To:                   Tim Carr, Headmaster

                        Mary Margaret Mallat, President, Board of Directors

                        Tom Hastings, Chairman, Personnel Committee

From:               The ASIJ Teachers' Union

Date:                April 2, 2005

Subject:            Update on arbitration meetings

After two unproductive arbitration meetings on March 15 and 25, we would like to give you an update. Our concern is and has always been the unilateral changing of Personnel Policies without the consent of those that are represented by the policy.   

The union was formed because the Board/Admin Team acted unilaterally in changing the Personnel Policies with no prior discussion with the faculty/staff.  These changes were detrimental to those already working under signed contracts.  After unsuccessfully trying to resolve this through the normal FSCC channels, a union was formed.  Since that time we have had 12 formal meetings within the danko and arbitration process.  These meetings have caused us to miss valuable class time and have taken all of us (teachers, administrators, staff and school lawyers) away from our normal job responsibilities.  This does not benefit ASIJ students.

Our concern is not strictly about money or age discrimination although both have become part of the issue because of the actions taken as a result of the initial changing of the retirement policy and the issuance of the subsequent Non-Regular Contracts.

Policy changes that negatively impact employees may not be legally changed without the consent of the employees.  The result of these changes affected the union members' income by over 14 million yen (see below).  We believe, by Japanese law, that we have a right to the salary and benefits that have been withheld from us.  In an effort to help settle this issue, we agreed to give up about 1.5 million yen at the last arbitration meeting.  The response from the Board's team seemed like a slap in the face.  Our concerns are not being taken seriously and we plan to continue pursuing our legal rights.

We have been surprised at the Board team's insistence on confidentiality before discussing any potential settlement.  The only money the union is asking for represents earnings that were withheld from paychecks, nothing more.  We see no need for confidentiality in an open and transparent environment, which the school espouses.

Our hope would be that the Board's team would begin to negotiate in good faith.  We have always been, and continue to be, very open to any discussion of this issue with any of you at any time.

The ASIJ Teachers' Union

Ron Dirkse

Bill Jacobsson

John Hohenthaner

Marguerite Arnote

Mid Squier

Name                           Lost Wages                  Lost Retirement                        Total Losses

Mid Squier                   3,804,000                    2,288,370                                6,092,370

Ron Dirkse                   1,902,000                       922,652                                2,824,652

Bill Jacobsson               1,902,000                      819,132                                2,721,132

John Hohenthaner         1,698,000                      687,909                                2,385,909

(Article 92 of the Civil Code). Explained simply, this refers to a situation whereby, in the course of repeatedly doing the same thing over a long period, there emerges a mutual sense of being bound that is similar to a pledge made through a tacit understanding, even though no mutual pledge has been made in particular. The following interpretation has taken shape based on decisions handed down over the years by courts in Japan. To wit, this thinking holds that, when a state whereby treatment in accordance with the work regulations continues ever since the time of starting to work for a company, that becomes a rule in the minds of both labor and management.