next »

[Reciprocity N]

Should "international universities" with international exchange programs be required to have non-discriminatory hiring practices?

E-1 Visa (Professors)
A. The Object of Visa Issuance
.... In the case of a national or a public university, a foreigner is not permitted to be a full-time professor.
Immigration Bureau, Ministry of Justice, Republic of Korea
Retrieved on April 9, 2005 from http://www.moj.go.kr/HP/ENG/eng_03/eng_306030.jsp

Foreign scholars merit equal status: The foreign professor -- colleague or hired hand?
Foreign professors tend to be treated as hired hands, without academic standing, and lacking the possibility of career advancement or tenure. They must submit to yearly contracts (compensated at a rate only 60 percent of their Korean peers) while walled off from the permanent Korean faculty who benefit from travel, research funding, sabbaticals, etc. Moreover, when hundreds of Korean scholars enjoy such perks at American and other foreign universities, something is obviously amiss.... According to the Samsung Group's chairman, Lee Kun-hee, to succeed globally, Korea must forgo the thought that Korea and being Korean is superior, and foreign specialists must be treated with respect.
by John B. Kotch, INSIDE JoongAng Ilbo (June 14, 2002)
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200206/14/200206142349223599900090109011.html

"No chair for foreigner"
GM Daewoo head told
He may be the president of GM Daewoo, but he is still an outsider in the Korean car industry. The Korea Automobile Manufacturers Association has decided that Nick Reilly, a Briton, cannot be the new chairman of the organization. The automobile association's rule states that only Koreans can lead the industry grouping. Mr. Reilly has thus stepped aside to allow his vice president, Lee Young-kook, to head the organization. The "no-foreigners" rule was first made in 2001 when then-Samsung Motor was being sold to Renault.
by Kim Tae-jin and Lee Ho-jeong, INSIDE JoongAng Daily (January 18, 2005)
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200501/17/200501172228551609900090509051.html

[Pecos]

Although the idea of reciprocity would seem fair, it is not clear who or what would have the power to change the laws.  Maybe someday the WTO will get involved in international labor laws, but I would not hold my breath.

I would also add that the US is one of the few countries with a long tradition of encouraging immigration, and our laws reflect that.

[a Canadian]

It would be nice for the US to practice reciprocity in trade too. The country expects free entry for their goods but not for those from other countries and attempts to control other country's economic policies. If all countries, including the US, was consistent then perhaps there would be reciprocity in labour laws.

There is a lot of one way traffic between US and Mexico now. Americans can  more easily find work in Mexico but the reverse is not true!

[Claudia]

How about all the other countries who don't have rules like that?

There is one country, ONE country with such discriminatory statutes in their law that you know - a country with a very difficult and tragic history - and you demand such far-reaching consequences?

[TBD]

Dunno if this is persistent trilateralism or what-- evidence of a now internationally-based business class with transnational interests.  I think that our negative balance of payments in the US prove that we are more open than we need to be about foreign goods.  Having people make our goods overseas is the same as employing them here.  And we allow many of these countries to produce goods and now services under conditions we would not allow in the US-- child labor, government anti-union activity, repressive regimes, the lot.  

I've seen many foreign citizens given academic jobs (some from Korea) often in service of "diversity."  Fine-- no doubt thay have quality contributions to make.  But I think we should have a firmly retaliatory policy with regard to these sorts of issues.  If you are not (formally or informally-- as in the case of Japan) open to our services or goods, we are not open to yours.

Tit for tat is a optimal strategy in a multi-move game such as international commerce.

[Rina]

TBD wrote:

>  Having people make our goods overseas
> is the same as employing them here.  

Except that it costs American businesses a micro fraction of what it'd cost them here.


>And we allow many of these
> countries to produce goods and now services under conditions we
> would not allow in the US-- child labor, government anti-union
> activity, repressive regimes, the lot.  

Those conditions and their poverty are precisely the reasons why American businesses go overseas.

You make it sound like we're being charitable when our companies outsource. Wake up!

[spongetroll]

As the number of H1-B visas is reduced the desire to outsource research and development and other services increases...

[duh]

Of course it's easy for Americans to get jobs in Mexico, there is no one left there to work-they all came here.

As far as pay in other countries goes, yes we pay overseas workers less than Americans for the same job. It's because we generally pay them what an average worker makes in THEIR country, not ours. Are American companies taking advantehge of poor conditions, of course they are, you'd have to be blind to not see that, but at the same time it is not the companies' duty to channge worker laws inthosse countries. Would it be nice if they helped change things? Of course, will it happen? No.Believe me, if it were the other way around (companies in other countries getting cheap American labor), the situation would be exactly the same.

[TBD]

You wake up.  You appear to be unable to read.  I don't sound like anything.  I'm making a "protectionist" argument about saving American jobs.  Or only employing people here from countries who open their employment markets to our citizens.

[Perfect]

Your information is NOT true. See the KAIST.


#1
http://www.kaist.edu/as_intro/as_nt_prsdnt/as_pd_msg/as_pd_msg.html

#2
http://math.kaist.ac.kr/math2005/menu.php?lang=en&title1=1&title2=1&title3=Arganbright%2C+Deane&chkLnk=chkprof&id=arganbright

#3
http://sms.kaist.ac.kr/~buglass/

#4
http://www.ee.kaist.ac.kr/peo.html?inc=profe_01

[Reciprocity N]

This is visa information from the Immigration Bureau (English version).

E-1 Visa (Professors)
A. The Object of Visa Issuance
.... In the case of a national or a public university, a foreigner is not permitted to be a full-time professor.
Immigration Bureau, Ministry of Justice, Republic of Korea
Retrieved on April 9, 2005 from http://www.moj.go.kr/HP/ENG/eng_03/eng_306030.jsp

If the information is incorrect or old, then it probably should be removed from the webpages.

I found an article about KAIST.

Viewpoint: A noble experiment at KAIST
At the end of May, one of the best science and engineering education and research institutes of the country, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, announced that its board of directors would appoint a Nobel prize winner in physics and a professor of Stanford University, Robert Laughlin, as the 12th president of the institute.... It is true that the closed culture and notion of keeping things within the school have obstructed Korean universities from becoming world-class universities, and so introducing a foreigner as the president of a school could be a turning point to overcoming those obstructions.
The writer is a professor of physics at Seoul National University. Translation by the JoongAng Daily staff.
Article by Oh Seh-jung
INSIDE JoongAng Daily (Article date: June 12, 2004)
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200406/10/200406102251235179900090109012.html

[llort]

It is hard to evaluate this info out of context. How hard is it to become a Korean citizen if you were offered a job in Korea? In Australia you can beome a citizen in 2 years which is much faster than the roughly 8 years or so it takes in the US from applying for an H1-B. And obviously you are going to need to teach in Korean.

And then there are regulations which say one thing and mean another. For example all applicants for student visas to the US have to convince the visa officer that they mean to return to their home country after they complete their study. But in the case of China what I have heard is only about 10% do. The rest get to stay one way or another (at least in the past, with reduced numbers of non-academic H1-Bs it might be harder). And everyone knows this, it is just a charade and you need to know how to play the game. If all else fails get the university's lawyers onto the visa office :) (this works once you are in the program and are denied readmission to the US because you are an "immigration risk").

[Reciprocity N]

What are your experiences in searching for jobs in Asia? Anyone apply for and secure a job in China, Japan, Korea, or other Asian nations?

[borderline]

Canada doesn't exactly welcome Americans for employment...

[a Canadian]

Well, not exactly welcome but (and I say this with some sadness as we have plenty of good scholars) I know of several research chair positions recently taken up by Americans desirous of leaving your fair country for reasons of politics I think. I think these positions should go first to Canadians or Canadians who desire to return to our country, especially since  these research positions involve research and American academics are more familiar with research possibilities in the USA.

I would say American scholars have a chance at jobs in Canada. Maybe borderline had a bad experience.