Showing posts with label Timeline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Timeline. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

TIMELINE OF NCKU DISMISSAL ACTION

                 TIMELINE OF NCKU DISMISSAL ACTION


1. March 29, 1999 - the FLLD review committee passed the "dismissal" decision  (no legal reasons.)

 

2. April 23, 1999 - Appeal to the College of Liberal Arts Review Committee's Appeals group.

 

3. May 3, 1999 - the College of Liberal Arts Appeals Group decided the  "evidences" listed by the FLLD were not objective and solid. The case was sent back to FLLD for them to solidify evidences.

 

4. June 9, 1999 - the College of Liberal Arts Review Committee's Appeals Group rejected the appeal. (This was based on my former student, Chen An-Chun's secret letter submitted by FLLD chair, Li Chung-hsiung, claiming harassment.)

 

5. June 14, 2000 - the College of Liberal Arts Review Committee passed the "dismissal" decision. (No legal reasons.)

 

6. June 25, 1999 - the University Review Committee passed the "dismissal" decision (no legal reasons.)

 

7. July 28, 1999 - Appeal to the University Appeals Committee.

  

8. December 3, 1999 - the University Appeals Committee cancelled the "dismissal" decision. (Chairman was university lawyer, Wang)

 

9. March 10, 2000 - the FLLD Review Committee passed the "dismissal" decision (no reasons.)

 

10. March 21, 2000 - Appeal to the College of Liberal Arts Appeals group.

 

11. March 29, 2000 - the College of Liberal Arts Review Committee's Appeals Group rejected the appeal.

 

12. April 12, 2000 - the College of Liberal Arts Review Committee passed the "dismissal" decision (no reasons.)

 

13. April 17, 2000 - Appeal to the University Review Committee's Appeals Group.

 

14. April 28, 2000 - the University Review Committee's Appeals Group decided that for this case, the FLLD and CLA did not list reasons of dismissal. They should re-review.  

 

15. May 5, 2000 - the FLLD review committee passed the "dismissal" decision  (the same illegal reasons as previous year.)

 

16. May 10, 2000 - the College of Liberal Arts Review Committee passed the "dismissal" decision (the same illegal reasons as previous year.)

 

17. May 24, 2000 - the university review committee passed the "dismissal" decision (the same illegal reasons as previous year.)

 

18. June 12, 2000 - Appealed to the University Appeals Committee.

  

19. August 18, 2000 - the University Appeals Committee rejected the appeal (Chairman was Wang)

 

20. September 5, 2000 - Appeal to the MOE Central Appeals Committee.

  

21. January 8, 2001 - the MOE Central Appeals Committee cancelled the "dismissal" decision.

 

22. May 24, 2001 - the university informed that they have started the investigation of plagiarism, requesting "appellant's" "defense."

 

23. May 24, 2001 - the FLLD review committee passed the "dismissal" decision.

 

24. June 19, 2001 - the College of Liberal Arts review committee passed the "dismissal" decision.

25. June 28, 2001 - Appeal to the University Review Committee's Appeals Group.

 

26. July 5, 2001 - the University Review Committee's Appeals Group rejected the appeal.

 

27. July 23, 2001 - the University Review Committee suspended the "dismissal" decision, and requested that the FLLD provide more evidence to match the requirements of Employment Law: Article 41.

 

28. September 12, 2001 - the university review committee passed the "dismissal" decision (the same illegal reasons as previous year.)

 

29. October 23, 2001 - Appeal to the University Appeals Committee.

  

30. June 18, 2002 - the University Appeals Committee cancelled the "dismissal" decision. (Chairman was a different person).

 

From May 11, 2001 to April 21, 2003 the MOE sent 8 letters urging the university reinstate the professor.

 

31. May 6, 2003 - the university notified of issuing the contract and compensated part of the salary.

 

32. May 20, 2003 - the University Review Committee passed the "plagiarism is a light case, the punishments are:no promotion, no salary increments, no sabbatical leave within next six years."

 

33. March 22, 2004 - the MOE Central Appeals Committee cancelled the "compensating part of the salary" decision, ordered the university to make proper decision within 20 days.

 

34. November 1, 2004 - the MOE Central Appeals Committee cancelled the "punishments" decision, based on the reason the law cannot trace back to these cases occurred before its formal execution.

 

35. August 19, 2004 - the university compensated the rice money but still refused to compensate the four years (1999-2003) yearly salary increment.


36. October 17, 2006 Wang claimed to the Kaohsiung Administrative court: "Foreigners(teachers)are not protected by Educational workers employment law, foreigners are are governed by Employment law, not Teachers law."  37. March 13, 2007 Wang claimed to the Kaohsiung Administrative court: "Foreign teachers are not protected by the Teachers law. When the contract period is fulfilled the hiring-employment relationship spontaneously terminates.

38. August 28, 2007 - the university compensated the four years (1999-2003) yearly salary increment.

Monday, August 25, 2008

TIMELINE (from May 6 2003 - Present (2010)

From May 11, 2001 to April 21, 2003
the MOE sent eight letters urging the university to reinstate me.
31. May 6, 2003 - the university notified me it will issue the contract and compensate only part of the salary.
32. May 20, 2003 - the University Review Committee passed penalties for unproved accusations, including denial of promotion, salary increments, and sabbatical leave for six years.
33. June 12, 2003 - Appealed to the University Appeals Committee.
34. September 9, 2003 - the University Appeals Committee canceled the decision of May 20.

35. March 22, 2004 - the MOE Central Appeals Committee canceled the "compensate part of the salary" decision, and ordered the university to make a proper decision within twenty days.
36. October 27, 2003 - the University Review Committee re-approved the decision of May 20.
37. November 14, 2003 - Appealed the Oct. 27 decision to the University Appeals Committee.
38. January 16, 2004 - the University Appeals Committee rejected the appeal.
39. February 18, 2004 - Appealed to the MOE Central Appeals Committee.

40. November 1, 2004 - the MOE Central Appeals Committee canceled the "punishments" decision, on the basis the law cannot be applied retroactively. (NOTE: The accusations were unproved by due process of law and were already part of the Ministry appeal, which favored me.)
41. August 19, 2004 - the university compensated the rice money but refused to compensate the four years (1999-2003) yearly salary increment.
42. August 28, 2007 - the university finally compensated the four years (1999-2003) yearly salary increment.
43. Present - The university continues to deny monetary damages, a formal apology, or disciplinary action against those involved in the illegal dismissal action.