurricane- no, I didn't undermine the text. Teacher's lives benefitted because of that and so numbers rapidly went up. I tried to build an infra-structure that was extremely visible and clear under the authority of the text as well as verbal promises.

Again- I come back to your negativism about change- perhaps you don't seek it because text always means that all parties are subject to a higher authority. Perhaps the Rubrick method of management that Mickey always spoke of demands an arbitrary finite authority (along with his underlords) can more easily become a vortex of implosion on others who don't bow the knee- just want what they were promised.

You are a great advocate of "Put-up or Shut-up" when the gate doesn't swing around and hit you on the back-side.

My guess is that the first thing people who want power will destroy/obscure is an authority higher than themselves- the text. To canvass people on this board to crush the duality of relationship/text opens the door for TESOL Papacy to rule unchecked. I guess you really don't care to help Korea with its infrastructure problem. You'd rather describe the thrilling event of the malls, walls and bridges falling into the sea. Pretty negative stuff!!!! Yes, there are Koreans who long for the day when the text/relationship sun will rise and bridges no more will fall- after all- it's their sons and daughters who die.