Breaking Contracts

[sid]

The thread seems rather philosophical for a straightforward matter. The legitimacy and purpose of the penalties are irrelevant to the OP. The school has her money and intends to keep it if she resigns without six months notice. The OP has three choices: give the notice and get her money, not give the notice and lose the money, or hire a lawyer and roll the dice. While we all seem to agree the school’s penalties are odious, our discussion doesn’t change the OP’s reality.

As for PG’s claim that I can’t make people do things, ummm, ok. Nope, I can’t. Nor can I offer jobs to anyone without a verified background. My school is off limits to any candidate who doesn’t provide sufficient evidence of their past ramblings. And that is true of an increasing number of schools, including all accredited by CIS and NEASC.

[Heliotrope]

> So we both understand the difference between most and all?

Yes, 'most' means it's much more likely, but not true for 100% of all ITs. But very likely.


> No it doesnt, it increases your marketability but not significantly. Its
> not a trivial increase either, but its not unrecoverable, especially given
> the tier of the IS. This isnt the case of an IT going straight to tier 1,
> these 4 years at this third tier IS arent going to make that happen either.

It *just* sets your career back by 4 years, so wherever you want to get, you will get there 4 years later.
According to your own scoring system, 4 years of experience is the difference between being an 'Entry level IT' and a 'Career IT', or between a 'Career IT' and a 'Professional IT'.
Everybody is always saying how important it is to have 2 years of international experience is when you start out, so it'd be foolish to ghost 4 years of it.
No, he won't be going straight to a Tier 1, but he might go to a tier 2 school with those 4 years on his CV. With 0 years, he will most likely not.


> Its not 8-10 years, its more like 2-4 years. No, it isnt its one IS later
> you can add them add back in, maybe two at the most. ISs arent likely to
> check beyond the last and most recent IS.
> The loss in salary is minimal as its only a couple years.

No, an IT with 8 year is more competitive than an IT with 2 years, if you aiming at good schools at least – some crappy for-profit schools might actually prefer less or no experience.
Lots of schools will check references for the last two schools, and some even contact #3 on the list, if they can't reach #2 for example, or just want to be thorough. And since you don't know if they will, you'd be risking a lot.


Plus, you know, the whole honesty thing, which would be my main reason not to ghost.


> Claiming those four years are going to break an IT is nonsense.

I never claimed it would 'break' an IT.
I'm just saying it's not a smart thing to do, for many reasons.

[Spawnboy99]

Hi All,

Thanks for your feedback and opinions on this matter, that's the great thing about this site and forum people willing to share their thoughts and feelings and understanding. So just a few points which doesnt change the situation which was me now simpling asking the question to HR has resulted in my contract not been renewed. So simple choice is to jump ship and pay a huge fine or stay until the end of the year and hope something else comes up for the start of 2020. I have 18 years experience and the last 15 has been overseas working at some top tier 2 schools. Rare I now but focusing on Early Years and KS1, I have had leadership roles and Year Leader positions etc, and have worked with a number of curricula. The school in SEA is one school under the company umbrella which has Tier 1 and a couple of Tier 2 schools and a number of other schools, plus a university. This school would be lower Tier 2. Will write a detailed review of the school and its leadership at some stage, but even HR and HOS are stating conflicting information with the breaking of the contract which is going to mean some interesting times ahead, but the bottom line there are a couple of penalties which are a punishment for completing and renewing another contract.

But thanks again for your reads

[secondplace]

@psyguy

Only if you dont craft the ghosting to not look nefarious.

If you 'ghost' experience then you're lying. So the line between nefarious and not nefarious has already been crossed.

[PsyGuy]

@Sid

We dont actually know if the IS has the ITs coin in their possession or not. Thats why it as advised the LW contact someone with the fund that is holding the pension. The IS may not be able to keep it, or the IT may be able to access it before departure. Those arent the sole three options, the IT can contact the pension holder and get the coping their entitled too and whatever benefits they can escape with, rolling of dice and lawyers arent required.

And ITs dont need to work for you, and thats not true at all. CIS isnt a regulator (nor an accreditor) and neither is NEASC. It may very well be your ISs policy but thats just your policy.

[sid]

Someone should really tell CIS and NEASC about them not being accreditors. They'll be shocked to hear it. As am I, having worked in CIS and NEASC accredited schools for many years. But if PG says it, it must be true?
Oh, I did need this chuckle today.

[PsyGuy]

@Sid

NEASC is an accrediting body, CIS is not. Neither of them are regulators.
CIS knows they arent an accreditor, but it helps their marketing and revenue to call their process accreditation, it isnt. CIS is "a membership community working collaboratively to shape international education through professional services to schools, higher education institutions, and individuals". They are a business entity, a club of member peers. Thats where their standards come from, membership agreement. CIS has done a great job marketing their affiliation, and collaboration with actual accreditors, but in no case is a CIS evaluation a substitute for actual accreditation by any accreditor or inspector.

[sid]

Says PG.
Te he he.

[PsyGuy]

@sid

As opposed to CIS saying so.

@secondplace

Diogenes knocking on your door, getting your honest man award soon. Everyone lies, and anyone who says they dont is lying.

@Spawnboy99

Si if your contract isnt being renewed whats there to decide, you get all your benefits, and coin. Unless they are trying to muddy the situation with miscommunication and ambiguity.

@Heliotrope

We dont agree on the definition of most.
It doesnt set anything back, not until it actually sets something back. You cant go back from the bottom.
Yes its the difference between one step on the PASS its not the difference between master and intern class IT.
The IT didnt have IE experience going in and they got hired. Its a small amount on the PASS.
He might go to a tier 1 with or without it.
No ISs will check the last IS, maybe the last 2 beyond that no not likely or even probable.
Im claiming its not a dumb thing to do.

[Heliotrope]

PsyGuy wrote:
> It doesnt set anything back, not until it actually sets something back. You
> cant go back from the bottom.

With the four years he wouldn't be at the bottom. With ghosting he is back at the bottom with 0 years.
It's resetting your career, where you could have been 4 years further down the path to where you want to be.


> Yes its the difference between one step on the PASS its not the difference
> between master and intern class IT.

You give 2 points for 4 years of experience (1 point per 2 years, maxed at 10). Actually 2,5, as you award 0.5 for international experience as well. And perhaps an extra point for curriculum experience or another 0.5 for documented extra-curriculars during those 4 years.
The difference between being an 'Entry level IT' and a 'Career IT', or between a 'Career IT' and a 'Professional IT' is only 2 points, so those 2.5 or 4 points are at least one step up the ladder on your way to what you call 'Master IT', a ladder with only 4 steps.


> He might go to a tier 1 with or without it.

He might, but the point is that his chances will increase with those 4 years.
And likely he won't be going straight to a Tier 1 in either case, but he might go to a tier 2 school with those 4 years on his CV. With 0 years, he will most likely not.


> No ISs will check the last IS, maybe the last 2 beyond that no not likely
> or even probable.

It has happened when reference #2 couldn't be reached, and reference #3 was contacted.
Not very likely, but not outside the realm of possibilities.
But even if they would check 2 references, it would still take at least 4 years before you can add in that ghosted school.


> Im claiming its not a dumb thing to do.

We disagree. I think it is dumb.
Those 4 years matter, especially since you tend to start at the bottom, so if you can get into a decent school because of that experience, you won't have to start out at the bottom AGAIN, and avoid another bottom school.


Just out of curiosity: how many schools have you ghosted yourself @PsyGuy?

[PsyGuy]

@Heliotrope

We disagree, hes still in the third tier. Its resetting nothing he could still end up in 2nd or 1st tier ith or without the 4 years experience. 4 years is worth 2 pts, thats a difference in one class. You can claim international experience other ways. Its one step, its a measurable difference its not a defining one.
No they wont increase, if your getting lucky youre getting lucky nothing about that 4 years of experience is going to make or break an IT going from that or zero to 2nd or 1st tier.
Not liekly is you cant reach the #2 IS than most IS would rely on the most recent ISs alone. very little is outside the realm of possibility.
We disagree. The four years matter but not the weight your giving them, and not a factor that isnt recoverable in a few years don the road.
They may start out at much better than a bottom IS. Youre just assuming that the metrics are the hole story and the only factor, and in this scenario they arent much of a factor.

[Heliotrope]

Scenario 1: you have 0 years of international experience on your CV
Scenario 2: you have 4 years of international experience, and possibly relevant curriculum experience and documented ECs

In what scenario would the average IT have a better chance of landing a job at a tier 2 school?
In both scenarios you can still get lucky of course, but I'm talking about general likelihood, and not 'exceptions, artifacts, and outliers'.
Everyone knows that scenario 2 gives you a better chance of landing a job at a decent school.
In scenario 1 you're right back to where you where before you started your job at the now-ghosted IS, four years ago. You have the same chance as getting into any school as you did when you just started out.
If you're very lucky in scenario 1, you might land a job at a tier 2 school.
If you're very lucky in scenario 2, you might land a job at a tier 1 school.


I agree, it's not likely they will contact reference #3, but it's still possible. The contact details are there. It has happened. I wouldn't risk it. But then again, I wouldn't lie in the first place.

[PsyGuy]

@Heliotrope

Scenario 1: IT has excellent references from their pre IE experience in DE, and zero IE experience.
Scenario 2: IT has less than positive references from a bottom third tier I after 4 years of experience.

Scenario 1 has the better marketability for tier 2.

[Heliotrope]

You're assuming the references will be bad.
I'm not assuming anything.

[PsyGuy]

@Heliotrope

No, Im assuming they will be less than positive.
Yes you are, youre assuming the references wont be "bad".