we cannot say if the contract is below the minimum standards of the LSA from what op described. the minimum could be even explicitly listed in the “rare situations”. so, i thought he saw or knew some conditions i overlooked, that made him assert it is illegal. but seems it is not the case.
It is illegal.
what is it?
The provisions of the contract that were mentioned above.
The only reasons listed that an employee may quit are health and a other rare situations.
this part?
Yes, that’s what I pointed at.
A company cannot keep you against your will.
if the contract says you cannot quit in any other situations, then it may be illegal. but the way op wrote sounds it just lists some situatiins that you can terminate the contract without a possibility to be sued.
I think we’re reading it differently then.
As @yyy guessed, it doesn’t say I can’t quit. It only lists a few reasons for quitting, which maybe acceptable (in Taiwan) despite being misleading. It seems it doesn’t mean I can’t quit for any other reason.
Why would an employer want to keep someone who didn’t want to work there so much that they would take the case to the supreme court? That’s what I’m mostly worried about, that right or wrong, this would upend my life. It’s not good when I’m starting a new job and I keep having to take days off to go to court, not to mention legal fees.
Not legal advice.
Basically ignore employment contracts here. I’d be very surprised if your employer was holding up their end of a bargain (and a bargain they drafted) as they almost never do here. It’s perfectly good toilet paper meant to intimidate employees rather than come to a mutually beneficial agreement. They are not drafted in good faith as they usually are in most modern countries.
The most recent one offered to me has article 9: we will fine you $40,000 for not completing the contract. Article 10: this has been drafted according to the laws of the ROC. I called them out in it. They’ve ignored me since, I say I dodged a bullet.
Anyway, just do what you want and leave. Technically they could sue you for damages IF they can prove a loss due to your quitting. But even if they could, it would be too much effort for anyone to do unless you’re a CEO or something.
So just quit, ignore your contract, go from there
I guess many, if not most, cases are employees go to court to confirm they can stay being employed, or can get some benefits by being non-fixed term employees.
Exactly. In the case I cited, the worker was trying to get paid after the supposed termination of the contract. It still came down to whether the contract was a continuous work contract or two specific work contracts.
As I think I mentioned, if your job is a fairly normal one (typical white collar foreigner salary with no esoteric training etc.), it’s unlikely the employer will care much. If your income and assets are low enough, you can qualify for full legal aid. If you’re not that poor, you can still get free legal advice. Try https://www.laf.org.tw and the labor department. Ideally bring your own interpreter if you’re not fluent, even though they (sort of) provide service in English.
There’s nothing inherently illegal with that. They would easily spend $40,000 to recover the breach penalty. If they made the penalty much higher, it would probably be reduced by the court anyway.
The illegal part would be deducting the penalty from your salary. If you don’t voluntarily pay it, the only legal way for them to get it is a lawsuit. Illegal deductions would make them liable for administrative penalties under the LSA.
1 Like