Working at a school on a spouse sponsored KITAS

[Bad_azz]

Okay. But let me -again - try to make clear what I am talking about in my last three posts above this:

1) It is NOT about being employed as a teacher;

2) It IS about being employed by a school or its foundation (not as working in one's own "family business"

and the rest as already outlined in my posts.

So what I am interested in for my particular example is not the "common sense" answer (no offense) but the best answer which can be provided regarding what may or may not be allowable (as in legally permissible) under existing law and regulation.

I don't see where the doubt lays... if you wish to work for a school- not as a teacher and the school want you- then they should be able to legitimately employ you in a different role.
The work permit is reserved for TKA - and as a spouse sponsored ITAS/ITAP holder you are not a TKA. Nor are you a teacher/or other regulated professional.

 

[HappyMan]

No, I d on't think that they are different. As BA and I have both said, there are regulatory requirements and qualifications which must be met for the approval and employment of foreigners as teachers however, I don't know of anything in Indonesian law saying that "guru kelas" is the only role or function in which a school or its foundation could see reason to employ a WNA.

If WNA do not require IMTA to work for someone, then as long as they are NOT employed in a capacity which WOULD require IMTA as part of a process of professional qualification, they SHOULD be permitted to work in such capacity without the IMTA.

In other words: one has to meet certain and particular qualifications to be accepted and employed as a teacher, but other capacities may not have such requirements, and teaching is not the only capacity in which one can be employed in or by a school. If the school or foundation sees the need and desirability of employing a WNA under another capacity, and if it is a capacity which may require certain skills a foreigner may have, then why can't they do so? Please provide the answer Here: _________________.

So, it seems that the problem has moved from one of IMTA (TKA) to Izin Pendidik (spousal KITAS/P). I mean that a spousal KITAP/S holder working in a school without "proper documentation" would be in trouble for not having an Izin Pendidik, rather than anything else. Then I suppose the next step to move from postulating to something... we could hang our hats on, is to check out the laws regulating Izin Pendidik (IP). We need to know what functions require a person to have that IP, then we can look for that wriggle room we need to stay on the right side of the law and employed. If anyone can give me a clue where to look for the regs, I'll start digging.

 

[Bad_azz]

My Indonesian is not good:

http://www.infokursus.net/perijinan.php

http://surakarta.go.id/konten/izin-penyelenggaraan-pendidikan-formal-dan-non-formal

http://sindikker.dikti.go.id/dok/UU/UU0122012_Full.pdf << higher education

I would think there will be something in that lot somewhere.

http://sindikker.dikti.go.id/dok/PP/PP 15 2015 standard nasional pendidikan tinggi.pdf
What I do is download the document then ask google translate to translate the document - it uploads the file and creates a fairly ok translation.
It contains : "INDONESIAN GOVERNMENT REGULATION NUMBER 13 2015 ABOUT SECOND AMENDMENT TO GOVERNMENT REGULATION NUMBER 19 YEAR 2005 REGARDING NATIONAL EDUCATION STANDARDS"
So I guess if the answer is not in that one then you need to look at UU19 2005

I am sure there used to be a book out there that contained all the laws- however said book would need to be updated all the time to keep up with various amendments.

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

I don't see where the doubt lays... if you wish to work for a school- not as a teacher and the school want you- then they should be able to legitimately employ you in a different role.
The work permit is reserved for TKA - and as a spouse sponsored ITAS/ITAP holder you are not a TKA. Nor are you a teacher/or other regulated professional.

Right. That is what I am reading too, by the illumination from atlantis's post. I'm just asking for more confirmation / clarification that this is correct, and I'll take your affirmation as an excellent start.

 

[HappyMan]

My Indonesian is not good:

http://www.infokursus.net/perijinan.php

http://surakarta.go.id/konten/izin-penyelenggaraan-pendidikan-formal-dan-non-formal

http://sindikker.dikti.go.id/dok/UU/UU0122012_Full.pdf

I would think there will be something in that lot somewhere.

There is a hell of a lot to sift through. I'd started on the 2003 law... but I suppose it is best to start with the newest... Going to be a while.

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

So, it seems that the problem has moved from one of IMTA (TKA) to Izin Pendidik (spousal KITAS/P). I mean that a spousal KITAP/S holder working in a school without "proper documentation" would be in trouble for not having an Izin Pendidik, rather than anything else. Then I suppose the next step to move from postulating to something... we could hang our hats on, is to check out the laws regulating Izin Pendidik (IP). We need to know what functions require a person to have that IP, then we can look for that wriggle room we need to stay on the right side of the law and employed. If anyone can give me a clue where to look for the regs, I'll start digging.

You may have a point, keeping in mind BA's caveat to use the term "common sense" cautiously round here, but I can't see why or how and Izin Pendidik would be applicable or required for any position of employment in a school, other than "guru" ... schools employ administrative staff, other support staff such as: stock, librarian, inventory, engineering, etc ... do they all have to have "Izin Pendidik"? Unless one is employed as a teacher (or teacher administrator), why would that be a requirement?

 

[Bad_azz]

You may have a point, keeping in mind BA's caveat to use the term "common sense" cautiously round here, but I can't see why or how and Izin Pendidik would be applicable or required for any position of employment in a school, other than "guru" ... schools employ administrative staff, other support staff such as: stock, librarian, inventory, engineering, etc ... do they all have to have "Izin Pendidik"? Unless one is employed as a teacher (or teacher administrator), why would that be a requirement?

I agree... the links I gave were related to education laws.
I would assume that one would have to work on a process of elimination- if the role is not mentioned in the regulated professions in a school then one would have to assume it is unregulated and therefore ok... a convoluted way round things- I hope someone somewhere knows of a list of unregulated professions ha!

 

[HappyMan]

You may have a point, keeping in mind BA's caveat to use the term "common sense" cautiously round here, but I can't see why or how and Izin Pendidik would be applicable or required for any position of employment in a school, other than "guru" ... schools employ administrative staff, other support staff such as: stock, librarian, inventory, engineering, etc ... do they all have to have "Izin Pendidik"? Unless one is employed as a teacher (or teacher administrator), why would that be a requirement?

I just started looking at the 2003 law (and there have been others since), but it would appear that positions other than guru are also regulated... though I haven't seen how yet. Here is Pasal 1, Ayat 6, UU20, 2003, "Pendidik adalah tenaga kependidikan yang berkualifikasi sebagai guru, dosen, konselor, pamong belajar, widyaiswara, tutor, instruktur, fasilitator, dan sebutan lain yang sesuai dengan kekhususannya, serta berpartisipasi dalam menyelenggarakan pendidikan." That just lets you know they are mentioned, not how. I'll do a bit of reading and let you know if I find anything useful.

BA, if you get hold of the actual law, it usually translates really well. Here is that previous quote, redone by Google, "Educators are educators who qualified as teachers, counselors, tutors, lecturers, tutors, instructors, facilitators, and other designations in accordance with their specialization, as well as participating in education."

 

[Bad_azz]

Right. That is what I am reading too, by the illumination from atlantis's post. I'm just asking for more confirmation / clarification that this is correct, and I'll take your affirmation as an excellent start.

I guess at the end of the day we have to work with what we feel comfortable with- if for example someone comes along and says - "hey you cannot do xyz..."
we have to feel confident enough to say "why not- abc law says I can, how am I in error?"

& to be sure that we are as up to date on the actual law- UU not some lesser regulation.

Personally I am (gobby) confident enough to question officials when they try to sell me the lesser regulations, I don't show fear or weakness, but I do smile and say - "oh, really- please tell me the UU number and paragraph- I need to research and educate myself, I will get back to you, thank you very much" then I go away look up - or ask in here /elsewhere.
I then go back & say - "ahh, I looked at the UU you told me but Pak, there has been an amendment since then- look here, I have a copy" & then make some quip about how things change so much it is hard to keep up to date- to save (his) face

& sometimes if I am in bitch mode I just chunter in rapid English bad,bad words lol.

BUT- disclaimer alert... none of us peddles our wares in here as a legal expert.
So it is all conjecture, opinion & (common sense -dare I use that phrase again?) advice.

My personal take on "law" is that it is rules with arguments and counter arguments- so if you can demonstrate your counter argument is equally or more valid than someone else's you have a fighting chance of being ruled in favour of.

 

[atlantis]

We need to know what functions require a person to have that IP, then we can look for that wriggle room we need to stay on the right side of the law and employed. If anyone can give me a clue where to look for the regs, I'll start digging.

Any foreigner who is employed as:

• guru,
• dosen,
• tutor,
• instruktur,
• fasilitator,
• konselor,
• pengajar,
• penutur asli bahasa,
• koordinator akademis

is considered a "Pendidik"

Any foreigner who is employed as:

• kepsek

is considered "Tenaga Pendidikan"

Therefore any educational facility employing a foreigner in any of the above functions is subjected to the Izin Pendidik dan Tenaga Pendidikan. As you see it doesn't leave a lot of possibilities if one intends to teach in any form.

If you want to dig more you have to look in the peraturan depdiknas of the year 2009, year that they started to be all excited to enact tons of new regs. My notes say Permen 66 tahun 2009 but it should be verified.

 

[atlantis]

a spousal KITAP/S holder working in a school without "proper documentation" would be in trouble for not having an Izin Pendidik

The Izin Pendidik and Tenaga Pendidikan" is NOT issued to a person but, like the IMTA to a company/yayasan.

 

[William King]

The Izin Pendidik and Tenaga Pendidikan" is NOT issued to a person but, like the IMTA to a company/yayasan.

Correct, and is normally completed 4-6 months before the start of the school year. So we have to list our classes and teachers needed, then search for people to fulfil those requirements. Someone knocking on our door in August and explaining that they have a spouse sponsored KITAS and could we give them a job are normally politely refused.

 

[HappyMan]

Anyone foreigner who is employed as:

• guru,
• dosen,
• tutor,
• instruktur,
• fasilitator,
• konselor,
• pengajar,
• penutur asli bahasa,
• koordinator akademis

is considered a "Pendidik"

Any foreigner who is employed as:

• kepsek

is considered "Tenaga Pendidikan"

Therefore any educational facility employing a foreigner in any of the above functions is subjected to the Izin Pendidik dan Tenaga Pendidikan. As you see it doesn't leave a lot of possibilities if one intends to teach in any form.

If you want to dig more you have to look in the peraturan depdiknas of the year 2009, year that they started to be all excited to enact tons of new regs. My notes say Permen 66 tahun 2009 but it should be verified.

Thanks, A. I'll go have a look there. There wasn't anything useful in the 2003 law, anyway, just a lot of "diatur lebih lanjut dengan Peraturan Pemerintah".

 

[El_Goretto]

OK, so this makes sense now.

A WNA sponsored by a WNI spouse can do mostly any kind of work in a school as long as it's not a formal educator role (Pendidik) as per the regulation's definition.

Now, the next question would be: If a WNA sponsored by a WNI spouse does work as a Pendidik without the school being issued the Izin Pendidik, who will be in trouble? The WNA? The employer? Both?

 

[Bad_azz]

OK, so this makes sense now.

A WNA sponsored by a WNI spouse can do mostly any kind of work in a school as long as it's not a formal educator role (Pendidik) as per the regulation's definition.

Now, the next question would be: If a WNA sponsored by a WNI spouse does work as a Pendidik without the school being issued the Izin Pendidik, who will be in trouble? The WNA? The employer? Both?

(zaps EL-G with a laser gun... )
Hahaha El_ G you re deffo making brains work today, great questions.
My take on it- the school is at fault- so can be legislated against.
I am not sure but i would think also the WNA could be legislated against if they have been complicit in the deception- for example giving fake documents.

In reality, I would think that the local immigration office would (try to) find something to investigate re the WNA- such as their statement that they will not undertake any illegal activities.

edit- got my A & I s muddle up...
however: the sponsor WNI does agree to some responsibility for the WNA's actions in all of the visa process.

 

[Bad_azz]

Thanks, A. I'll go have a look there. There wasn't anything useful in the 2003 law, anyway, just a lot of "diatur lebih lanjut dengan Peraturan Pemerintah".

Totally off topic (sorry)- but I envy you lot your command of the language - I am still learning , slowly. So kudos guys.

 

[HappyMan]

Any foreigner who is employed as:

• guru,
• dosen,
• tutor,
• instruktur,
• fasilitator,
• konselor,
• pengajar,
• penutur asli bahasa,
• koordinator akademis

is considered a "Pendidik"

Any foreigner who is employed as:

• kepsek

is considered "Tenaga Pendidikan"

Therefore any educational facility employing a foreigner in any of the above functions is subjected to the Izin Pendidik dan Tenaga Pendidikan. As you see it doesn't leave a lot of possibilities if one intends to teach in any form.

If you want to dig more you have to look in the peraturan depdiknas of the year 2009, year that they started to be all excited to enact tons of new regs. My notes say Permen 66 tahun 2009 but it should be verified.

Yes, that is the one. It seems to be locked up pretty tightly, as you said. I don't see a way to work in education without the IMTA, as the law even says that the teaching license should be dated to match the IMTA... The informal teaching sector (language course) is also included. This permen did not list the penalties for violation of the law.

 

[atlantis]

If a WNA sponsored by a WNI spouse does work as a Pendidik without the school being issued the Izin Pendidik, who will be in trouble? The WNA? The employer? Both?

First, I would like to understand why, as an employer, one would choose to employ as a pendidik someone with who he may be in trouble with Depdiknas and Nakertrans while he may have a certainly similar quality candidate in the pool of people not being sponsored by a WNI spouse?

Personally, if I would be kepsek, I would do as William King says kepsek are doing: I would politely refuse because I know I would be able to find similar quality candidates presenting less potential headaches for me.

Anyway, to answer your question, I would say that the school will be the recipient of the administrative action. Going after the WNA would be legally difficult (art. 61) in my opinion beside being unpopular (remember s/he is married to a WNI).

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

(zaps EL-G with a laser gun... )
Hahaha El_ G you re deffo making brains work today, great questions.
My take on it- the school is at fault- so can be legislated against.
I am not sure but i would think also the WNI could be legislated against if they have been complicit in the deception- for example giving fake documents.

In reality, I would think that the local immigration office would (try to) find something to investigate re the WNI- such as their statement that they will not undertake any illegal activities.

Did you intentionally refer to the WNI (spouse) here, or did you mean the WNA (the one who's working as a foreigner married to the WNI)?

If the WNA spouse is working for a third party, the only ones who could get in trouble about the working, seems to me, would be the employer or the WNA ... how would the WNI spouse be engaging in any "illegal activities" in that?

 

[William King]

^^ Atlantist's post.

Let's also assume that any school is normally looking for multiple people for different roles, and spending time arguing about one person's supposed qualification or lack thereof is really not going to be high on their list of favourite past times. A Kepala Sekolah (I hadnt seen Kepsek abbreviation before) would also have a thousand other things to do with the day to day running of a school as well.

Finding the right employee for the job, quickly, easily and without possible legal troubles later would certainly be high on their list variables to consider.