RetireJapan

RetireJapan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:13 am

hbd wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:57 am In my experience, 'appropriate and humane' carries very little weight when weighed against the written employee manual.

I'm glad your colleague is in good enough financial shape to be able to go 'home' to put him/herself in better physical shape, while also taking such a large cut in anticipated retirement money.

There are two very good things about manuals or rulebooks. One is that they exist at all in accessible mediums (though certainly not at some institutions). The other is that they can be revised in response to justifiable objections to their current contents. As you noticed long ago, Ben, in this society a great many employees (both Japanese and foreign) have only very modest resources after decades of working hard; they get the short end of the stick in so many regards. If they have to leave work a year or two early on medical grounds, surely they deserve a better deal from their employer. 'We' (white or dual-heritage English speaking males?) may well be the most privileged ethnic minority in this entire country, so I think we can do more than just study, interpret and make the most of the systems we live within here. We can also try to make them better for those among us who are less fortunate, and of course for those who'll come after us. … So if not for the fact that your friend happens to be well off, his/her loss of 40% of the allowance due to retirement for medical reasons just 8 months early could well be used as a lever to start nudging your university management toward re-thinking the flagrant inhumanity of the 'no exceptions' approach to so-called 自己都合 retirement. ( Hmm, I wonder how much they actually know about your friends' finances. If they've no idea that money worries aren't an issue in this case, then perhaps the point could yet be made, and seeds of change for the better planted? )

hbd wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:35 pm So if not for the fact that your friend happens to be well off, his/her loss of 40% of the allowance due to retirement for medical reasons just 8 months early could well be used as a lever to start nudging your university management toward re-thinking the flagrant inhumanity of the 'no exceptions' approach to so-called 自己都合 retirement. ( Hmm, I wonder how much they actually know about your friends' finances. If they've no idea that money worries aren't an issue in this case, then perhaps the point could yet be made, and seeds of change for the better planted? )

hbd wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:35 pm [
There are two very good things about manuals or rulebooks. One is that they exist at all in accessible mediums (though certainly not at some institutions). The other is that they can be revised in response to justifiable objections to their current contents. As you noticed long ago, Ben, in this society a great many employees (both Japanese and foreign) have only very modest resources after decades of working hard; they get the short end of the stick in so many regards. If they have to leave work a year or two early on medical grounds, surely they deserve a better deal from their employer. 'We' (white or dual-heritage English speaking males?) may well be the most privileged ethnic minority in this entire country, so I think we can do more than just study, interpret and make the most of the systems we live within here. We can also try to make them better for those among us who are less fortunate, and of course for those who'll come after us. … So if not for the fact that your friend happens to be well off, his/her loss of 40% of the allowance due to retirement for medical reasons just 8 months early could well be used as a lever to start nudging your university management toward re-thinking the flagrant inhumanity of the 'no exceptions' approach to so-called 自己都合 retirement. ( Hmm, I wonder how much they actually know about your friends' finances. If they've no idea that money worries aren't an issue in this case, then perhaps the point could yet be made, and seeds of change for the better planted? )

... they effectively withhold a portion of your wages until retirement in order to enforce good behaviour and loyalty. Same goes for the "bonus" system.

hbd wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 12:21 pm They could save their institutions a lot more money by letting the full professors get out at 61 with proper pro rata retirement allowances, then hiring a junior academic whose salary is far lower for the 4 or 5 years that they have to pay each of 'we' professors - we who hang on until the bitter end like dogs dying of thirst. Has this glaringly obvious point not ever been made to the management of our esteemed national universities? The calculations involved are not difficult.

an early retirement scheme you can apply to from mid-50s: if accepted you get your full taishokukin

hbd wrote: ↑Sun Aug 01, 2021 1:15 pm I can imagine such a scheme is offered to just a very few each year, but I hope I'm wrong about that ... Do you know anyone who's actually been accepted and received the full allowance?

hbd wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 12:21 pm

... they effectively withhold a portion of your wages until retirement in order to enforce good behaviour and loyalty. Same goes for the "bonus" system.

Ah yes, now it's time to talk about the legendary BONUS system. Now surely this is worth a new thread, but for now let me say that there are national universities where the bonus seems to be treated in a very different manner. Case in point: By engaging in truly shocking behavior such as TURNING 61 YEARS OLD, one's bonus is immediately cut by about 45%! For a full professor that's at least a US$10,000 p/a income cut overnight, so if one stays on till 65 it will be over 40K or even 50K, depending on which month one's birthday falls in.