You are here
G.education's Interpretation of its Promise
Browsing the Nova/g.education website, I came across a press release dated February 18 [PDF in Japanese] in response to the accusation that g.education had reneged on its promise to hire all former Nova staff and instructors. G.education apparently didn't like the negative press it received and felt compelled to clarify things by issuing a statement. Here's a translation of the Q & A. Does it clear things up or are they being weasels?
After assuming Nova's business, was the promise to "hire all employees in principle" broken?
The truth is that we hired 1,931 employees (500 Japanese staff and 1,431 foreign instructors) and did not hire 10 individuals after interviewing them. It was clearly stated in the contracts when we assumed Nova's business that re-hiring would be based on interviews. The 10 who were not re-hired was in keeping with the terms of the contract.
Were 1,000 employees dismissed?
No, as of February 14, the number is 62.
Were 800 employees dismissed in the December email?
We did in fact email 800 employees who were to start work on January 10. In the email, however, 200 were to be hired with the remaining employees to secure work at a group company or another company. The results was that 326 individuals joined the company.
Were employees illegally dismissed in violation of the Labour Standards Law?
The contract period is clearly defined, and we did not renew the contracts of those individuals who did not meet our renewal standards, so it is not a violation of any laws or ordinances.
Were the terms and conditions of employment not explained or defined?
It was explained that Nova's rules and regulations [the ones from Nova before its collapse] would continue to be used and contracts were signed based on this understanding. The rules and regulations are in every school.
Is it not a contract violation to dismiss someone who refuses to be transferred?
The contracts state that Nova determines the place of employment, so this is not a contract violation. We cannot continue to pay salaries in areas where there are no schools. We pay the moving expenses when an employee is transferred.
Will there be more non-renewal of contracts?
Yes. When contracts come up for renewal, we examine things like attendance in order to improve the quality of Nova's lessons. We are planning to start hiring instructors from March.
- Shawn's blog
- Log in or to post comments
Comments
What a mob of bull-shit peddling dick-cheese lickers.
Something similar to that was faxed to the branches in english, in response to accusations made on the General Union's website.
They have been weasels from the very beginning, because they never intended to re-employ all the teachers. A lot of their answers are misleading because they only partially address the question.
'OPTION B' INSTRUCTORS'
The December email that they sent to 800 employees who had chosen 'option B' was the worst and most obvious of many breaches of trust. When commencing employment, employees could choose option A or B. Option A involved starting work immediately, recieving an optional advance of 50,000 yen and getting their first paycheck on the 4th of the next month (which was later moved to the 15th). Option B involved receiving a lump payment of 150,000 yen and starting work on Jan 10th. Starting on Dec 1st, I chose option A to be safe but it was quite difficult to hold out until Jan 15th for my first paycheck.
Sure, some people took the money that came with option B with no intention of working for G.com, but a lot of them had to take it just to survive. Many of them were assured that they would definitely be able to work from Jan 10th. The timing of the December email, on christmas day, was an unbelievable error of judgement by G.communications, and it's biting them in the ass now.
They say that other instructors were to be employed by a 'group company or other company'. I know option B instructors who weren't offered anything. This might be an outright lie.
REFUSAL TO TRANSFER AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR TERMINATION
It's true that our contract says that the company determines the place of employment but it certainly doesn't say explicitly that the company can force people to relocate in order to work at a different branch. No fair-minded person could consider this a fair justification for termination when they have failed to give sufficient notice. I know first-hand four people who were told to move from western honshu to places like Nagoya or Aichi within 1 or 2 days. That is totally unreasonable even by Japanese standards. One of them had a wife and kid. In each case instructors were expected to make a decision within a couple of hours. Could this practise possibly hold up in court? I don't think so.
THE BRIGHT SIDE...
Is that in the more isolated areas (and hopefully the bigger cities too?) teachers are finding alternative employment in what is now the peak hiring period and management is panicking. Having whittled down instructor numbers just prior to the peak sales period, now we have more than 350 students, but 3 of our remaining 4 instructors have just given notice, with me being the most recent. Students can't book lessons now (the down side) and the complaints are rolling in...
Pissing off instructors just before the peak sales period, which coincides with hiring season, was a fatal error.
it wasn't sent on christmas day. g-fuckers sent it a few days before christmas.
i get the sentiment but it annoys me how everyone mentions the christmas day thing, when it's actually not true.
I want to start off and say I was a Nova instructor under monkeyman and I feel for all the people who got screwed (especially the people who came after the end was inevitable).
In response to some of the responses Shawn mentions above:
1) G-Comm did welch on the deal to "hire" everyone
2 & 3) Who knows really how many people were dismissed\let go
4) The way the Japanese law works companies "have to" dismiss employees sooner rather than later (if they don't then they get saddled with them/ stuck with deadwood indefinitely)
5)If they are going by the Nova terms and conditions why did some instructors recently have to sign and return some letter recently "confirming" the working terms and conditions?
6) Sorry folks but this makes sense in any business. Although G-Comm "tookover Nova" it is not the same company (# of schools and locations). It needs people in certain locations and if there are too many then it will have to reduce the number in that location. Also if there are places it needs people it SHOULD offer it to existing employees but if there are no takers then they need to hire new people (BUT it should be under similar/existing conditions). They claim they will cover moving expenses but what the offer says is that they will RE-IMBURSE expenses ONLY with PROOF/RECEIPTS. In this situation it would not be unreasonable for the company to offer an advance for the moving expenses to be paid back on an installment basis, considering the situation.
7) OF COURSE they will not be renewing "some" contracts in the future. It is there right to decide whether or not to keep an instructor. But if they dismiss people purely for financial reasons (cost cutting) then SHAME ON THEM! They mention they will review the instructor's record on things like attendance. Is that all? Will that be the deciding factor (like it was way back in the day of old Nova under fuzzy faced Anders).
Just had to give my two cents.
Yeah it's true that they are a business, and they weren't responsible for the NOVA bankruptcy.
I've always contended that making it sound like they were promising to hire everyone when they had no intention of coming close to it, was the biggest mistake. I think I would have accepted them saying that they couldn't hire everyone, and if they had they would have been able to deal with those they hired in good faith whilst keeping costs down.
Unfortunately I think the Trustees insisted on them making that promise, but not caring whether they actually kept it or not. The promise was for the Japanese public, not the employees, because the Government is embarrassed about the mess it made.
Yeah fair enough, but I still think it was a filthy trick.
i find it fucking hystarical the shitty green tag who trained me now has my old crap job and in fact makes 1100 less yen an hour!!! hahahaha you fucking sucker. why would you ever stick with such a rotten company?! You know who you are ben from the uk with your shitty ass flat top haircut. hope you have to fucking buy ramen for the rest of your miserable life.
Was talking to a few teachers who have survived the Nova chopping block and say that it is bad and that teachers are leaving ever other week while students are coming back and are pissed that there is no one left to teach them English. I was just wondering, with all the chopping that G.Cum had done, does any one know about how many teachers are left at this point?
The numbers have been slashed drastically, and now G-fuckwits have realized that theyve cut too many. It seems as though, now, the average school seems to have 4-6 teachers/school, with new student/teacher ratios being made the norm. Schools close to stations are being relocated (for financial reasons) and are reopening in predominantly smaller schools, further from the major stations. This company has conducted, and continues to conduct, atrocious business practices - at best. No wonder all those high school grads with rich parents send their kids overseas to learn economics/business....
school girl loving ben?