Concerning the Bureau of Labor Affairs, Taipei city In regard to the negotiation of a labor dispute, which took place at the offices of B.o.L.A. (Bureau of Labor Affairs), Di-hwa St., Taipei, on April 20, 2009.
The negotiation which took place concerned myself, Robert Brian Wadleigh, (Chinese name ¡§Wan Bai-an¡¨), U.S. Passport # 713183910, A.R.C.# CC00147601, working permit # 970539971 (see attached Doc. #1); and ¡§Core & Corner¡¨ (Chinese name ¡V please see attached letter from T.I.W.A.) ¡V the agent of B.o.L.A. who was (so-called) ¡§facilitator¡¨ at the meeting was Mr. Michael Yeh. Two witnesses of my own came with me that day (Ms. Vicky Kuo ¡V see attached letter doc. # 2, and Mr. Nathaniel Wu -- please see attached letter doc. # 3, all included with this complaint), and that was the reason I asked their presence ¡V Mr. Yeh had previously rejected my attempts to re-schedule the negotiation to a later date when others more knowledgeable about my case and with legal experience could be present, (e.g. Ms. Emma Hwa, Yun-Wen, tel. XXXXXXXXXX), and Mr. Yeh¡¦s own English ability being greater than my two witnesses it was in fact he who explained the details of the negotiation.
Though I appreciate B.o.L.A.¡¦s quite belated efforts to finally do something in regard to my case, which was handled in a manner that can only be characterized as highly irregular -- in that it was not processed in any way per B.o.L.A.¡¦s own standard procedures -- and as completely mismanaged, in fact from start to finish B.o.L.A. staff worked completely against my best interests and favored instead the interests on my employer. (I will soon file a full complaint in regard to the misconduct of three B.o.L.A. staff members with this very office as well as to other appropriate offices of the R.o.C. government.) Thus, even as I entered the negotiation I considered it would function merely as another excuse by which to deprive me of my working rights, e.g. Mr. Yeh had previous contended that I could not claim one month¡¦s salary even though I had completed that work and remained unpaid, but finally reversed his decision after I threatened to fill a full complaint in regard to the handling of my case to that point. (See attached doc. #4)
The reason I filed the complaint about my employer was primarily because they fired me because I filed a complaint that they refused to comply with the laws regulating employment of foreigners in Taiwan, particularly the fact that they never applied for me as they must within three days of my employment, to the National Health Insurance Bureau. Salary was only a secondary issue both then and now. However, the agents of B.o.L.A. repeatedly refused to address this main issue and complaint at all, even going so far as to delete and alter the record of my original filed complaint and demands at the negotiation. (Please see attached statements and photocopies. Doc. #5) The fact of the matter is that I was fired illegally for demanding my right to health insurance coverage as a worker in Taiwan, the fact of which I was informed of by a representative of the N.P.A. and again by their staff member, Mr. Wu, 02-XXXXXXXX, who handled my separate but related complaint to the N.H.I.B.
Once again at the beginning of the negotiation, Mr. Yeh dismissed the major complaint of my illegal firing which I had prepared to prove even at the negotiation. (see attached Doc. # 6) Thus, by dismissing my main complaint, I felt the negation was pointless and, quite frankly, a farce. My only goal was to follow the process put before me, as indeed I was informed repeatedly that I ¡§must¡¨ (primarily by Mr. Yeh, himself) and later appeal to a higher authority, and or in a court of law. I have subsequently learned from the ¡§Legal Aid Foundation¡¨ that B.o.L.A. (again primarily Mr. Yeh) misinformed me of my rights to approach the court directly to seek redress of my situation. I believe misrepresenting the rights and regulations pertaining to my work in Taiwan to be at least unethical, if not illegal. Mr. Yeh stated in English, ¡§As I¡¦ve said before, C&C have followed all the rules and labor laws in regard to firing Mr. Robert, so you must accept that they have the right to fire you. You cannot reject this.¡¨ He stated this only after repeatedly rejecting to investigate the details of my complaint, even rejecting the data I provided him and my initial two page, hand-written statement in English that I submitted on Mar. 24th. (Again, please see attached documents. Docs. #4 & 6)
If only I needed to collect my unpaid salary I could have done so more successfully and more quickly without the intervention of the B.o.L.A. Therefore, I considered the entire process completely flawed and without any purpose. Mr. Yeh further stated previously and again in the meeting that the B.o.L.A. have ¡§no authority to enforce the agreement¡¨ at hand or any other issues, thus logically indicating that the negotiation was legally non-binding. I wondered at that moment how my own tax money could be used to basically fund a ¡¥talking shop,¡¦ and was eager to put this informal, but ¡§mandatory¡¨ step in my legal case against my employer behind me. Given that there was never any reference, during the meeting or at any point in the processing of my case, to the contract (See attached Doc. # 7) by which I was hired by this company, how could it possibly be anything but a formality along the path to a proper negotiation, later, or date at court? If this is the process of government and law in Taiwan, I am quite frankly appalled.
Thereafter, Mr. Yeh further impaired my ability to pursue my case at court against C&C, by mischaracterizing to me directly the nature of the agreement which was before us. He told me during the negotiation on more than three occasions that I may still proceed to the next step of negotiation and/or file a law suit against my employer in court for ¡§breach of contract.¡¨ In my experience, in America at least, a breach of contract law suit would necessarily address the issue of illegal firing and properly investigate working conditions including hours completed, unpaid wages and severance.
Therefore, I insisted that the negotiation be stopped and that ¡§we will all meet again at court,¡¨ and let all matters be decided there. However, in response, Mr. Yeh stated in English, ¡§Robert, you cannot, not accept your salary.¡¨ (Thereafter, he restated in Chinese in response to my expression, first seriously and then -- realizing perhaps I would bring this up at a later date -- jokingly, ¡¥who would reject receiving money?¡¦ ) Thus, I knew full well that this would compromise my case but I had no choice but to respect the statement of this government officer present and given authority to deal with my case, even when I have certain knowledge he is in error. Correct procedure requires me to appeal at the next level of authority, not dispute the authority of the officer present. In fact, accepting any salary during such a dispute is paramount to accepting the claims of the opposing party. (My first part-time job as a teenager was working a summer internship at a law firm, Paxton and Seasongood, in Cincinnati, Ohio.) Thus, Mr. Yeh, assertions were in my view absolutely ridiculous ¡V either through ignorance or apathy ¡V how is it possible he could be so unformed of the due processes of law? I stated thereafter with some distain, ¡§What then do we have to do to finish this meeting because I¡¦m tired of wasting my time?¡¨ Mr. Yeh again stated that I must accept my salary and only it remained to calculate it and a severance payment. I rejected any receipt of severance pay ¡V ¡§the court can decide the severance pay,¡¨ I stated. Mr. Yeh, said I can accept this severance and allow the court to reconsider the matter. The response I eventually made in regard to that calculation was that ¡§I do not see this as proper severance pay and consider it almost equal to my (logistical and) incidental costs¡¨ incurred when employed. I asked all present to remember this statement of mine. (For example, due to the employer closing the legal location stated on their business license, in October, 2008, I was forced to teach our students at a third party location, of my students choosing, usually Starbucks. The so-called ¡§severance¡¨ pay perhaps refunded me for my necessary expense to buy coffee each time I taught my students.)
Other points were ¡§negotiated¡¨ similarly, i.e., I have no right to reject the positions of my employer, that became then the ¡§resolutions¡¨ as stated in the ¡§Taipei City Government B.o.L.A. Labor Dispute Report¡¨ dated 98/4/20, 10.30AM, witnessed and sealed 12.20PM. The title of which did not reflect even my main complaint, stating only in English ¡§Salary Dispute.¡¨ (see attached Doc. # 8, and reference Doc. #6, ¡§6)¡¨)
This salary issue was dealt with in resolution 1. (see Doc. # 8) By letter of the agreement, I was to receive a payment on Apr. 23rd. At the end of business hours that payment was not present. Only the next date could I find evidence that I had received anything. Thus, resolution one was unfulfilled per the agreement.
Resolution 2 deals with the employer necessarily paying what they are legally required to submit to the National Health Insurance Agency and the National Labor Insurance Bureau. They have paid absolutely zero to either government agency. Although they did apply after firing me as they must still necessarily, the only reason my National Health Insurance Card is currently valid is due to my employer submitting a document (see Doc. # 9) stating they withheld funds from my salary to pay the N.H.I.B., the basis on which and the salary claimed is incorrect and will lead to my health insurance again being blocked after filing my tax income report. The N.L.I.B. as of several days ago had no record of any application, neither was any money deducted from my salary at any time during my employment or at the April 20th negotiation. Therefore, resolution 2 is unfulfilled per the agreement, and B.o.L.A. staff sit idle doing nothing while the employer I requested them to investigate repeatedly breach the law with their full knowledge.
Resolution 3 states the employer agrees to not use my personal information ¡V specifically discussed in the so-called negotiation as it is within C&C¡¦s computer system ¡V without my expressed consent. This company, as of the moment I¡¦m writing this complaint (May 13th, 2009, 2.15pm) continues to use my data and login id, personal password and biographical information without allowing me to delete that information, entirely illegally ¡V this constitutes identity theft, for which I may file a criminal complaint¡V also in breach of resolution 3 of the so-called agreement. (see attached Doc. # 10, showing my ability to login to C&C¡¦s computer system, they have the ability to create an email in my name and my former supervisor once contacted me by email using the address of a former foreign employee named ¡§Tom¡¨ ¡V Nina said, ¡§Oh, that was me!¡¨)
4. Resolution 4 states the employer would file papers for the termination of the aforementioned work permit # 970539971 on April 23rd, 2009. They had failed to do so as of my last visit to the CLA, Yen Ping N. Rd. on May 8th at 3.30pm. This hinders my freedom to seek a new primary sponsoring employer, also hinders my ability to sue them for breach of contract (they have not actually legally and officially terminated my employment as yet), and allows them to falsely claim benefits, fraudulently, that I was employed there. It is illegal for a company to continue to claim to employ an individual when in fact they are not employed there. I have done no work for C&C since March 28th, 2009. I warned both the employer and Mr. Yeh during the meeting that it was ¡§illegal to continue to keep the employment permit open when I¡¦m not working there¡¨ and insisted that C&C immediately file the termination papers. This work permit I applied for in person, myself ¡V paying all associated expenses of which the employer refused to refund the expenses. So, now B.o.L.A. expects that workers in Taiwan must pay personally for the legal paperwork to grant the necessary documents to their employer. Do you ask also that I pay for my employer applying for a business licenses as well? Therefore, resolution 4 is unfulfilled.
I informed Mr. Yeh of C&C¡¦s failure to fulfill all points of the agreement, to which his response was (made by text message on 04/27/09 at 13.57) ¡§When they pay your salar, our part is done. Regarding your claiming your personal right , it have to be processed through the court. You can ask your lawer to file a suit against them. Goog luck, (sic)¡§. I can only assume that he is stating I must ask the court for my ¡§personal right¡¨ to be employed and to not be fired for demanding National Health Insurance coverage, as is stipulated is mandatory for in various immigration laws and the National Health Insurance Act (Please reference the section in relation to the employment of foreigners, as I recall it can be found in Sec. 3).
Subsequently, on May 1st, 2009 I obtained a copy of the ¡§Statement of my Personal Income¡¨ (ref# 971581205 ¡V please see attached photocopy ¡V Doc. # 11) for the year 097. My employer failed to report any income during the entire period of my employment from Aug.1st, 2008 (97) to Dec. 31st, 2008 (97). Nonetheless, they withheld or were entitled to withhold a minimum of $5,608 during that period. Therefore, the issue of salary (resolution one) is still unresolved and my employer is in breach of the tax laws of this nation.
I was instructed that I must agree to and ¡§please sign here¡¨ the ¡§report,¡¨ (please see again Doc. # 8) absolutely contrary to the statement in English, ¡§Both parties have verified the above resolution without any objection.¡¨ All parties present were fully aware of my continuing objections to all aspects of the so-called agreement, including my two witnessing companions. I did so fully aware it would hamper my case, but Mr. Yeh among other insisted I must agree, and knowing I cannot override his authority but must appeal to a higher authority, I obliged him with my signature and he once again assured my that I could pursue my case at a different forum.
On the basis of what I have demonstrated that indeed this agreement can only be considered a legally non-binding, informal agreement, and further on the basis that the employer failed to fulfill the resolutions contained in the said report, I demand this document be declared invalid. Thereafter, I demand the case be reopened and all details properly collected and all aspects investigated.
My demands revert to the status quo ante ¡V the reason for my being fired must be clearly and correctly ascertained, and investigated thoroughly. I will not accept that staff of B.o.L.A. ask me to misrepresent myself and the facts of the case simply for their convenience and the ¡§comfort¡¨ of my employer. I demand restoration of my working rights. If these rights are refused, my employer must be penalized according to their infractions, and according to all pertinent laws. If B.o.L.A. actually have no authority to pursue the illegal actions of my employer then these facts must be forwarded to the proper authorities. Also, correct and valid documentation that truthfully reflects the reality must come into being at the conclusion of my reopened case. Then if severance pay is rewarded it must be properly calculated using the legal documents that secured my employment, my contract, and on a proper legal basis, not simply the hearsay of my employer with the approval of a compliant B.o.L.A. staff member. Outstanding issues of remaining unpaid wages and income falsely deducted for tax purposes that was never report or paid to the National Tax Bureau must be resolved legally.
The fact that I must file this complaint shows a complete failure of legal processes involving resolution of disputes between foreigners and their employers here in Taipei city. I expect an immediate response and redress of the situations described herein. Failure to do so will necessitate that I initiate legal action to protect my working and civil rights.
(Please note that I¡¦ve highlighted certain passages in this letter for ease of reference.)
Robert Brian Wadleigh
May 10th, 2009
TIWA -- Taiwan International Workers Association
