Real, Strange News

OOOO, I do believe in spooks, I do believe in spooks, I do, I do, I do, I do believe in spooks.

Not sure if England has the same laws about church state separation, in fact I'm sure they don't, but this is nonetheless disturbing. What if the next tenants are Voodoo witch doctors? Can they file an unlawful eviction lawsuit against the council? I thought the Brits had a bit more commonsense than this.

This was much more about saving money than it was about exocising spirits.

money well spent

I am sure that if she had requested a Catholic exorcism that they would not have paid for it. Religious intolerance is a two way street.

Is anyone sticking up for the rights those spirits. They were the original tenants and certainly have a right to live in its ethereal plane. Frankly I am aggrevated.

This is so dumb i can't decide whether to laugh or cry.

here is a copy of a letter my Member of Parliament regarding a complaint about the British Council and its dealings with salary.

I never ever got a reply and this shows how they have the money to burn on ghostbusting.

Our contracts with the British Council are governed under the labor laws of South Korea and not the U.K. As a result we must pay into the South Korean version of the state pension and also local taxes. New contracts were produced for new staff members which stated that a percentage of the salary (the salary scale didn't change - in total) would be 'severance pay'. When the Staff Representatives queried this they were told that it was to 'comply with Korean Labour Law'. Under Korean law we discovered that all workers are entitled to what is known as Severance Pay at the end of each contract, this is equal to one month's salary for each year worked to be paid as lump sum at the end of the period of employment. When the Staff Representatives spoke with the Assistant Country Director, Gavin Anderson, about this he referred to the BC lawyer and then said that the severance pay had 'always been part of the salary' but not noted in contracts or pay slips. He added that teachers had the right to pursue the matter but he hoped 'they would not do so'. We consulted a lawyer and were told (this is the same information on the internet) that severance pay must be paid whether mentioned or not and that it COULD NOT be paid prior to leaving. When we asked the management again, the ELT Director and the Council Director, currently a Mr. Ian Simm, stated (verbally) again that we were already been given it in (as a proportion of) our salaries, however although there was no mention of it all anywhere either on our pay slips or contract. That was the last time there was any discussion of the issue.

We then sought further legal advice in Korea as to the situation regarding severance pay and were advised to seek advice from the Korean Labor Department who with the aid of our translator explained to us the labor laws of South Korea. They checked our contracts and initial applications for severance pay and both I (along with other teachers applying) and the country director were called to the Labor Department. Initially we were told that our claim was valid and that we should apply to them for assistance if the British Council didn't pay severance pay within 14 days of completing the contract. The Labour Officer also expressed an interest in any teachers who had left within the previous 4 years saying that they would also be entitled to severance pay. They told us that at the meeting with Mr. Simm's representative (he did not actually attend) the labour laws of Korea were explained and we now know that the local Korean staff receive severance pay if they leave the British Council

As our visas expired we had to leave Korea immediately at the end of the contract and so we left the applications in the hands of the staff representatives in Seoul. We have no union within the British Council teachers section so we rely on informal volunteers to help out with areas of dispute that arise with the management in each country.

After many visits to the Ministry of Labour and many phone calls when little was said (except for them to take the severance pay claim applications - possibly hoping we would forget about it) and nothing was put in writing. We then found out through our translator that the Labour Department would no longer investigate our claims. We were not given a reason in writing from them but we were advised off the record that the reason was that the Head of the British Council has diplomatic status and therefore is not subject to Korean jurisdiction. In these cases is it the Head of the organization that is accountable. We were then advised to take more legal advice for a civil case. That, as you can imagine, would prove very expensive and difficult. There has been no response from the Seoul BC office as to why we are not entitled to claim for severance pay - they would put nothing in writing and always waited for the Staff Reps to ask questions before saying 'we are doing nothing wrong' - and yet the new contracts include it as part of the monthly salary. I feel that no response is unacceptable. Korean labour laws are quite clear on the matter and if teacher's working in other schools or universities receive severance pay then it is unacceptable for the British Council to hide behind the Director's diplomatic status. Possibly the BC was worried because total Severance payout would far exceed Mr Simm's 65,000GBP housing allowance paid for by the UK tax payers!

The Staff Representatives raised the issue and the comments of the Ministry of Labour Official's comments with the Director of English Language Services, Mark Howard (also on Diplomatic Status), stating that teachers felt that they had no protection as contracts stated that they were subject to Korean Labour Law but that this was not the case. Mr. Howard responded that while that may technically be true, the British Council was a reputable organization and teachers had nothing to fear. This and other cases in the British Council network show that this is not the case.

We request that you raise the issue in Parliament to establish the law under which British Council staff are bound and to establish clarity about the 'treasury requirements' of the British Council offices overseas. Transparency about the packages of senior BC staff would also be welcomed by the vast majority of staff who do not benefit from huge amounts of money would also be welcomed.