Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Newyorker
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:41 am

Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by Newyorker »

My children and I are dual EU-US citizens and to increase my chances I was thinking of switching all of my applications to single status. My wife works part time at her job remotely so she is not really a dependent.

The aim is to increase my chances of landing a position, especially in Europe. My children would be covered medically in Europe and would not need visas. My wife would be the only one in need of a visa and I can secure that independently of the school.

I would use my housing allowance to get a place for us and my wife's income along with some of mine would allow us a bigger space which would be enough for our family.

In short it is workable for me to be hired as single status with no dependents so how would I go about this? Schools would only be taking care of me as a single hire.

Do schools frown upon this as I do not want to be seen as hiding anything? Please advise on how to proceed as right now I am not competitive to European schools. Thank you.
Overhere
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:29 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by Overhere »

Where would your kids go to school? Would you fly them over, as well as your wife, on your own nickel? I can see your train of thought but there are multiple benefits associated with dependents that you need to make sure are covered. Plus, I'm not so sure a school would appreciate you advertising yourself as a single and then showing up with a ready made family.
Newyorker
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:41 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by Newyorker »

My kids are all under 3 so not really bothered about school for the next few years.

I understand the part about advertising myself as a single hire and then showing up with a ready made family so then what is the best way to advertise myself? I would like to appear to not be a financial burden to a school with all these depedents.

As for flights we have loads of miles so that wouldn't be a problem at all.

How do I convey all of this to a school though as we would like Europe and right now we are pretty much shut out of most jobs?
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Response

Post by PsyGuy »

Remove the family data. Present/pitch yourself as a LH (local hire), thats essentially what you are offering.

THE GOOD:

Your family is an obligation that can and will effect your work relationship. Despite your logic and rationalizations, it is destructive and discouraged for an IS to reclassify staff and faculty to appear and offer yourself as a more marketable candidate. What you are proposing is undercutting all the other staff and faculty at your potential IS. How does leadership explain and address that? The IS has a policy approved by ownership that they have some flexibility and discretion but that they essentially have to follow. You can have millions of miles, but if the policy provides for travel and airfare for the employee and family thats the policy they have to apply to the contract. Not doing so without cause, especially int he EU can have serious consequences for unfair business practices, and or union regulations, not least includes having to answer for that action to ownership.

THE BAD:

Answering you are single could easily be interpreted as dishonesty and misrepresentation, your not single no more than you are younger/older, different ethnic background, etc. than what you are. If pressed on the family issue be honest, but vague and ambiguous or attempt to change the subject. If you want to reply that your family status is not relevant to your candidacy or decline to answer (there are regulations addressing this in the EU and WE), though understand you will likely not be offered the vacancy.

THE UGLY:

Change your application documents to represent that you are single, but do not state you are single in anything traceable until after you have a contract and are on location. If asked be vague you have some personal responsibility and are seeing someone (you are your spouse) but nothing that requires any assistance or aid from the IS. You can take the position that your family status is personal and private. Once under contract and on location it would be very illegal to dismiss you based on your family, and an IS wont be able to prove you misrepresented yourself, and even if they could it would be illegal for them to make such inquires and cant be used as grounds for dismissal. Your leadership will do one of two things either they will shrug and move on, or they will pursue other means of dismissing you for other cause. If they wanted to remove you, your days would be shortly numbered, it doesnt take long to build a legally justifiable case. It will be a constant struggle.
sid
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by sid »

I agree with OH that you need to consider this more.
It's not just a matter of flights to get you there one time. It's annual round trip flights for everyone, for as long as you stay at the school. Your miles will run out quickly, and your children will graduate to needing their own seats quite soon. They will also start school in the blink of an eye, possibly at age 4 depending on the school. You'll want their tuition paid for.
Your housing allowance will be bigger for a family, and you'll need it. Europe is expensive.
I'm not sure how your children would be covered for health insurance. Depending on the country, they may be covered locally, but you may not want to use the government doctors. And you won't be covered for trips back home or other vacations. A good IS will give a family policy that addresses all this.
If you really only want to go for such a short time that none of this matters, than you really aren't very marketable. Good schools want teachers who seem likely to stay for a long time, starting with at least 2 to 3 years. Your post sounds like maybe you just want a year. As a recruiter, I would not consider a candidate who only seemed interested in the short term.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Discussion

Post by PsyGuy »

@Sid is being disingenuous. The insights sighted are from the perspective of a short term appointment, not from one who is permanently pursuing relocation (if indeed that is your intent), @sid doesnt know what your objectives are there are two issues:
First, While I agree that you would potentially be missing out on many OSH benefits, these benefits are subjective to your individual scenario.
1) Annual flights arent worth much if your truly relocating to the WE and your vacation is going to be no different than any other LH who doesnt have their employer provide paid vacations (not just paid vacation time).
2) Tuition is also a non issue if you enroll your children when the time comes in a municipal system, perhaps you want them to have instruction in the host language. You dont need a tuition benefit if there is no tuition.
3) Housing allowances arent common in WE ISs outside of the elite tier and some first tier ISs. Its a moot point if one isnt part of the OSH package to begin with.
4) Many WE regions have a national socialized social insurance system. They arent just covered locally they are covered nationally and many programs have reciprocity with other regions or there is a short term option for obtaining services out of country (except the USA), especially within the EU and WE. You may not like the "government" doctors but you may also find that the vast majority of health care providers are enrolled in the national health care system, and having more options would increase the probability of having a more productive relationship with your health care provider. Its just as easy that a region could have a small handful of private physicians and you dont like any of them or you dont like the treatment and care provided by a hypothetical ISs private insurance plan.

At that point none of those OSH benefits offer you much vague or utility and pale in comparison to increasing your marketability to an IS.

The second issue, and truly disingenuous of @Sid, is that as long as the IS cant prove you misrepresented yourself, once the contract i signed and you are on location, as long as you were classified as an OSH you get those benefits as a negotiated obligation, since the personal policy is HIGHLY likely to be incorporated into the contract, and in the WE an IS cant easily vacate itself legally of those obligations. If they attempted to challenge it it would be a phone call to a local union rep or maybe a visit to the labor board before the IS changed its position and followed its policy. The dont want to explain to an arbitration board without very strong evidence of misrepresentation why they are refusing to proceed with their legal and contractual obligations, especially to an EU citizen who has the rights, time and resources (wifes income) to fight it out in the short amount of time it would take to pursue a labor standards action.

Youve been at the IS for three years at the start of your third year (you have tenure now) you walk your child into the admissions office and that exchange goes like this:

You: Hello Id like to enroll my daughter for the start of the term.
Assistant: Your daughter? One moment.
::Principal arrives::
Principal: Hello Mr. Watson, i understand you want to enroll your daughter for the start of the fall term ::looking at wide eyed child::
You: Yes, my understanding of the school policy as incorporated into my contract allows one child to attend free of tuition and fees exclusive of uniform and personal supplies?
Principal: Yes thats correct, we were unaware you had a daughter.
You: Well now I would like to enroll her and avail myself of the tuition exemption outlined in the faculty policy.

"Smart" Principal: Of course, Ms. Assistant please guide Mr. You through the enrollment and entrance assessment process. ::Shakes Mr. Yous hand::

"Dumb" Principal: I dont think we can do that?
You: Are you discriminating against an employee based on family status?

It goes down hill for the IS and leadership at this point, and they either get smart very quickly, or really bad things start happening to them.
sid
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by sid »

There's more to Europe than just the countries with strong labor laws, unions and fully developed public health systems, but without housing allowances.
There are also other European countries where what you and the school agree on, is the end of the matter. Where public hospitals are tricky at best, and where schools offer housing to overseas teachers.
In the first group of countries, PG is probably right about them being legally obligated to pay all family benefits so long as you didn't lie. Of course, in that group, most countries offer next to nothing as family benefits, usually just tuition or some fraction of it. So there's little point in hiding your family, as you won't save the school much money anyway.
In the second group of countries, forget about starting with one set of bennies and switching up later.

If you're new, you might want to check some of PG's old posts to see what you think.
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

It should be noted that @sid is also an administrator with a leadership agenda.
In the first post it is cited all these OSH benefits you dont want to miss out on, and then the claim changes to there arent many benefits of much value.

Europe is big and that is why i qualified my claims by references WE (Western Europe), that includes such countries as Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Switzerland. Not the EE (Eastern European) countries where the contract is the contract.

ITs switch benefit programs all the time, they get married, and or/they have children, those ITs then receive the new set of benefits.
sid
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:44 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by sid »

ITs do indeed switch bennies regularly, when their circumstances change. Not when nothing has changed except the teacher's mind.
I've always been focusing on countries with good family packages. It makes sense to me. The OP is talking about whether he can raise his employability by changing family status and thus being a cheaper hire. The only countries where that might be an option, are countries where there are benefits that could be given up.
Why would we have this conversation about places where it makes almost no difference?
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@sid

ITs can change their mind and switch benefits when they change their mind as well, in WE, because it would be HIGHLY illegal to discriminate among employees based on family status. This is WE thought the countries people want to be as i stated earlier, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, etc.

What makes sense to you is not the only measure of "good sense' the LW has a EU citizenship, they can send their child to a municipal IS, they dont need or yearly airfare, and they are happy with the national health are system. Those benefits could have little value to the LW in comparison to the benefit of being more marketable.

It makes a difference because you can find all those benefits in very generous quantities at elite ISs in the WE. Being single with working papers would make you a more attractive late season hire, because you avoid the immigration and visa issues. That advantage would be a wash when factoring a family into the equation, and in those elite ISs in the WE countries as described above, you could not for practical purposes be dismissed for having a family.

To describe the scenario. IS Genovia (Elite tier IS) is Switzerland is interested in Mr. You, since he hasnt indicated he has a family. The IS never asks directly, and nothing in his pre-departure documentation check indicates he does or any other irregularities. So after signing the contract and being classified an OSH Mr. You and family arrive. Before the beginning of the term Mr. You presents himself and his daughter to admission to enroll her in the start of the school year...
1) IS Genovia can not dismiss Mr. You for having a daughter, they cant even dismiss Mr. You for not mentioning he had a daughter because they arent allowed to ask and hes not required to answer.
2) IS Genovia must provide him all benefits contractual benefits including those policies incorporated into the contract by extension.
3) They are obligated to enroll Mr. Yous daughter and waive tuition and fees and defined by policy.
4) If Mr. You wanted to and the Policy and contract allowed he could require that IS Genovia pay/reimburse for all his and his families airfare, in compliance with IS Genovia policy. He could also require IS Genovia to provide him the appropriate housing allowance based on his entire family.
5) Mr. You is entitled to all other future benefits for him and his family including yearly airfare (if provided by policy), tuition/school placement fees, housing allowance increases, local transportation, etc.
6) If IS Genvoia refuses Mr. You can enforce the contract through a labor arbitration board, obtaining the appropriate monetary compensation.
70 IS Genovia can not dismiss Mr. You for any actions or factors related to his family status. Not only would Mr. You then easily obtain a judgement but IS Genovia would likely be punitively penalized in the form of damages and fines. IS Genovias management could also be subject to custodianship.

As a result Mr. You would have all the marketability benefits in recruiting as a single IT and all the benefits of an OSH hire for himself and family. Provided the IS can not prove he misrepresented himself.

Lastly, it may not make any difference to you, but to a significant segment of the IT population location is more important than benefits. This matters because your claims are inaccurate.
shadowjack
Posts: 2138
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by shadowjack »

Unless, of course, the contract that Mr. You signed stipulated that he would not receive those benefits based on his status as a single hire.

You can't knowingly sign a contract and then demand a different contract. Other people with different benefits signed a very different contract. It would be like the cleaner walking in and demanding the Operation Manager's benefits!

As well, there is a probationary period. Goodbye Mr. You.
wrldtrvlr123
Posts: 1173
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:59 am
Location: Japan

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by wrldtrvlr123 »

I am trying to envision a hiring process where at no time during an application, probably several interviews, email exchanges ect, the school never asks or clarifies a candidates marital and/or dependent status.

Leaving that, I am surprised to hear that "Europe", even places like Germany, are somehow considered a teachers' paradise due to enlightened labor laws. Those laws may in fact exist but that does not stop many schools from ignoring them (the paid section is full of reviews of dodgy schools and/or admin/owners) when it suits them. Bottom line is that schools (pretty much anywhere) can find ways to get rid of/non-renew teachers if they feel they do not fit or if they feel the teacher misrepresented themselves in fact or in spirit.

Back to the OP. By all means try and offer yourself as a virtual single teacher with no dependents but do it by explaining the circumstances rather than hiding the reality.
Newyorker
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:41 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by Newyorker »

Psyguy, Sid, wrldtrvlr123, shadowjack: Thank you all very much for your insights.

I am in awe of Psyguy's knowledge. I have read this forum for many months without commenting once and I have to say I have learned an amazing amount from Psyguy who is a treasure. Kudos to you for your herculean efforts here to enlighten IT's. Hats off to you. Psyguy cites sometimes uncomfortable truths for some people here but he has proven correct on every issue I have studied here thus far. Thank you again for your selflessness and wish I could buy you a drink at some point!

As luck would have it last night I received a fantastic offer in a great spot that covers my entire family. Thankfully I do not have to worry about any misrepresentation and did not have to go to the ME or any undesirable region for this coverage.

Again, I appreciate all of your input and hope this thread helps others in the same predicament.
shadowjack
Posts: 2138
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am

Re: Switching from married with dependents to single status?

Post by shadowjack »

Awesome news! Congratulations to you and your family :-)
PsyGuy
Posts: 10789
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:51 am
Location: Northern Europe

Reply

Post by PsyGuy »

@Newyorker

::sniffle::

@SJ

In theory this is true, but ISs dont typically make designations of family and marital status in the contract directly. They are referenced in the policy documents. That policy is going to have a general definition of OSH and LH, you are categorized based on those definitions not specific circumstances or events (especially in the WE).

This is a red herring fallacy. Were not comparing a cleaner to a manager, two very separate. This sint even a comparison of groups, we are referring to one large group of educators (faculty). We arent even comparing contracts to other subgroups of educators such as leadership and teachers. ITs in general have a standard 'template' contract with slight variations for personalization (name, NID, etc) and salary. There isnt a different contract to be had.

In this very range restricted scenario, a probationary period would have no effect. You can not discriminate against protected factors for employees regardless of interim, or probationary status. You cant discriminate against family or marital status no more than race and dismissing an IT (in WE) for being a minority. Any illusion or language to that effect would simply be nullified and unenforceable.

@WT123

This is a scenario with an atypical set of factors that significantly increase its feasibility.
1) The LW is an EU citizen they have a right to live and work in the region. They dont have to leave at some point either by legal/institutional pressure or lack of professional options. They have time.
2) The LWs spouse has independent employment and income. They dont need IS guarantees for housing, etc. They have a right to abode. It may not be easy, but they can afford to adjudicate their issues.
3) The LW has larger and greater intermediate employment options. Its not IE, EE or bust.

Emails would be critically problematic, and as i advised the LW they should avoid documenting any such statements or declarations of family or marital status. Interviews, conversations, etc are not going to produce sufficiently strong evidence succeed at arbitration/adjudication. It isnt even legal for an employer to ask such questions, which themselves would be evidence of inappropriate management.
Post Reply