Remember that time you asked your boss about Shakai Hoken and you were ignored?
Or that time you asked about the possibility of a pay raise next year and you were brushed off?
Or that time you asked why you only get partial salary during the month of December even though the company gets the full amount from the Board of Education, and you never got a response to the email?

Well, unlike all those other times, a demands issued from a union as part of collective bargaining cannot legally be ignored.
The revolution in the Tokyo area starts now.
Who wants in?

We will be publishing some of our demands non-specific to individuals soon.
Stay tuned.

Solidarity,
Erich

Interac then apparently called the police! When the police arrived, our member corrected them as well; reminding them that he did not, in fact, need a permit to pass out flyers.

Interac gave all of their trainees pizza during lunch, so that effectively kept them from going outside to meet the evil union member (it would not the first time that has happened). Eventually, they did have to let the teachers leave, and our member then passed out some more information to anyone who would take it at that time as well.

Perhaps Interac has something against the dissemination of information?
Perhaps Interac just doesn’t like teachers to know their rights?
Perhaps we will find out in collective bargaining…

Solidarity,
Erich Manning

Tozen Union Flyer

It is that time of year again! Time for the mad scramble of March when good teachers everywhere are worried if their contracts are going to be renewed or not, otherwise known as the “ALT Shuffle”. Two things you should be sure NOT to do:
1) Do NOT let your employer force you to sign resignation papers! You do not need to sign any such thing. If they do not have work for you, they should give you dismissal papers so that you can claim your unemployment benefits until you find your next job.
2) Do NOT let your employer threaten you into leaving your apartment. It does not matter whether your employer is your guarantor or not, you can pay your landlord directly. Tenant’s rights are strong in Japan, but they are non-existant if you do not claim them.

If you find yourself facing either of these situations, call your local union representative to report the harassment.

If you are not in a union, and would like to fight against these kinds of ill treatment, join a union and help improve the working conditions of Japan.

Solidarity,
Erich

I am glad to hear that the new Interac is “financially stable”. With this financial stability, I can think of no better way to move from “strength to strength” than by improving the working conditions of all of your ALTs. Here are a few suggestions that I personally think would benefit all ALTs:

1) Employment classification:
Hire all ALTs as full time employees (一般会社員). No contracts, just normal employees with the same pay in August, March and April as the rest of the months. This will give your ALTs more stable pay year round, and they will not have to fight so hard to claim their rights as employees.

I have seen many contracts between BoEs and Interac, and I know that, although it will cut into the profit margins, Interac can afford it. Interac is, after all, “financially stable”.

2) Insurance:
It is still amazing to me how many ALTs arrive to work for Interac in Japan, and have no idea that they are required by law to sign up for government run insurance. Sign up all of your ALTs for Shakai Hoken. According to the government of Japan, even part-time employees are eligible, the “29.5 hours a week” excuse that many employers implement does not in fact disqualify anyone from Shakai Hoken.
One of the biggest reasons to have Shakai Hoken is that it protects a sick employee from going bankrupt by paying out a portion of the employee’s wages if they are incapacitated or hospitalized and cannot work for a few months.
This can be very valuable for any employee, but even more so when the employee’s family is thousands of miles away. Surely this kind stability is not too much for a “financially stable” company like Interac.

3) Unemployment insurance:
In 2007 and 2008, I had to fight for about ten months to force Interac to sign me up for unemployment insurance. If not for the help of my fellow General Union members, I probably wouldn’t have been signed up for it at all. It took a lot of paperwork, a lot of translation work, and a lot of time corresponding with “Hello Work”, just to get a little financial stability that I had the right to in the first place.

In the past few years since that time, the laws changed to make it harder for companies to avoid paying for Unemployment Insurance, but Interac ALTs have reported that their hours are being split between “Maxceed” and “Interac” and that is used to justify not giving them Unemployment Insurance. Why? Unemployment Insurance is based on a very small percentage of an employee’s wages and it is definitely something that a “financially stable” company like Interac can afford. Surely someone with your experience would agree that stable working conditions create a stronger workforce? Why not just give all of your ALTs that peace of mind without forcing any of them to fight for it? Especially when they are all qualified for it anyway?

I have a few questions as well. Feel free to answer them in an email to your employees as you usually do:

1) With this merger, is the company name “Maxceed”, a part of the Selti group along with Interac, being absorbed into the new Interac name as well?

2) If so, will you
a) have to rewrite contracts with BoEs to keep those contracts?
b) cease double bidding the same BoE with multiple names? I guess you will
have to stop unless you will create a new name right?
c) cease using a second company name to justify not signing up ALTs for Unemployment Insurance as previously mentioned?

3) Does the new Interac plan to pay recent damages to union members that it has been ordered to pay without trying to argue that the victories were against a prior company?

4) Will the new Interac hold collective bargaining with the General Union as it was ordered by the Osaka Labor Commission? Will it hold collective bargaining with the GU’s sister unions as well such as the Fukuoka General Union, Tokyo Nambu and the Tokyo General Union when requested as is required by law?

5) Interac was ordered by the Osaka Labor Commission to hand deliver an apology to the General Union for failing to hold collective bargaining.
This still hasn’t taken place.
When will it take place?
As a former GU member myself, I can tell you that it would mean a lot to me personally to see this take place. To me it would indicate a more transparent Interac, with a greater respect for labor and trade union law than what I, and certain government agencies, perceive the “old” Interac to have had.

Yours in solidarity, looking forward to a new Interac.
Erich Manning
Tokyo General Union ALT Branch
http://interacunion.org
interacunion@gmail.com

Tokyo General Union
http://tokyogeneralunion.org/
TEL: 050-3488-6734 FAX: 050-3488-6734

Earlier this month, I wrote a message in the ‘Interac-shin’ newsletter announcing that the Selnate Group was re-organizing into a new group under the Interac name. This change will be effective October 1, 2010.

Unfortunately, comments have been made on the forums of some well-known websites this weekend suggesting that Interac may be in financial difficulty or be going bankrupt. I am deeply concerned that such rumors may cause you worry and stress. So, let me categorically state that Interac is financially stable and in absolutely NO danger of going bankrupt. I would like to put an end to such rumors here and now. Nor will the re-organization have any impact on your jobs or working conditions.

It appears that the cause of such rumors was a legal notice placed by us in the Government’s Official Gazette on August 24 2010 announcing that Interac would dissolve on October 1.

This is technically true. Part of the re-organization involves consolidation. Selnate Group companies will be consolidated into one big organization. One of our other group companies AP 18 will assimilate the others as New Interac with the old Interac dissolving. Under Japanese law the new group will simply take over all elements of the previous companies.

In practice nothing will change. For example, the same executive and management team will continue and your contracts and employment status will simply role into the new company. You remain as Interac employees. Also, the re-organization will in no way affect the existing contracts with our clients. All our clients are aware of the change and understand it.

The other question that has been raised is in regard to the ownership of the Selnate Group. At the beginning of this year the previous main shareholder retired from the group management. At that time, and after careful consideration and consultation with the executive board members, the board approved changing the main shareholder of the Selnate Group to a long-term investment fund managed by Advantage Partners.

As a company Advantage Partners is the largest in its field in Japan with an outstanding reputation for the support that it provides to its portfolio companies.

Its own philosophy is to contribute to society by teaming up with good, profitable organizations that they believe they can assist to grow and become stronger. We all believed that Advantage Partners philosophy fits well with our own and is in an ideal position to help Interac maintain and strengthen its current business and seek new areas of opportunity in the future. Indeed, we are already seeing the benefits of the fresh perspective and management support that they provide.

Since we are unlisted, we have never made the names of its shareholders public but since facts were falsely represented in a public forum, I decided to address this issue with you.

Thank you and if you do have any concerns or questions, please do not hesitate to speak with your Managing Consultant.

It appears that Interac as we know it may be completely taken over and dissolved, although we may not know for sure until October first. Interac recently lost its right to do business with Osaka prefecture BoEs when it was found guilty of an Unfair Labor Practice against the General Union and of interfering in union business. Our members that have sued Interac have also won several court cases, meaning even more financial punishment.

When I originally heard of the name change and the association with bankruptcy, I was a bit skeptical. I thought Interac may have been changing names to avoid paying the damages to union members and as a way to get around the recent ruling that prevents them from doing business in Osaka prefectural BoEs. This certainly would not have been out of character for them; they have for years had a second name, Maxceed, that they used to double-bid BoEs across the nation. They would submit one bid as Interac, and one bid as Maxceed, and shuffle their ALTs between Maxceed/Interac contracts as needed. I was hired as an ALT for Interac in 2005, and was placed in a city where I was expected to lie to the BoE and tell them that my company was called “Maxceed”. The contract between the BoE and the dispatch company said “Maxceed”. My contract with the people in the same office, with the same employees with a different phone number said “Interac”. Also, in the past year, ALTs have complained to us that their time is split between “Maxceed” and “Interac” so that Interac can pretend that the ALT has two part time jobs, instead of a full time job and have an excuse to avoid giving the ALT full time benefits. If Interac is going to be dissolved, these kinds of practices never favored the ALT’s working conditions, and they will not be missed.

Whether Interac will be going fully under or whether things will really just be “reorganized”, my personal concern, shared among my fellow union members, is centered on the stability of employment for the foreign teachers in Japan. I am urging every ALT in Interac/Maxceed/every-other-dispatch-company-in-Japan to band together, unionize and fight back to improve working conditions for yourselves and for the people who will want to come to Japan and teach here in the future. Demand to be directly hired! Every Interac/Maxceed contract I have ever seen has either been
1) illegal according to the The Ministry of Education guidelines concerning proper dispatch methods or
2) has enough clauses in it that violate Labor Standards/Trade Union Law that the whole thing is null and void.
If you unionize and claim your right to be directly hired, the BoEs will not be able to ignore you. I have seen it myself; the when I was in Osaka and a member of the General Union, we forced my BoE to direct hire, and the ALTs there are in a much better position today than they were in 2005.

If you are tired of the instability of your job, of getting reduced or no pay for March or August, of getting penalized for being sick, then you should force the BoE to take responsibility. Unionize, and demand direct employment and the full benefits that you are entitled to under the law.

In Solidarity,
Erich Manning
http://interacunion.org/
http://tokyogeneralunion.org/
http://interac.generalunion.org/
http://fukuoka.generalunion.org/

Osaka prefectural ordinances prevent companies found in violation of Trade Union Law from bidding on public projects. The General Union, along with allied unions from Osaka Union Network and Osaka Zenrokyo have submitted demands to the Governor of Osaka Prefecture, Toru Hashimoto, that Prefectural ordinances be enforced.

As a result, Osaka Prefecture has now informed all divisions of the prefectural government, including the Osaka Prefectural Board of Education, that they may no longer enter into contracts with Interac. Furthermore, Osaka Prefecture has summoned Interac to explain the situation, placing further pressure on the company to obey the Trade Union Law and negotiate.

The union’s victory at the Labour Commission and its subsequent economic impact on Interac will go along way in making sure that not only Interac, but other employers trying to evade their legal obligations, negotiate with the union in the future.

5 Jul 2010
Health Checks – They’re mandatory!
Interac ordered to obey the law

Industrial Health & Safety Act
For many westerners, the idea of a state mandated health check smacks of a nanny state, and we are often reluctant to submit to the tests. While not all companies obey this law, the fact remains it is compulsory for all employees to have an annual health check under article 66 of the act.

We often receive enquiries about how to escape taking the annual check-up. The major reason given is privacy concerns. In the 1990s these concerns had merit. One well known case is that of a company employee who was diagnosed as being HIV positive as a result of the check-up. Rather than inform the employee, the testing company chose to disclose the information to the employer. The company then chose to terminate the employee under false pretenses while still hiding his HIV status.

Changing attitudes and the introduction of privacy laws in 2005 saw most of these issues resolved.

School Health & Safety Act
Looking at labor law stipulations in the light of the education law, state mandated health checks appear much more reasonable.

Concerned with the health of children and that of the general population, the education law states that all school employees must be checked for tuberculosis by x-ray. Pre-war Japan had a high prevalence of tuberculosis. Post-war times saw the numbers in decline but as in many countries it is on the increase again. In 1998 the rate of infection in Japan was more than 5 times that of the USA. The government reports that there are now more than 40,000 new cases of TB per year in Japan and that it claims about 2,700 lives. There are also increases in the number of children and university age students being infected.

Interac and other ALT companies
It is difficult to give a precise figure, but the number of ALTs in Japan is in the thousands. If we then include other teachers of at-risk students, the number may well increase to over 10,000. The majority are not tested for tuberculosis, thereby placing the health of both students and other teachers at risk.

As part of the General Union’s campaign to make Boards of Education and dispatch companies follow Education and Employment laws, Interac was recently found to be violating the law by not providing ALTs in Tokai city with health checks. As a result Interac was ordered to institute testing and it appears Interac is now rolling out a program for all ALTS to be tested but we are taking a wait and see approach to guage their commitment. Anecdotally, we know that in the past Interac had asked ALTs at some Boards of Education to take the tests but the company often failed to ensure the tests were actually taken.

ALTs should be hired directly
Health checks are another reason that we cannot place the education of Japan’s youth in the hands of private companies such as Interac. They cannot be relied upon to ensure the safety of students or workers. If all ALTs were directly hired their annual health checks would take place at the same time as their Japanese coworkers.

If you are concerned with your health and that of your students, contact us to find out more.

Solidarity,
Erich

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20100417p2a00m0na019000c.html

KASHIWA, Chiba — Public schools here have been unable to start their native speaker-taught English classes this school year after the city’s board of education was accused of violating labor laws with foreign language teachers.

According to the Kashiwa Municipal Board of Education, it has been instructed by the local labor office to change its labor relationship with foreign assistant language teachers (ALTs) in the city’s elementary and junior high schools after it engaged in illegal employment practices.

The local education board entrusted part of its English curriculum for primary and secondary school students to a Tokyo-based staffing agency between 2007 and 2009, and a total of 23 foreign teachers belonging to the agency worked as ALTs at 61 local public elementary and junior high schools during this period. Their contracts expired at the end of last month.

A local labor union supporting foreign language teachers complained to the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry’s Chiba labor office that the teachers were forced to work as temporary workers under the guise of subcontractors, while demanding the municipality extend their contract periods.

In response to the complaint, the labor office launched an investigation and confirmed that each school placed the foreign teachers under its direct supervision even though they worked under consigning contracts. The labor office then concluded that the education board forced the teachers to work as temporary workers under the guise of subcontractors, a practice that constitutes a violation of the Worker Dispatching Act.

Under the current law, companies and other business operators must offer a direct contract to their temporary workers after they have completed the first three years of work. Moreover, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare’s labor guidelines require a minimum three-month interval before the two parties enter into another temporary contract.

The city’s board of education had planned to terminate its English class teacher outsourcing contract and employ temporary English teachers directly starting this April. However, as the labor office judged that the education board had already forced its contracted foreign teachers to work as normal temporary staff, it became impossible for the city to renew the contracts right away, in accordance with the ministry guidelines prohibiting consecutive temporary contracts of over three years.

The local education board has announced that it will comply with the labor office’s order and will resume relevant English classes after the three-month waiting period expirees in July.

In August last year, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology instructed local boards of education nationwide to switch consigning contracts for ALTs to either direct or temporary employment. A subsequent survey by the ministry has revealed that 670 municipalities still maintained their outsourcing arrangements for native English class teachers, of which 439 responded they were not planning to change their current practices.

The ministry’s International Education Division has requested each education board consult with their local labor office and make corrections as needed.

(Mainichi Japan) April 17, 2010
Original Japanese article here:

http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news/20100417k0000m040089000c.html

Throughout Japan Boards of Education have been moving away from the JET program in favour of outsourcing ALT jobs to dispatch companies. In Fukuoka it has come to the point that most BOEs subcontract out their work.

This page is aimed to shed some light on the current systems that operate to the detriment of ALTs – who are practically all non-Japanese (NJ).


- Why do BOEs outsource ALT teaching jobs.
- The difference between direct employ, sub-contract and dispatch contracts.
- What is illegal about a sub-contract ALT working at a public school.
- The tender bid process.
- How much money do dispatch companies make from ALTs?
- Dispatch company ALT and health insurance.
- How dispatch companies and BOEs get rid of ALTs they don’t like.
- Ministry of Education tells BOEs to directly employ ALTs – BOEs ignore
directive.
- Labour Standards Office issue reprimand, BOE has head in the sand.
- How the sub-contracting system damages other teachers in the industry.
- Why the Fukuoka General Union is fighting for direct employment.
- Reference materials
- You Tube news reports on the ALT sub-contracting issue (Helps explain the
situation to Japanese teachers)

Why do BOEs outsource ALT teaching jobs.
Up until a few years ago most local governments procured their Assistant
Language Teachers (ALTs) through the JET program. However, with local government
budgets tightening, they began looking for ways to cut expenditure. The
cost of keeping a JET was about 6 million yen per year, so when they were
approached by dispatch companies which offered to do it for less they jumped
on the bandwagon. But not only did they save money, they outsourced the
management of the ALTs, getting the dispatch company to take on the troublesome
chore of getting the ALT accommodation, assimilating them into Japanese
society and taking care of any trouble that arises. Like a cancer the number
of non-JET ALTs at public schools increased to a point where they make
up the bulk of ALTs in Fukuoka (and other) Prefectures. To outsource the
ALT teaching jobs, they have determined that it is a "service"
(業務 gyomu).

- The difference between direct employ, sub-contract and dispatch contracts.
The Board of Education (BOE), which is in charge of placing ALTs at their schools outsources the work to the dispatch companies like Interac, OWLS and KBS. However the type of contract that they make with the Dispatch company is at the core of the problem.

DIRECT EMPLOYMENT
This is what all JET ALTs and some non-JETs get. They are directly employed
by the BOE (City/town). Conditions are usually much better than the outsourced
worker. ALT and Union can negotiate directly with BOE.

SUB-CONTRACT
Practically all BOEs SUB-CONTRACT the work out and therefore make a SUB-CONTRACTING
CONTRACT (English sounds a bit clumsy, but it is the closest translation
of the Japanese 委託業務契約 itaku gyomu keiyaku). Then, the dispatch company
employs ALTs to work at the BOE (school). In this case the BOE has no control
over the ALT, only the dispatch company has the authority to tell the ALT
what to do/teach/where to go etc. Schools cannot issue references as they
are not the employer. ALT cannot negotiate with school or BOE regarding
conditions. BOE does not have to negotiate with Union or ALT over conditions
even though they definitely have a moral obligation to. （click here for
explanatory graphic)

DISPATCH CONTRACT
A dispatch contract (派遣契約　haken keiyaku) is a special type of contract
meant for dispatch companies to send workers out to work for companies.
The dispatch company makes a DISPATCH contract with the BOE, and then the
dispatch contract employs the ALT with a DISPATCH CONTRACT. In this case
the BOE does have the authority to tell the ALT what to do/teach and where
to go. The big advantage of a dispatch contract is that if the dispatchee
(ALT) has worked at the company (BOE/school) for a certain period of time
(1-3 years) the ALT has the right to demand full time （正規 seiki） employment
and the company (BOE) must grant the full time direct contract of employment.
The ALT or Union can negotiate with the BOE. (It is noteworthy that Interac
make a point of this when promoting sub-contracted ALTs)（click here for
explanatory graphic)
**JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE WORKING FOR A DISPATCH COMPANY AND ARE DISPATCHED TO A SCHOOL DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE ON A DISPATCH CONTRACT!!**

What is illegal about a sub-contracted ALT?

An ALT, by definition, is an assistant. They assist the Japanese Teacher of English (JTE), so the JTE must tell the ALT what to do. However a sub-contracted ALT cannot receive ANY direction or evaluation from the JET before, during or after the class. If a JTE, or anyone at the school tells the ALT what to teach, how to teach or evaluates the ALT, it is illegal under the dispatch law (派遣法).
However, let’s suppose that the JTE does nothing, doesn’t tell the ALT what to do and gives them a free hand to do what they want. This would breach the Education Law as the teacher must have a (Japanese) teacher’s licence to teach a class.
The Ministry of Education has issued a clear directive stating that an ALT must plan lessons with the JET, and evaluate each other. In the same directive it stated that a sub-contracted ALT cannot be evaluated by, or plan lessons with a JTE. Either way the system breaches the law, but the BOE, and especially the dispatch company ignore this.

The tender bid process
Despite the subcontracting of ALT work breaching the law, and the MOE directing BOEs to hire ALTs directly and not to sub-contract, they still do. ALTs are mostly procured by tender bid process.

I might add that ALTs (gaijin) are the only teachers ever to be “procured” by tender.

It is a “tender by proposal” （企画入札）therefore the proposals are submitted and the company with the best proposal wins the tender. Criteria for adjudging the best proposal is here. As you can see there is very little regarding teaching in the classroom, with more weight being placed on administrative ability of the dispatch company.

In the case of Fukuoka Prefecture BOE (2010 school year) the tender was gazetted on the Prefecture web site on Feb 5, 2010 for 30 ALTs to work at 40 Prefectural High Schools from April 12 to July 20 (the 2009 contract was for a full year, however this time it is for a mere 3 months). The ALTs are to work from 8am to 5:15pm for a total of 7 hours (despite it being 9hours 15 minutes they want you to be there, your work is only 7 hours!)

The timeline for the tender bid is as follows:

The criteria for evaluation of the proposals concentrate on a) the number of ALTs registered with the dispatch company and b) the ability of the dispatch company to manage the ALTs. There is very little criteria relating to classroom work. There is even an item relating to work with the community – something that the school should definitely not subcontract out.

Click here for the proposal evaluation criteria and the Prefecture’s point
score/weightings. (Japanese-2009)
Click here for an English translation.

This process means that the current 30 ALTs working at Prefectural High Schools will not know if they will have a job after March until March 18, and even then it will not be for a year, but only 3 months and 1 week.

In 2009, 4 companies submitted proposals, with the successful company (OWLS) submitting a quote and eventually signing a contract for 122,183,250 yen.

As of December 2009, 8 ALTs, or 26% had quit.

Here is another (hard to believe) fact relating to the quote. The successful dispatch company is notified and then submits a quote by fax to the BOE. If that quote is above the upper limit of designated by the Prefecture for the ALTs, the dispatch company is notified and asked to submit another quote. If the dispatch company decided that the upper limit is too low (and not worth bidding for) the second best proposal gets a chance to bid.

In reality, the winning bidder can submit as many quotes as they like until they reach the upper limit the Prefecture has set.

For the BOE and dispatch company it is a convenient system. For the ALT and the education system it is an unstable, unfair system that has no future.

Phantom positions vacant ads for ALTs

As you can see in the Fukuoka Prefecture BOE tender, the successful bidder will not be notified until March 18. However, the dispatch company must have a number of ALTs on their books (registered with the company) for the tender bid proposal. Therefore, the dispatch companies advertise on Gaijinpot and Fukuoka Now etc. for ALT jobs ? that they don’t yet have. Phantom jobs! In the case of the 4 dispatch companies, only OWLS teachers got jobs. All the people who registered with KBS, Interac and American Chatterbox for the ALT positions, well bad luck.

And if OWLS do not win the bid, then all their ALTs will lose their jobs too.

The dispatch companies do not mention that they don’t yet have the jobs they are advertising for. False Advertising!?

How much is an ALT worth?

Each BOE sets their own upper limit for each bid, so each city/town will spend a different amount per ALT. To get an idea of how much the BOE pays for each ALT per year/month it is just a matter of dividing the total amount by the number of ALTs.

Another ridiculous side of the sub-contracting system is that these contracts are subject to 5% consumption tax. In other words, 5% of the ALTs salary goes in tax, then on top of that they pay income tax. This system unfairly double taxes the ALT. (Direct hire is not subject to consumption tax).

Below is a table showing how much BOEs in Fukuoka are paying for ALTs.

The Fukuoka 2009 Prefecture ALT contract includes 5,818,250 yen in consumption tax and 100,000 yen in stamp duty.
This works out to 197,275 yen per ALT going in tax, that would not be applicable
if the ALTs were direct hire.

Kitakyushu City sub-contracts work out by the class, rather than by the ALT, therefore a contract will be for a certain number of classes. Therefore, to work out how much OWLS was paid for a certain contract I divided the number of classes taught (as per reports submitted by OWLS to the Kitakyushu BOE) by the total amount of the contract.

(This is one of numerous Kitakyushu BOE contracts)

Dispatch company ALT and health insurance.

This is a very complex issue, but the bottom line is that dispatch companies
do everything they can to avoid enrolling their ALTs in public health and
pension, known as Shakai Hoken (SH). Despite what they tell the ALTs about
the cost, them main drive behind their unwillingness is that the dispatch
company MUST pay 50% of the SH cost. This usually works out to about 25,000
to 30,000 yen per month (depending on income). It is on parity with the
National Health Insurance (Kokumin Kenko Hoken [KKH]) but is more expensive
than private (travel) insurance. (The FGU advises members not to join private
insurance if at all possible as foreigners in Japan are obliged to join
either SH or KKH).
One way that unscrupulous dispatch companies avoid enrolment is by making employment contracts less than 30 hours per week. This is to try and create an “out” by calling on a government advisory that states that to be eligible for SH an employee must work APPROXIMATELY three quarters of a regular full time employee. Seeing the normal working week is 40 hours, anything under 30 hours is less than three quarters. Therefore, by making contracts 29.5 hours work per week, the company claims that the ALT is under the threshold. It should be noted that the FGU believes that even teaching 29.5 hours per week ALTs are eligible as the advisory states that it is APPROXIMATELY three quarters （概ね3/4）.

By avoiding enrolling ALTs in SH a dispatch company saves 25,000 yen per
month per ALT. A company like Interac which has 5000 ALTs would save 1.5
billion yen per year.

And just because you are enrolled in private health insurance, it doesn’t mean that you are absolved from enrolling in SH or KKH. One ALT, who was enrolled in private health insurance was hit with a bill form 2 years back payment for KKH. When he didn’t pay it he had money seized from his bank account. Then, after cleaning out his bank account, the city then went on to seize his salary.

The city will let the dispatch company weasel out of enrolling ALTs in SH, but they will hit you with big bills for not enrolling in KKH.

In addition, to weasel out of SH dispatch companies limit working time to less than 6 hours per day (5.9), but they demand that ALTs be at the school from 8:30 to 5:00. This means that there are a couple of hours that the ALT must be at the school, but do not get paid, because they are not working. If they sit around web surfing, other teachers will say they are slacking off.

click here for Fukuoka Pref HS ALT contract and specified hours.

The Japanese teaching staff are not aware of this situation.

By the dispatch company avoiding SH, it enables them to provide cheaper labour to the BOE. Therefore, the BOE benefits from the dispatch company ignoring working conditions. This must stop.
How dispatch companies and BOEs get rid of ALTs they don’t like.

How to get rid of a sub-contracted ALT

To get rid of a JET is a long involved process, as the BOE, being the employer, has responsibility for hiring the ALT in the first place. Under the sub-contracting system, a simple phone call can result in an ALT getting kicked out.

Despite the BOE, school and JTE being prohibited from evaluating an ALT, they do, and if they do not like one, a simple phone call from the BOE to the dispatch company will result in an ALT losing his job. This actually happened with an OWLS ALT in Yanagawa. The BOE told OWLS that “if he kept on at the school they would not be able to reach the required level”, so OWLS told him that he had no work and tried to get him to quit. (He didn’t quit, he came to the FGU). OWLS tried not to pay him, but the FGU forced OWLS to pay out the rest of his contract.

In another case, a school demanded a female ALT, to replace the male ALT that was allotted to them. Their reason was that they “had planned the curriculum on the premise of a female teacher coming to the school”. This was a co-ed public school in Kitakyushu.

To keep in the good books with the BOE, the dispatch company will walk all over ALTs.

- Ministry of Education tells BOEs to directly employ ALTs – BOEs ignore directive.

In 2005 the Ministry of Education (MOE) issued a directive (MOE directive16-121,
17 Feb 2005) stating that sub-contracting ALTs may contravene the dispatch
laws and that they “should endeavour to directly hire excellent ALTs”.

After most BOEs ignored this directive, and the General Unions met with
MOE officials in July 2009 another directive was issued directing BOEs
to hire ALTs directly. (21初国教第65号　平成21年8月28日). (Click here for
extract) (see end page for complete document)

Despite these two clear directives, BOEs continue to sub-contract out ALT jobs.

Dispatch companies also word employment contracts so that the ALT is prohibited
from seeking direct employment from BOE, and threatens penalties if the
ALT does. Also, they get (con) BOEs into the sub-contract to include a
clause stating that they won’t attempt to employ the ALT directly.

What does this mean? That if either the BOE or the ALT approach each other
the dispatch company can (try to) sue for breach of contract. In other
words, if the BOE or ALT follow the MOEs directive they may be in breach
of contract.

The dispatch companies are walking all over the MOE instructions.

Labour Standards Office issue reprimand, BOE has head in the sand.

In December 2009, OWLS was issued with an official reprimand from the Labour Standards Office (労働基準監督署　是正勧告書) for illegally deducting a penalty from an ALT who quit mid-contract.

OWLS has a policy of making ALTs sign an “Agreement” when they sign their contract. It states that if the ALT resigns mid-contract
OWLS can deduct a penalty of 114,000 yen from the salary. This practice
is illegal and clearly breaches article 16 of the Labour Standards Law
(prohibiting penalties for non-performance of contract of employment).
OWLS were forced to pay back the money.

Nevertheless, no OWLS teachers, all of which signed the “Agreement”, were told by OWLS that they had breached labour law.

What is worse, is that the BOE has no way of knowing that OWLS has been breaking labour law, another incentive from them to carry on with the practice.

How the sub-contracting system damages other teachers in the industry.

Dispatch companies are continuing to reduce working conditions for ALTs. Some ALTs are only employed for the school term (April to mid July, Sept to Dec Jan to Mar) and are left unemployed during the school holidays.

Turning teaching English into a “service” (gyomu 業務) dehumanizes the occupation. Dispatch companies increase their influence and lower the bar for all occupations. It has been reported that some universities are starting to outsource classes to dispatch companies.

Also, the fact that FOREIGNERS are the only teachers subject to this practice. When this was pointed out to a BOE representative, the reply was “But we subcontract the security work out also”. Equating ALTs with security guards that drive around at night and check schools just goes to show the mentality.

Japanese teachers should be concerned because if the trend continues, it could happen to art, music, and home science teaching as well ? it could be turned into a “service”.

Why the Fukuoka General Union is fighting for direct employment.

Since dispatch companies have been replacing ALTs from the JET program, working conditions have deteriorated. Pay has dropped, stability has been eroded, and the revolving door of non-JET ALTs shows that the system is in a mess.
Local government BOEs have a moral responsibility to look after their employees. However, by outsourcing the ALT “service” they can let the dispatch company do their dirty work and claim impunity.

BOEs need to abide by the law, take responsibility for ALTs employment and provide a better education for students in their care.

ALTs are not only at schools to teach English, they are there to nurture international understanding and promote international exchange. This is the opposite to what BOEs that outsource are doing.

Provide stable jobs for ALTs. Demand direct employment.

REFERENCE MATERIALS (in Japanese)

Document 1 Notice from MOE (28 Aug 2009) to BOEs nationwide on subcontracting ALTs
Document 2 Reply from Ministry of Health Welfare and Labour (MHLW) to MOE (28 Aug 2009) on subcontracting ALTs (reply to document 3)
Document 3 MOE Letter to MHLW enquiring about the legality of subcontracted ALTs (21 Aug 2009)
Document 4 Attachment to document 3 defining the role of an ALT in a team teaching role.

Fukuoka Prefecture BOE tender bid information for 2010 ALT "service" contract
Onojo City Tender Bid results (KBS and OWLS with OWLS winning) for ALT "service" 2009-2012 school years.

You Tube (In Japanese)
These TV news reports provide a good summary of the "scam" and how it adversely affects foreign workers.

NHK Report on Sub-contracted ALTs Part 1


NHK Report on subcontracted ALTs Part 2