next »

[crypto]

1) When this Contract expires, the Employer and the Employee can renew the Contract, *subject to mutual agreement by both
parties.*
2) The Employer *shall indicate its will about the renewal* to the Employee no later than five (5) months before the expiration of the Contract.

Yes, if you really think of the worst case scenario, the Employer can rightfully declare termination of your contract 5 months before it ends.  The word "mutual" here is nonsensical since renewal is contingent on the will of the Employer, which is based on unilateral evaluation. 

My opinion is that the entire paragraph 1) should have been eliminated if the Employer intended to force everyone to reapply at the end of their contracts since the resulting contracts are technically "new contracts", not renewals.

I guess with all the sweet talks at the opening of the school, and favorably interpreting vague expressions in the contract as awkward translation, many faculty members did not expect this to happen, especially in light of MSUA, where most non-exchange faculty members were given renewal unless their performance suffered.

Which brings us back to the initial posts here that warned prospective applicants to the AIU positions that were advertised on the Chronicle and through other sources.

Also, academic job "negotiation" means negotiation on salary, teaching load, research fund, etc. which usually comes AFTER the prospective employer shows clear intension of hiring/retaining you.  I do not know of any teacher who were exempted from regular evaluation and given contract renewal through "negotiation".

[allies]

I hear yukidaruma's case and I guess interpretation does figure in. However, I would maintain that it's a violation. If AIU sincerely chose not to renew each person individually--their right contractually--then simply had to recruit for all the vacant positions, it might be bizarre, unethical, and highly suspicious, but one could claim the contract terms were fulfilled. However, AIU made a *collective* statement that no contracts could be renewed. Ie. the contracts were no longer renewable. Can AIU sincerely claim that the contracts they offered are RENEWABLE if NOT A SINGLE FACULTY MEMBER GETS RENEWED? It's a violation. They simply changed their minds about the sort of contracts they wanted, and made the changes unilaterally. I think you're straining to interpret this in AIU's favor. Regardless of whether we want to label this a contract violation or not, everyone I have talked to strongly agrees AIU is worthy of our scorn.

 

[zatroof]

I’m in agreement with allies. AIU is in violation, and can and should be sued. I understand President Mineo Nakajima is now offering humanitarian support for the faculty who “may be feeling anxiety” about their contracts which AIU has violated. President Nakajima states he is “offer(ing) as much assistance as possible in their efforts to seek employment elsewhere.” I understand that part of this “assistance” is in the form of a one-year, non-renewable contract with AIU at reduced rank and salary. (I don’t work there and this data is a couple generations from the source, but the tactic has been around for a while – so it’s highly believable and highly likely (except the cheap bit.)

Anyway…

DO NOT SIGN ANY CONTRACT THAT OFFERS YOU LESS THAN THE ORIGINAL THREE-YEAR RENEWABLE.

I am not an attorney, but as I understand it, if you sign a new contract with AIU, it’s provisions supercede your original contract, and you no longer have a claim that AIU is in violation. AND they won’t be in violation when they don’t renew you at the end of next year. They are in violation now.

Now, It’s entirely possible that President Mineo Nakajima is a great humanitarian along with all his other fine qualities, as usually a miscreant administration offers the victim a substantial  increase in salary as bait in order to weasel out of the main items: the provisions in the contract for renewal and length of term. Without the salary bait, maybe it really is just an honest way to offer “assistance” and add some holiday cheer (or further humiliation) for the poor redundant.

If you haven’t sought professional legal advice, do it. If you haven’t joined the union, get on it. You have nothing to lose and stand to gain much.

Much.

Much.

Like the maximum - up to the total salary you would make until retirement age. No kidding.

Don’t take my word for it. Check it out.

[zatroof]

P.S. For reasons similar to those given in my previous post, DON'T (possibly in a fit of righteous indignation) RESIGN either.

If you resign, you also lose your claim that the university didn't renew you as the contract stated.

DON'T RESIGN.

Mass resignations of non-renewed faculty would be the best Christmas present President  Mineo Nakajima could ever hope for.

He's rich enough.

Talk to a lawyer.

[concernedinakita]

For those of you who understand that you are going to lose your job in April (and for those of you are averse to working in a climate of fear and loathing): Form a union through RENGO now. You have absolutely nothing to lose. Go to the RENGO office, fill out the forms and in three weeks you are a RENGO affiliated union. Even if you is only you-one person can form a union. (I would strongly suggest, though, at least two- one to hand President Nakajima the document that establishes that you represent a bona fide faculty union, and another to photograph the look on the great man’s face for posterity.) This won’t keep your job, but it will make it extremely costly to fire you and every other union member. Union membership is confidential and the administration won’t know who (except one) or how many people are actual union members. Only one member/representative has to show up at negotiations. The RENGO lawyer will do the rest. Now, for one, or even bunch of foreigners with no political clout (message: try to get as many Japanese colleagues to join you as possible), RENGO won’t be giving you their finest legal minds, but they are bound to give you someone to represent you and AIU is legally bound to deal with its faculty union. AIU will probably fire you anyway, but the cost of firing you will be many times that of firing a non-union teacher. Take that cost times say, 10 or 15, or more faculty, and you start getting into the kind of wasted money taxpayers and newspapers are interested in. (Maybe this paragraph alone just saved a couple positions.) Anyway, check it out:

 
RENGO Local of  AKITA
Address
FORUM AKITA, 6-7-36 Naka-dori, Akita-shi, AKITA 010-0001
Telephone
+81-188-33-0505
Facsimile
+81-188-33-0506

But for reasons discussed above, it’s probably a good idea to get a private lawyer that specializes in these cases, too-all the better for individual and class action lawsuits.

Legal Action may be the only way this story is going to get any publicity in the media--local or national!

[zatroof]

Thanks for the referral to my previous post, concernedinakita. But for the AIU folks, I'm deferring to takibansei's subsequent post.

A few quick corrections to Zatroof's otherwise excellent advice.  First, Zenrokyo is the more appropriate choice for foreign employees (Rengo too often will not act).  You can find more info here:

http://home.vicnet.net.au/~genunion/

We're all sending the same message: ACT!

It's not just for you, it's for our whole profession.

[concernedinakita]

New Website for General Union:
http://www.generalunion.org/

Looks like this may be one way to go to get help and news coverage.

Ritsumeikan University Case
Teachers Unionized in 2003
The Ritsumeikan University Branch was formed in 2003 to address specific Ritsumeikan University issues. The branch is currently in dispute with university administration over its policy of contract term limits that treat teachers as disposable.

After leaflets were distributed
activities made the evening TV news:
NHK reports on Ritsumeikan dispute (WAV file)
http://www.generalunion.org/rits/

An informative video was produced in English and Japanese and put on the net:
http://generalunion.org/kumiai/video/Rits2005EN.html


From the Rits leaflet:
Q: What do cow's milk and some Rits  teachers have in common?
A: Both soon expire...

The same could be said for AIU.

The situation at AIU needs to get into the news!

[yukidaruma]

Here are a notable few of the things said when some of the students met the President to express their concerns recently.

As already written before, due to the University reforms it was unfortunately necessary to let some members of the faculty go, having seemingly found replacements with good educational records and PhDs, necessary to raise the quality of the University and to open the future graduate department. The President did express his displeasure at having to do it and also in that many students feel unhappy about the decision, but that the management considered it carefully and came to that decision. He did say he was doing his best to ensure those members of staff who didn't receive new contracts find a new job and place to live (etc). Again, it would be nice to know if this is happening, at least to reassure the students' minds.

In regard to the renewal of contracts for the Directors without competition from outside the University, the President was noted as saying that the Directors were needed to secure the core of the University while making these changes to faculty and restructuring. When questioned about how the Directors are evaluated, the answer given was peer evaluation. Obviously though, the President has the final say on all matters anyway. So the issue about unequal treatment is again down to how the system works. The President has the power to decide that...

When questioned about the system in place at the University, the President remained firm on his belief in the top-down system of management, for reasons that in a democratic system, decisions rarely get made quickly and conversation simply 'evaporates' after meetings. He also seemed unconcerned when a hybrid system of sorts was suggested, in order to allow some feedback from the faculty while retaining the decision-making power at the top. As for the evaluation reports, it was acknowledged by the President's secretary that there were still problems that needed ironing out, but as with the universal system, it seemed to follow the same line that it will remain unchanged. Clearly changing the system is on a much grander scale than contract renewal however, but it's disappointing to see that it won't be considered, despite every teacher that has been interviewed having expressed discontent with it.

Finally, and perhaps something notable for the court case that seems to be developing, the President did say that this situation is may occur again 3 years if further changes or restructuring is needed. I think that rings very loudly of inappropriate contracting practices for foreigners as many, many other Universities in Japan are plagued with.

[concernedinakita]

Here are a notable few of the things said when some of the students met the President to express their concerns recently.
<>
He did say he was doing his best to ensure those members of staff who didn't receive new contracts find a new job and place to live (etc). Again, it would be nice to know if this is happening, at least to reassure the students' minds.

This makes me feel so much better about the situation at AIU. To know that Dr. Nakajima is doing "his best"  to find "new jobs" for those who didn't receive new contracts!


Please, reassure the students minds, send in your testimonials about the "help" that Dr. N is giving you!

[yukidaruma]

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm only reporting for the most part. I thought it was doubtful the faculty who haven't been given contracts will get one at this late stage, so letting the students know about finding a new job and such was an afterthought. I still think the whole ordeal is terrible and I'm not implying that I suddenly think that the manner in which these changes occurred is acceptable at all. I would like to see the staff remain and the system at this University altered. We're not entirely sure what we can do now though, as many of the students do not want to get involved in action and others also stand by the President's decisions.

[crypto]

I did some research on the case of Ritsumeikan APU.  Their situation appears to have a lot in common with what happened at AIU.

http://university.sub.jp/apu/saiban/
http://university.sub.jp/apu/saiban/english/
http://university.sub.jp/apu/saiban/shomei/apu_bira01.pdf

APU teachers successfully got support from the General Union, Oita Regional Labor Union, Japan Federation of Private University Teachers' and Employees' Unions, and the teachers' union of the Ritsumeikan University (APU is affiliated with RU but is a separate entity).

I hope the non-renewed faculty members at AIU are aware of this.  The APU plaintiffs are still fighting their lawsuit and should have a lot of advice for the AIU folks.

Ultimately Monka-sho should realize that job insecurity for non-tenured faculty is one of the major factors contributing to the constant export of talented educators/researchers, Japanese or non-Japanese, or the general lack of interest in college graduates to pursue career in academia.

[concernedinakita]

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm only reporting for the most part.

Yukidaruma,

I'm not misunderstaning you. I understand that you are only quoting what the President said. And we appreciate your doing that.

If it is true that the Dr. N is helping former staff to seek new positions elsewhere I hope that they will tell us about it.

It would be very reassuring to confirm that this is actually taking place.

[crypto]

As for the evaluation reports, it was acknowledged by the President's secretary that there were still problems that needed ironing out, but as with the universal system, it seemed to follow the same line that it will remain unchanged.

I am very curious what kinds of "problems" still need to be ironed out?  It has been almost three years since the school opened!  Isn't quick decision making the reason for the top-down management?

I only have experience at a few universities in the US, but all of them had more or less similar sets of questions.  My current school has a dozen standard questions on helpfulness, availability and preparedness of the instructor, how challenging the course was compared to the student's expectation, what grade s/he is expecting, the pace of lecture, classroom environment, and whether the student is willing to take another course with the same instructor.  Answers are scored on the scale of 0 to 10.

The same list of questions are used for all instructors from TAs to full professors.  The results (average scores for each question) are available online and serves as a guide for students when they register for courses.  Also, those with stellar evaluations are nominated for various teaching awards.  Our school is public, and it is indeed spelled out clearly that it is students' right to know the results of teaching evaluation.

This is a standard practice and very easy to execute - 5 minutes at the end of the last lecture of the semester and one student volunteer to collect and deliver the evaluations to the department office. 

I really do not understand what the problem is with AIU.  Political intentions undermining quality of education and student welfare?  Or sheer inability?

[crypto]

Sorry for repeated posts, but I find this utterly irritating:

In regard to the renewal of contracts for the Directors without competition from outside the University, the President was noted as saying that the Directors were needed to secure the core of the University while making these changes to faculty and restructuring.

Okay, so from now on this kind of HR chaos will erupt every three years, while the Directors, who also face their contract renewals at the same time, are given almost automatic renewal without outside competition because they are "needed to secure the core of the University" at the time of transition. 

This is essentially a tenure system, which Nakajima criticizes with passion.

[concernedinakita]

In the News!

It's finally happened. The problems at AIU are now officially news!

If you live in Akita-ken you can check it out for yourself in today's (December 17, 2006) edition of the Asashi Shimbun (One of five national newspapers in Japan. It has alliances with the International Herald Tribune and the New York Times.)

Hopefully other papers will follow suit.