November 18, 2004: A Japanese copy of the newly adopted retirement proposal was faxed to
the Union offices. This, in no way, addresses the concerns of the union
about (1) honoring personnel policies that we were hired under, (2) unilateral changing of policies, nor (3) the introduction
of overt age discrimination into the personnel policies. Seemingly, the Board feels it does not have to honor Personnel
Policies in signed contracts, but the teachers do have to honor their obligations in contractual matters. Is this what
ASIJ has become? See latest letter to Board--Nov 29, 2004.
---------------------------------------
This page is to allow interested parties to
follow the progress of our concerns with how ASIJ personnel policies are being unilaterally changed, with particular reference
to retirement issues and age discrimination.
We are very concerned about
the unilateral changing and re-interpreting of our policies which is illegal in Japan. We
want to insure that ALL faculty and staff are treated in a FAIR and HONEST manner. We have formed this union
to protest and fight against recent actions. Rather than being met with discussion of the issues,
we have encountered denials, half-truths, stonewalling, condescension, and out-right lies.
ASIJ Teachers' Union Position:
In
Japan, the past implementation and interpretation of a policy carries more legal emphasis than what the written policy may
state. (See Laws of Japan on sidebar)
In all the past 38 years that the retirement
policy was in effect, there has never been a non-extension of contract SOLELY BASED UPON AGE OF 60.
For the actions of the Board/Administration (releasing teachers solely based on age of 60) to be legal,
this practice would have had to have been standard procedure over the years the retirement policy was in effect. Of course, this was not the case and there are many examples to show this--see sidebar. There are
NO examples to show the Board's current interpretation--and they have admitted that.
Board/Administration
may not unilaterally change the policy to affect current teachers who have taught under the past implementation of
this or any other ASIJ policy. Do our Personnel Policies have no meaning? Does
signing a contract mean anything?
We are not alone in
our concerns over recent changes in Personnel Policies. In the past couple years janitors, bus drivers, accounting office
workers, secretaries and Japanese faculty on both campuses have either formed unions or sought other legal means
to address their grievances. Why has this been necessary?
--------------------------------------
Please select the pages
on the sidebar.
