The fellow I mentioned was more of an acquaintance than a friend, so I donât have as many details about his deportation as you (Brian) would probably like. As far as I know, his school had told him that his ARC was being processed, but the fact that heâd already been in Taiwan for close to 6 months and didnât have it yet leads me to believe that something was amiss with the school. No big deal, right? This is pretty common in Taiwan, as we all know. The thing is, this guy had no clue; he thought that everything was on the up and up; that his ARC was on the way and that heâd be able to work without hassles.
On another note, to Brian, itâs obvious that you take this all very seriously and have good intentions. I donât want to sound condescending, but this is the way it has always been and this is likely the way it will remain for a long time to come. Some people, like the guy I mentioned above, get burnt. Your attempts to rationalize all of this are noble, indeed, but as ironlady mentions, in a lot of minds, chabudo is not half bad. This is especially the case on Isla Formosa. Naruwan!
I donât see Brian trying to rationalise it or defend it at all. He is simply pointing out that since the situation is X, it is encumbent on us to do Y, and highly recommended to do Z.
Well, if thatâs what heâs up to, then all is good. We canât do much more than try to promote individual awareness, mind our pâs and qâs and cya the best we can. To be honest, the length of his posts, and Toastyâs for that matter, got less than my full attention when reading through.
Yes it is true. I guess that I write so much as I like to be as thorough as possible. I know that some people like this, and I think that it can be helpful to a newbie for everything to be explained and re-explained. Anyone who doesnât need to read the details can of course skip over to the âjuicy bitsâ.
So it seems that his case doesnât really fit the category that we were talkihng about above i.e. people with an ARC working a second job or a kindy job; or people working during the application process.
Actually I think that it is a very big deal. This is exactly the sort of school that should be exposed, and teachers warned against. There is no excuse for a school who employs a teacher on the promise of an ARC only to fail to deliver this. This is the sort of scenario that is next to impossible for a teacher to guard against, and I would have full sympathy for someone in this particular situation. I stated so earlier on my posts here. I believe that this is the sort of person that we should all be expending our energy supporting.
I donât disagree with you entirely, but I am not sure that I am trying to rationalize this.
My main point in posting in what was the a thread about Kojen, is that teachers who research and prepare themselves for coming to Taiwan are far less likely to run into any of the troubles mentioned here than teachers who just hop and a plane and arrive. Why even give the schools the power, when you can retain the balance of power by educating yourself.
Yes I have already conceded in my earlier posting that if a school does misrepresent itself by saying that a teacher did a runner when in fact he or she didnât, that the teacher could possibly be blacklisted for doing nothing wrong. This is why a teacher needs to protect him or herself by giving notice in writing and complying with the contract in regards to periods of notice. It is only through doing this that a teacher can then stand up in a case of abuse of the system and defend him or herself.
Bear in mind also that the CLA themselves ackowledge this potentiality, and they have indicated that there would be repercussions upon a school which presented false information. It is not a perfect system, but it is far from the imperfect situation that you seem to be suggesting that it is.
Finally, the fact that there is an established appeals process in place is reassuring, and seems to show foresight on the CLAâs behalf.
All in all, I am quite confident that the process is reasonable, and in the absence of any other suggestion, I canât see why schools and the government in Taiwan should not be entitled to some protection from teachers who abscond.
Yes there are many reasons that a teacher may want to leave an employer, and teachers are fully entitled to leave their contracts at any time provided that they give notice of their intention to leave. This notice could be the term stated in the employment contract, or up to 30 days as considered by the ESA.
In the cases that you mention above I cannot see any reason that a teacher cannot give this notice and continuing working until the notice period expires. I mean we are talking about less than 30 days here.
In cases such as where there is a threat upon the teacher, where the teacher is not getting paid, or where the teacher is being forced to work illegally, then that teacher should contact the CLA. The legislation pertaining to foreign workers in these situations specifically states that these employees can be released from their contracts by the CLA.
So what are the exceptions to this I wonder? Bearing in mind that teachers do not get blacklisted for leaving employers, but only for leaving without notice, what do you see as being the inequity in the system.
Obviously blacklisting would apply to those who leave for a better job elsewhere. Remember though, it only applies if they donât give notice.
In cases of genuine emergencies I am sure that the teacher could contact the CLA for advice before or after the fact if as you suggest the school maliciously had the teacher blacklisted. I am equally sure that there would be some paperwork (hospital records etc.) that could be used to substantiate this case.
You seem to be assuming that teacher blacklisting is automatic in almost every case of a teacher leaving an employer. That is just not the case from my understanding.
I have been here for over a decade and have dealt with many schools during my time here. I donât share your view that many of them are dishonest.
In cases where a school is really as dishonest as you suggest, then a smart teacher would have prepared as much documentation as he or she could, to prove that the school was being dishonest. I have personally been in such a situation and the documentation that I had proved that the school was lieing, so I won. I have no doubt that the appeals process with the CLA is no different.
You are of course entitled to your opinion and I am not trying to change that. I think it somewhat silly however to extrapolate bad experiences with some arms of the government over onto others.
The reason that I have more confidence is that I have been in contact not with just any bureaucrats, but the ones within the CLA who are involved in this process. Why not give them a call yourself and raise your concerns? You may be as pleasantly surprised as I was when I did exactly that.
Well it would be totally up to you wouldnât it. I mean no one is twisting your arm to appeal the decision. If you want to appeal it then there is an appeals process there that seems to be to be very fair. If however you have neither the desire to return to Taiwan, nor the dedication to try, then that is your choice and off you go to greener pastures elsewhere.
I am not exactly sure what your point is here Ironlady!
[quote=âbrianâ]
My main point in posting in what was the a thread about Kojen, is that teachers who research and prepare themselves for coming to Taiwan are far less likely to run into any of the troubles mentioned here than teachers who just hop and a plane and arrive. Why even give the schools the power, when you can retain the balance of power by educating yourself.[/quote]
My point, Brian, is that after spending many years in Taiwan myself, I know for a fact that things are not as easy as they may sound. Laws are laws, but practices are practicesâŚand in Taiwan, ârule of lawâ is still not 100% established. If youâre met only honest schools, you are lucky, and thatâs great, but educating oneself might not be enough to defend oneself against potential trouble with a school should one need to leave early.
Written notice? Iâd only suggest that as evidence if you send a registered mail copy to your embassy as well, or send the letter as a âcunzheng xinhanâ (Post Office Registered Evidentiary Letter). Otherwise it is too easily âlostâ. And so on. I donât think there is the need to refute all you have posted â I have other priorities this week as Iâm on the road on a job. If you want to discuss this sort of thing more maybe we can pick it up in a week or so.
Agreed. This is the reason that quite often schools do not even know the rules. Unlike western countries where business owners tend to seek out relevant rules to ensure compliance, in Taiwan many schools will just operate in a way that they see fit regardless of what the law may say. This doesnât mean that they are choosing to operate dishonestly, however their failure to understand their obligations under the law may have an impact upon teachers.
What you suggest above is really my point too. Considering the above, why rely on the schools. If every teacher took the time to educate themselves about relevant affairs (I estimate that you could do this in a couple of days easily) then at least you have a basic idea of how things should go. This enables you to identify the warning bells.
I disagree with this.
At the end of the day the law will apply. The major difference between Taiwan and many western countries in this regard is that you will need to seek enforcement of the laws, as they may not automatically be enforced.
Back home you could probably just make a phone call and someone would investigate your claim, and that person would be fully trained and have a full understanding of the relevant laws and regulations. This of course comes at a cost, and is one of the reasons that tax rates are considerably higher back home.
Here in Taiwan, you cannot rely upon the fact that the relevant authorities will act in the way you would expect back home. You need to point out to them exactly what the school is doing wrong, and push the enforcement through. This is why a knowledge of the relevant legislation is vital. Once you do this however you will find that the results are the same as back home.
So in my opinion, educating oneself is the ultimate tool in dealing with beauracracy in Taiwan. If you donât want to educate yourself then there are companies such as MLMcLean that you can pay to represent you in these matters.
The fact is however that there is a system. There is recourse. You just need to pursue your rights.
Agreed. Giving notice in such a way would be easier to prove than just handing in a letter or sending your boss an email. In some cases this would of course be necessary for proof.
Overall though, handing in a written notice (preferrably by email) can be a good way of showing that you have complied with your contractual obligations and the law. I donât believe that the CLA requires this level of proof. They just want a reason to say Ok you have complied so no blacklisting is required. I believe that this is borne out by the experience of the only person I know of who has appealed a blacklisting.
I essentially agree with all of Brianâs points, but just wanted to add the following:
Itâs a shame that these posts seem so negative. Does anyone really think this is reflective of most peopleâs experiences here in Taiwan?
For those ânewbiesâ considering coming to Taiwan, here is the important part:
While Teach 2005âs experience is unfortunate and most certainly accurate, it is also EXTREMELY rare. Itâs probably like winning the scratch off lottery! (although, not quite like winning the big one). 99.9% of teachers at Kindergartens have none of these problems. While I donât mean to diminish Teachâs experience, its very important to let people know the reality.
Again, 99% of teachers come into Taiwan on a Visitorâs visa. Getting a work visa (NOT AN ARC, this is impossible prior to arrival) is much more difficult and frustrating. Like Brian said, itâs better for everyone involved to come to Taiwan on a 60 day visitorâs visa and get your ARC upon arrival.
I really think a lot of this has to do with cultural differences. Does anyone here really think that working at a Kindergarten in Taiwan is illegal in the Western sense of the word? We are viewing the situation from Western eyes. Just like the word âapologyâ in Chinese is not entirely analogous to the Western word, the meaning of being âillegalâ is just not the same. Iâm not trying to belittle the situation, but I really think working at a Kindy in Taiwan is essentially equivalent to Jaywalking back home. Is it possible you will get a ticket? Yes. Should you be aware of this possiblity? Yes, of course. Should you let it effect decisions you make? Thatâs an individual decision, but I say, âNoâ.
Finally, EVERYONE who comes to Taiwan on a Visitorâs visa (again, 99% of people) begins to work while their ARC is in process. Is this illegal. Technically, yes. But, its just the way things are done.
I think its really important to look at the reality of the situation. It would be nice if they did things our way. I agree the Western way is clearer and more straightforward in this type of situation. However, there are a lot of things about Chinese culture which are preferable as well. Anyway, thatâs a topic for another post
