Home
A Publication of the SUITE union
Vol. 1, No. 2 October 3, 1994
Teachers Remain Hopeful In Face of Stonewalling
We at SUITE thank you for your support as we all begin the Fall semester. Although SUITE and the NUGW are working very hard to resolve the crisis at the Community College (CC), we regretfully report that negotiations are not progressing as well as expected.
Nevertheless, we remain hopeful. We are confident that both sides can find a common ground of understanding which serves the best interests of all members of the Sophia University community: faculty, teachers, staff, administration and students.
The Community College was founded to help fulfill a fundamental aim of Sophia University: to be a bridge of understanding between East and West. Today, the College also furthers the Jesuit ideal of educating the "whole person for the whole lifetime." Unfortunately, the administration does not seem to appreciate how the College helps Sophia achieve these salutary goals.
The administration is represented by a negotiating team led by Mr. Tanaka, the kacho of the Center for Extension Programs. This group is solely concerned with "clarifying" the part-time teacher contracts. There seems to be little understanding of the intercultural mission, function or operation of the College.
Others in the University share the sentiment quoted below. These people sincerely fear that Sophia's focus and reputation rest on language education alone. They are frustrated and embarrassed by the successful University and CC language programs:
"Because if the school [Sophia University] thinks it is an institution to teach language skills, it is an act of renouncement of the original purpose [of the university]. It will be denying itself the qualifications as a university and debasing itself." - Kazuyuki Matsuo, "The Future Is Behind Us: Our Foreign Language Education" in The Future Image of Sophia University ed. Mutsuo Yanase, S.J. (Tokyo: Nanosha Co. Ltd., 1989) p. 182
Anyone who thinks Sophia's sole function or reputation is "language skills" or who believes that language education is unimportant is sadly mistaken.
This is not a simple contract dispute. The administration's misguided strategy endangers the stewardship of the College and the mission of Sophia.
You may have received a letter from the administration which was distributed within Sophia University (dated August 4th). It is time to air it out.
Allegation : The administration stated in the above document that the Community College teachers "perhaps misunderstand their status" and "think that they should be treated as university professors."
The Truth : We have never taken and will never take the position that the part-time teachers should be given a status similar to "professor."
The CC teachers organized in SUITE know and respect that Sophia professors have a unique status and bear particular responsibilities that apply to their position in the university. The CC teachers have their own, different, special position in the university.
SUITE challenges the administration to find in SUITE's communications or rhetoric any indication that the CC teachers have claimed for "treatment as Sophia professors" or even as "full-time employees."
All we have demanded is:
In the August 4th document there were repeated references to the "52 language teachers" who were "invited to teach from outside the university" ("gakugaisha").
Fact : Most of the part-time CC language teachers were never "invited" at all. Instead, they applied for a competitive job, they were interviewed and they were hired. These teachers were hired by Fr. Everett, Fr. Howell and Professor Petite. They were never treated as "guests" or "independent contractors." Asking them to accept a change to their status from "employee" to "guest" is not a reasonable request to ask of dedicated professionals. In fact, the school itself does not consider or describe those part-time teachers to be "gakugaisha."
Many of these "gakugaisha" teachers have the title "Sophia University Center for Extension Programs Teacher." Please refer to the CC course catalog published by the Center. This publication is freely and very publicly distributed, and describes the teachers as:
Professor - Sophia University, Department of xxx 12
Professor - (other) University, Department of xxx 5
Teacher - Sophia University Center for Extension Programs 42
Free Writer (freelance writer) 1
The part-time teachers whose contracts are currently under negotiation have always had a document entitled "Employment Agreement" or "Agreement" as written evidence of their status with the school. Nowhere in these contracts is it expressed or implied that the teachers are "invited" or are "guests."
How can management advertise these teachers as belonging to the University
as "Sophia University Center for Extension Programs Teachers"
and then, when convenient, turn around and try to label them as "gakugaisha"?
Does the administration honestly consider teachers who have served the Community
College for 5, 10 or 15 years to be outside the Sophia community? Does the
right hand know what the left is doing?
The August 4th document stated that the attempted change in contractual status offered to the CC teachers "did not make any difference." False. The proposed contracts make a big difference and the school knows it.
The administration is holding themselves out to be quite badly misinformed on the law. The law clearly and unequivocally states that "Employment Contracts," after repeated renewals, accumulate employment rights. Included therein is protection against unjustified non-renewal of the contract. Of course, if the employer can show a good reason for non-renewal, then non-renewal can be legal. Good reasons must be as extreme as bankruptcy. Sophia is not bankrupt...or is it?
It may surprise you that we are not fighting for "more money." During the original contract talks (before SUITE was established) the administration actually offered to pay each teacher a large sum of money to induce signing of the new Entrustment Agreement. The teachers showed little interest in the offer.
After reviewing their labor attorney's original advice (that their current contracts had at least some employment rights) the teachers concluded that signing the entrustment would leave them unreasonably vulnerable and would devalue their professional status. Money is no substitute for self-respect!
As with the gakugaisha assertion, we can see that the school's actions regarding the contracts are telling. If the administration truly felt that the teachers currently work under an entrustment (not an employment contract) then why such urge and determination to change the title and substance to "Entrustment"? Why so stubborn in insisting that the new title is "beyond negotiation"? If not employee contracts, why did the school go so far as to try to pay the teachers to give up their old contracts?
The August 4th letter also denied that the teachers have any participation
in the management of the CC and that the teachers "demanded to have
the classes held at days and times to fit their convenience."
Fr. Yamamoto, is your advisor named Iago?
Fact : At the behest of the school, and with the full cooperation of the relevant authorities, the teachers researched, planned and suggested a new curriculum.
In October 1993 Professor Sugawara, then the Director of the Center, wanted each language group to make "a new curriculum" that would benefit the College.
Br. Milward, the Community College - University liaison, duly informed the teachers of the request. The teachers gladly agreed to become more involved in the operation of their school and volunteered their time and energy for the project.
Necessarily, many courses were moved from one day to another, from one time to another, from one level to another. These changes were made for the benefit of the Center, not for the convenience of the teachers. The various language groups presented reports to Professor Sugawara and Mr. Tanaka for their use in planning the Spring 1994 schedule. The result: only one English class had to be canceled for low enrollment in Spring 1994, as compared to 16 the previous Spring and 23 in the previous semester (Fall 1993).
Clearly, the school benefited from the requested advice. How ungrateful to now characterize the teacher's effort as a "demand for convenience"! What better proof of the teacher's dedication and resourcefulness, and what better evidence that the teachers can make a positive contribution to the management of the Community College?
The project outlined above had another beneficent result: it laid the foundation for SUITE. Professor Sugawara and Br. Milward paved the way for the SUITE union by fostering teacher-to-teacher communication and by encouraging the teachers to become more involved in the management of the school. A few months later, Tanaka-kacho and the negotiating team made SUITE necessary by virtue of their stubborn "take it or leave it" tactics; finally, NUGW and the founding SUITE members made the union a reality.
The teachers organized in SUITE are committed to serving Sophia. We promise to do our best to work for the good of both the College and the University.
Can management make the same claim?
SUITE - Sophia University International Teachers and Employees Union - can
be reached in care of: NUGW (The National Union of General Workers)
3-21-7 Shimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo
phone: (03) 3434-0669 fax: (03) 3433-0334
SUITE Newsletter
Volume 1, Number 1 July 4, 1994
SUITE Newsletter
Volume 1, Number 3 October 13, 1994
SUITE Newsletter
Volume 1, Number 4 October 25, 1994
SUITE Newsletter
Volume 1, Number 5 November 10, 1994
SUITE Newsletter
Volume 1, Number 6 December 13, 1994
SUITE Newsletter
Volume 2, Number 1 July 4, 1995
The overview: Tokyo Observer article