By I guess firing contractors hasn’t provided enough jobs yet for USFK spouses moving to Korea:
.jpg)
As U.S. Forces Korea works to increase family-accompanied tours for troops, some soldiers say difficulties in finding child care and work opportunities for spouses in South Korea can put them in a financial pinch.
And for those who do find work, the cost of child care is sometimes more than their salary, soldiers at K-16 Air Base told the top U.S. general in South Korea on Wednesday.
Capt. Jonathan Schloicka said the lack of jobs particularly affects junior enlisted troops who depend on two incomes to make ends meet.
“They come to Korea, sir, and they can’t get by,” Schloicka told U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. Walter Sharp during a tour of the helicopter base.
Sharp said he was trying to make it easier for spouses to find jobs — in part by making it easier for them to search for available positions on the command’s Web site and in part by asking South Korean companies to hire them.
Sharp said he is working with the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry to recruit South Korean companies with branches in the U.S. for his employment-assistance program, which could be developed in six months. He declined to name the companies but said they were enthusiastic about the plan.
Their willingness to hire spouses, however, might be tempered by the poor worldwide economy, Sharp said.
“Realistically, Koreans are looking for jobs, too,” he said. [Stars & Stripes]
There is no way Korean companies hiring Americans is ever going to be a sustainable way to find jobs for USFK spouses especially when you read stories such as this:
Kim Joo-won was making about $3 an hour when he lost his minimum-wage job assembling cars in March. But every day, he is back at the gate of Donghee Auto, dressed in his white factory uniform. He and several other temporary workers who were also fired greet managers and workers going to work or coming off the night shift, shouting, “We want our jobs back!” [New York Times]
Any business that hired a bunch of American spouses over Korean workers would get smashed with protests plus what American spouse would work for the Korean minimum wage anyway? General Sharp should instead look to find these spouses jobs as English teachers.
10:57 pm on July 24th, 2009 1
You glossed over a very important point with regard to the man who lost his minimum-wage job ~ he was a temporary employee. He was hired with the express understanding that he was not a permanent hire, and if the time came when he was no longer needed, he would no longer be employed and there wouldn't be any severance or benefits.
The temporary employees – with the backing of the ultra-left labor unions and the Democratic Labor Party – are now crying foul saying they were unfairly treated and fired for no reason.
With regard to USFK spouses working for Korean companies – the first thought that popped into my mind was that they would be teaching English to company employees or doing other work that required native English skills.
11:49 pm on July 24th, 2009 2
I thought it was against the SOFA for spouses to work off post. Is that not correct? I know when I was a soldier they told us it was illegal. Anyone know?
1:18 am on July 25th, 2009 3
I don't think USFK wants to entangle itself too much sponsoring spouses into the Korean English teaching programs either.
What would USFK's responsibilities and obligations be when spouses start to complain about exploitive hagwons who are not complying with their contracts? What will USFK do when the spouses become targets of the Korean groups that want to question their qualifications or trump up charges that children are being abused?
USFK should consider these hazards before recommending spouses into the Korean job market.
4:14 am on July 25th, 2009 4
It says GEN Sharp is "working with the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry to recruit South Korean companies with branches in the U.S. for his employment-assistance program."
That wouldn't include hakwons.
It sounds to me like he wants Korean companies that have branches in the US (and who make money there) to help out and employ some Americans in Korea.
4:56 am on July 25th, 2009 5
"He was hired with the express understanding that he was not a permanent hire, and if the time came when he was no longer needed, he would no longer be employed and there wouldn’t be any severance or benefits."
Actually, he was probably fired because he was a few weeks short of having worked there for 2 years. A law in the books since 2007 dictates that temp workers who have been with a company for 2 years automatically become full-time employees, with the salary and benefits that comes with it.
10:40 am on July 25th, 2009 6
I think it is over the top to claim that contractors are being fired to provide jobs for spouses. Whatever your take on the propriety of the "ordinary resident" decision, I can assure you it was not about creating jobs for spouses.
If I were a contractor, I'd be much more concerned about the Obama-mandated "insourcing". That's gonna have a ten-fold greater impact on contractors. In fact, the first batch of these contractor-to-civs will be coming on board in June '10.
Leon, not sure when you were a soldier here, but in 2001 the USA/ROK governments signed an MOA that specifically permits SOFA family members to work on the economy without impact on their SOFA status. You have to meet all the requirements for the job and get the appropriate passport stamp from immigration, but it can be done legally. I expect companies that hire foreigners anyway (including schools) may find some benefits to hiring spouses from USFK, it would certainly be cheaper than recruiting in the USA, paying airfare and housing etc.
And yes, the law on temporary employment not exceeding 2 years is having some unintended consequences as employers are "churning" this catergory of worker rather than converting to permanent status. We had to adjust our KN regs to conform with this law, although if we are going to have a continuing need for the job we generally bite the bullet and convert.
11:35 am on July 25th, 2009 7
Thanks John, I wasn't aware of the MOA. I wonder how many spouses were able to take advantage of that.
Which brings up JOEC's point, what to do about possibly exploitative, discriminatory and/or unsafe working conditions (by US standards) spouses might find themselves in.
As far as teaching English, red flags pop up all over. If that is being looked at I do not see how it would help most lower enlisted spouses considering English teachers are required to have a degree and a certificate, right?
Why not hire them for these restaurant, PX and commissary jobs? Not only does it help many of the younger families, it might lead to better service and help diminish some of the black marketing problems.
11:54 am on July 25th, 2009 8
Well, with the increase in family members, there will be a need for more support jobs on base, and I expect that some percentage of these will be available for family members. Interestingly though, a friend from AAFES told me they posted some Burger King jobs for US family members and they went unfilled, so they had to hire Koreans. I'm not sure how many family members who say the want jobs really can't get them. The Child Development Center is always hiring. I'm thinking folks are looking for cushy office jobs, and they are harder to come by…
12:01 pm on July 25th, 2009 9
What is the Korean tax rate on wages earned on the Korean economy by USFK spouses in any capacity? It is my understanding the SOFA addresses this, but I don't know where to find a "transparent" copy of the SOFA.
1:00 pm on July 25th, 2009 10
If you can't afford to have your spouse in Korea then don't bring the spouse over…
I mean, if my wife and I can accept/"endure" being apart for one year – minus two short vacations – why can't we expect soldiers to do it? When they sign up, they understand they can be deployed around the world and will have to be separated from family for significant periods.
I think it makes sense of USFK to try to increase the number of accompanied tours, but to add to that the near obligation to find work for the spouses is a few steps too far…
…and as others have pointed out, can easily lead to big headaches and much consumed time on the part of USFK when they could be spending it better.
I wonder how the local Korean governments are going to handle it if/when Korean staff are let go in favor of spouses? I would think that would put a little dent in the local economies and cause a lot of complaints to the local officials.
Here, I am on the side of the spouses — if it is an American base, and you want to increase the percentage of accompanied tours for quality of life issues, and you have jobs on base, the spouses should get the nod first…
2:28 pm on July 25th, 2009 11
There are already dozens of people on the J2 staff at Yongsan who converted over from contractor to civil service. I don't know of a single one of them that wishes he/she was still a contractor. I'm not saying there are some who don't like it – only that the dozen or so with whom I have spoke are happy with the switch. Most of them got hired at the same pay level (or higher) than when they were contractors.
Of course, there is the tax differential to take into consideration and the loss of saving money on housing. But as a civil servant, they now have job security, higher housing allowance (in most cases), much more leave, many more training opportunities, guaranteed retirement check & excellent retirement savings account options, they can travel to the US more than 30 days a year without worrying about the tax exclusion status, etc.
With regard to the housing money savings – it seems like a lot of companies have cut way down on housing allowance for contractors. In part, of course, it's the exchange rate difference, but even with that factored in, many contractors are getting a lot less.
I lost my contractor position because of my residency status and rather than go for another contractor position, I opted for civil service – and haven't regretted it for a minute.
2:39 pm on July 25th, 2009 12
With regard to family members getting jobs on base ~
Many of the jobs on base are designated for Korean nationals as per the SOFA. Getting this changed would require major negotiations with the Korean gov't – all during a time when the US is pushing hard for the Koreans to pay more of the move and build-up at Camp Humphreys.
2:40 pm on July 25th, 2009 13
Looking at the way manpower was managed at USFK and subordinate components, it is kinda wacky…
Many of the contractor positions, if they are of a more "permanent" nature, SHOULD be civil service positions, on the organization's manning document- and if the command needs the skills of that incumbent during wartime, they should be emergency essential positions.
I have seen numerous positions in different commands which just would have made more sense to be civil service- a command hires a civil service employee, a company contracted to provide specific services to a command hires and fires its employees- the contractors aren't part of the required manning of a command, although their services are oftentimes absolutely essential.
I wonder how often the flesh peddlers really look at this stuff…and what conclusions they come to.
3:56 pm on July 25th, 2009 14
Agreed. Convert me any day. Many of these companies treat their employees very bad and the pay sucks, but they are really governed by no rules. At my level of responsibility a conversion would likely be a raise, plus the other things you mentioned. I could also buy back my military time.
6:10 pm on July 25th, 2009 15
Existing jobs occupied by KNs are hard to convert to US, but newly created positions can be designated as the command sees fit. On the NAF side it's just a matter of whether many family members want fast food or PX jobs, but for appropriated fund positions the ROKs are paying 71% of KN wages. So, it is more difficult from an economic standpoint to fill these as US positions.
7:27 pm on July 25th, 2009 16
Something to consider is the number of military spouses who are not adequately educated to do something other than work in the PX or at a fast-food joint. I mean, you have to face the fact that most of these people are less educated than Canadian ESL teachers. They're unhirable.
10:50 pm on July 25th, 2009 17
[They come to Korea, sir, and they can’t get by,” Schloicka told U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. Walter Sharp during a tour of the helicopter base.]
Give me a break. If any couple can't "get by" here without the spouse having a job, it's because they are living beyond thier means. Let's add it up–move at govt. expense, housing provided, on base prices comparable to CONUS…why wouldn't a family be able to "get by"?
The only reason I can see for a problem is if the spouse left a good paying job in the States to join the service member in Korea. Well, decisions have consequences. Separation is tough, but is an unfortunate sacrifice that service members have to make sometimes. And in this case, if a family's priority is to stay together, they will find a way to "get by".
8:39 am on July 26th, 2009 18
The only USFK Commander that actually did anything in Korea is GEN B.B. Bell and he pissed the Koreans off so bad they ran him out of town. Not one single American will have any kind of job unless the Koreans say so. Not even at Burger King. Bribery is just more than cash payments…… GEN Sharp is only here to please the Koreans.
9:28 am on July 26th, 2009 19
What hiring preference has the highest priority? Spouse preference or Vet (0/10/30). You would think a Veteran would have more preference since he/she earned it and the spouse only married into it. Each command may be able to pick and choose which one they wish to give priortiy to.
1:42 pm on July 26th, 2009 20
Last I checked on GS/DoD jobs vets (30% disability and so forth) have a preference. I think spouses are fairly low on the preference pecking order if I'm not mistaken. I wonder if USFK going to sneakily attempt to somehow circumvent this policy?
2:29 pm on July 26th, 2009 21
When you read about how the preferences are supposed to work, you get the impression that as long as you've got the 30%+ disability – you've got a huge advantage.
However, in reality, hiring preference for vets, 30% disability, etc. is a joke. They hire who they want and they only need to justify the choice by say "he/she was the most qualified."
3:34 pm on July 26th, 2009 22
Merit promotion rules are not something you can ignore and hiring practices are subject to internal and external review. I seriously doubt there are wide spread abuses.
Having said that, as a selecting official I most certainly do gravitate to the "most qualified" candidate. I have a strong sense of self-preservation and if I pick unqualified subordinates my unit will fail and I'll be accountable.
I just don't see any motivation for a manager to select anyone other than the best available applicant.
11:26 am on August 1st, 2009 23
There are a few more points to consider here. To address one comment above stating that many spouses are not qualified to do more than work in the PX, that may be true for a few but there also some of us out there that have degrees and have been in positions of increasing responsibility throughout our careers despite the constant moves. However, there is no way we can get hired in Korea due to the agreements that are in place designating the largest percentage (96%) to Koreans. Further to that there is a link on the USFK website trying to lure GS employees from the US with charts depicting the increases in pay for working oversees. Wow, that is really the icing on the cake.
Lastly, in response to the person who stated there always jobs at the CDC. Not everyone is able to work with children and I personally would not want someone with my child that did not absolutely want to be there.
11:48 am on August 1st, 2009 24
The Koreans ran him out of town? What makes you think this?
3:53 am on August 3rd, 2009 25
Please provide a citation which states 96% of the jobs in Korea are designated for Koreans. Thanks.
9:49 am on August 3rd, 2009 26
"… many spouses are not qualified to do more than work in the PX, that may be true for a few but there also some of us out there that have degrees…"
A citation for this also. MOST spouses have degrees and careers? I don't think so, especially for the lower enlisted.
And, would you not agree that those who served, veterans, ought to have hiring preference over spouses?
Lastly, as far as I'm concerned, you may run all the Koreans off the installations, you are welcome to their jobs.
#13 is spot on.
1:15 pm on August 12th, 2009 27
MOVE OVER VETS A NEW SHERIFF IS IN TOWN
Spouses get federal job boost next month
By Karen Jowers – Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Aug 12, 2009 17:31:05 EDT
A rule that could help military spouses get jobs in the federal government quicker will take effect Sept. 11.
The final regulations published in today’s Federal Register implement a Sept. 25, 2008, executive order allowing federal managers to hire qualified military spouses without putting them through the normal competitive hiring process.
Those eligible include spouses who relocated with their service members because of permanent change-of-station orders, unremarried widows or widowers of service members killed on active duty, and spouses of service members who are 100 percent disabled as a result of active duty.
Federal agencies are not required to use the hiring authority, but Defense Department officials will definitely use the new authority, said defense spokesman Army Lt. Col. Les’ Melnyk.
Spouses are eligible for a noncompetitive appointment for a maximum of two years from the date of their service member’s PCS orders. They must provide documentation verifying the service member is 100 percent disabled or was killed on active duty.
Spouses may receive only one noncompetitive appointment per PCS move.
2:11 pm on August 12th, 2009 28
I just. don't. get. it.