Teaching English Requirements


#163

Hold the boat here a second.
The title of the page you linked to is:

Title: Regulations Governing Educational Institutions at All Levels Applying for Work Permits for Foreign Teachers and their Administration

Chinese:
法規名稱(Title): 各級學校申請外國教師聘僱許可及管理辦法

That entire page is about requirements for schools to obtain a work permit for a teacher they want to hire. It does not say anything about employees who do not need a work permit.


#164

Ministry of Labor: Employment Service Act
http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=N0090031

Article 42
Foreigners to be employed as foreign language teachers as specified in Article 46.1.4 in the Act shall have the following qualifications, and their weekly working hours in teaching-related work shall be no less than 14 (fourteen) hours:

  1. Be 20 (twenty) years old or above.
  2. Be graduated from colleges or above.
  3. The language to be taught by the foreign teacher is the official language used in the country specified in the passport of the teacher.
    The foreigners mentioned in the preceding Paragraph shall have qualification certificates for language teaching if they have not obtained bachelor‘s degrees.
    When the foreigners mentioned in Paragraph 1 are hired by 2 (two) and more employers within the valid periods of their Employment Permits according to Article 53.1 of the Act, their weekly working hours in teaching-related work for each of the employers shall not be less than 6 (six) hours.
    For the foreigners mentioned in Paragraph 1 and the preceding Paragraph, their total weekly working hours in teaching-related work shall not exceed 32 (thirty-two) hours.

It says nothing about teacher certification.


#165

Title: Regulations Governing Educational Institutions at All Levels Applying for Work Permits for Foreign Teachers and their Administration

My understanding is, if they are employed as foreign teachers, the law is applied.

If not, they should meet the requirements for laws applied to taiwanese teachers.


#166

That is on buxiban teachers.


#167

Ministry of Labor
Employment Services Act
http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=N0090001

Article 48
Prior to employing foreign worker to engage in work, employer shall apply to the central competent authority for employment permit with relevant documents submitted. However, the following foreigners are exempted

  1. A foreign worker to be employed as consultant or researcher by the respective government or their subordinate academic research institutes.
  2. A foreign worker has married a national of the Republic of China with a registered permanent residence in the Republic of China and has been permitted to stay therein.

#168

yes, those foreigners are governed by the same laws with locals.

Without a licence, they can be sub teachers, but cannot be regular teachers.


#169

So then we can put this rumor to rest that foreigners with an APRC or JFRV need a teaching certification to teach in private schools.

I have not found where it stipulates this. Can you link to a specific law stating this?

There are plenty of “local” Taiwanese teachers in private schools who do not have teaching licenses and are teaching full-time, not as subs. Usually, local teachers in private schools are either (a) licensed teachers abiding their time while they wait for a public school opening or (b) unlicensed teachers who cant work in public schools because they don’t have a proper teaching license.


#170

That is 中小學兼任代課及代理教師聘任辦法. I found no English version.

And, sub teachers can be full-time.


#171

@SuiGeneris Yes I can read clearly, I know what the title of the document says and this was my main point when speaking with my director. I went through the work permit process and therefore am actually certified so I have no personal stake in this. What is currently happening is we are being told that MOE does not care if an individual has an open work permit, what they care about is meeting the standards of a full-time teacher. That document is highly ambiguous as it refers to applying for the work permit, not simply hiring a teacher. Again, we just got off the phone with Ms. Liu at the MOE and as of right now, the situation is bleak. She stated we must provide all these documents for every teacher regardless of status or working rights. For clarification, we are a private school registered with the government.


#172

As for Taiwanese teachers without licenses, they get hired as admin. There are ways around every rule. Right now, I am looking for a way around a rule recently told to my school. Trust me, I hope it is BS as that’s more than half our staff.


#173

I find this plausible, though a lot is still unclear to me. My impression is that the MOE has always favored such interpretations (foreigners are foreigners and have to follow the rules for foreigners). However the Labor ministry has been in charge of things, and has held to the alternate interpretation (people with open work rights can perform any work a local can with equivalent qualifications.) Things have been in flux however since the sexual molestation case involving a teacher last year. If they’ve decided to let the MOE run the show, their interpretation could hold sway, or they could at least attempt to proceed in that manner. I’d still withhold judgment here until we see more, but it’s worth paying attention to, and could be a sign of things to come in cram schools as well.


#174

But if locals can’t do the same kind of work without a permit, it’s much less surprising.


#175

Same as the one @airirow posted (the former is MOJ, the latter MOE). But did anyone at the MOE actually say this was relevant to foreigners with open work rights?

Article 1
These Regulations are prescribed in accordance with the provisions of Article 5, Paragraph 2, of the Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals.

第 1 條
本辦法依外國專業人才延攬及僱用法(以下簡稱本法)第五條第二項規定訂定之。

Note that it’s not the Employment Service Act. However, when we go to the Act for the Recuitment & Employment of Foreign Professionals (which sets different rules for normal, “special”, and “senior” foreign professionals), we find this:

Article 4
Terms used in this Act are defined as follows:
[…]
4. “Professional work” means the following work:
(1) Work as listed in Article 46 Paragraph 1 Subparagraphs 1 to 6 of the Employment Services Act.
(2) Possessing specialized knowledge or skill, and approved by the central competent authority in consultation with the Ministry of Education as a teacher of non-academic classes in a short-term tutorial school registered in accordance with the Supplementary Education Act.

That means the AREFP supplements (or overrides) the ESA as far as “white collar” work is concerned – but that’s for ESA Art. 46 Par. 1, to which foreigners with open work rights are not subject.

Then this:

Article 5
An employer hiring a foreign professional to engage in professional work in the State, as referred to in Subparagraph 4 Item 1 of the preceding Article, shall apply for a permit to the Ministry of Labor, submitting the relevant documents therewith, and the application shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of the Employment Services Act. However, an employer of a school teacher as described in Article 46 Paragraph 1 Subparagraph 3 of the Employment Services Act shall apply for a permit to the Ministry of Education, submitting the relevant documents therewith, and shall not be subject to the provisions of Article 48 Paragraph 1 of the Employment Services Act requiring a permit application to the Ministry of Labor.

Regulations on qualification, screening criteria, permit application, permit cancellation, employment supervision, and other relevant matters relating to school teachers as referred to in the preceding provision shall be set by the Ministry of Education, and shall not be subject to the provisions of Article 46 Paragraph 2 and Article 48 Paragraph 2 of the Employment Services Act.

ESA Art. 48 Par. 1 is the one that exempts PR’s and foreign spouses:

Article 48
Prior to employing foreign worker to engage in work, employer shall apply to the central competent authority for employment permit with relevant documents submitted. However, the following foreigners are exempted:

  1. A foreign worker to be employed as consultant or researcher by the respective government or their subordinate academic research institutes.
  2. A foreign worker has married a national of the Republic of China with a registered permanent residence in the Republic of China and has been permitted to stay therein.
  3. A foreigner employed at a public or registered private college/university in the field of a course of lectures or an academic research approved by the Ministry of Education.

I suspect there’s a misunderstanding here, intentional or not. The first part of ESA Art. 48 Par. 1 seems redundant, as ESA Art. 43 already establishes that the employer needs to obtain a work permit.

Article 43
Unless otherwise specified in the Act, no foreign worker may engage in work within the Republic of China should his/her employer have not yet obtained a permit via application therefore.

However, Art. 48 Par. 1 also stipulates that the central competent authority (i.e. the Ministry of Labor, of which the Workforce Development Agency is a part) is responsible for issuing work permits, so to transfer responsibility to the MOE for the work permits of teachers (other than buxiban teachers), the AREFP stipulates that those teachers “不適用就業服務法第四十八條第一項本文向勞動部申請許可之規定”, of which “shall not be subject to the provisions of Article 48 Paragraph 1 of the Employment Services Act requiring a permit application to the Ministry of Labor” seems like a reasonable translation.

If the MOE is saying this actually exempts foreign teachers from ESA Art. 48 Par. 1 period, i.e. open work rights no longer apply to foreign teachers (other than buxiban teachers), that seems like a misreading of the legislative purpose. However, the official legislative reasoning doesn’t really clarify the matter.

https://lis.ly.gov.tw/lglawc/lawsingle?0001402431C10000000000000000014000000004000000^08180106103100^0000C001001

第五條
[…]
理由 一、第一項本文明定雇主聘僱外國專業人才在我國從事第四條第四款第一目之就業服務法第四十六條第一項第一款至第六款之專業工作,其申請許可之主管機關及適用之法規。惟為鼓勵學校擴大延攬外國教師,爰於第一項但書明定聘僱外國專業人才來我國擔任就業服務法第四十六條第一項第三款學校教師工作之許可及管理,回歸教育部主政。
二、因應學校教師工作之許可及管理回歸教育部主政,爰於第二項明定學校教師之資格、審查基準、申請許可、廢止許可、聘僱管理及其他相關事項之辦法,由教育部定之,不適用就業服務法第四十六條第二項及第四十八條第二項規定。

Unofficial translation of bold text:

“But to encourage schools to expand recruitment of foreign teachers, in the proviso of Par. 1 clarifying the work permission and administration of the hiring of foreign professional talent coming to our country to hold positions as Employment Service Act Art. 46 Par. 1 Subpar. 3 school teachers, it is returned to adminstration by the Ministry of Education.”


Tl/dr: it’s not clear.

If I were at one of the schools currently facing a turnover crisis because of this confusion, I would try to get official statements from the MOL (responsible for the ESA), the MOE (responsible for the regulations cited earlier), and the 通用目 of the NDC (responsible for the AREFP) ASAP.

And now if you’ll excuse me, I have some alphabet soup to cook… :man_cook:


#176

what I meant is, foreign teachers with work right or open work permit can be hired with the same qualifications with local teachers, in other words, they need taiwanese teacher lisenses to be hired as regular teachers. Taiwanese teacher licenses may be exempted if they are hired as “foreign” teachers based on the foreign teacher employment law, and for that they need teacher licenses by their countries.

But, yes, this is just what I think.


#177

That’s true, but less options and lower pay on average. I found it tough going in a rural township. You can get work eventually, and the advantage is cleaner air and a greener environment.