Let's Japan.org Debunking Eikaiwa and Ramblings in Japan

It doesn't look like the lawsuit will end any time soon:

The current focus of negotiations is the amount of notice union members should give the company ahead of industrial action. Initially, Berlitz Japan offered to drop their lawsuit if teachers gave a week's notice before striking. Begunto proposed five minutes. Since teachers typically only learn the next day's schedule the night before, the judge instructed the company to come up with a better offer.

Asked how much notice unions legally have to give before striking, Langley replied, "None. Zero. That's one of the beauties of a strike: You just strike."

In the latest round of talks held Thursday, Berlitz Japan requested contract teachers give strike notification by 3 p.m. the day before, and per-lesson teachers by 5 p.m. Begunto pointed out to the judge that per-lesson teachers don't receive their schedule until 6 p.m. the day before. Union executives have taken the offer back to members for consideration

That's quite the chutzpah from Berlitz. I don't know why they want advance notice of industrial reaction when it hasn't stopped them from screwing over their teachers:

One, who didn't want to be named, received word of his dismissal just before shipping out to Afghanistan as a U.S. Army reservist at the end of July 2009. Berlitz Japan had allowed the teacher to take unpaid leave for military duty several times before the strike. But after being the only teacher at his Yokohama branch to walk out, he began getting complaints from students.

According to Begunto members, after being ordered to deploy to Afghanistan, Berlitz Japan told the teacher he could take a leave of absence of less than a year, and that he'd have to quit if he needed more than a year. Two days before he left for Afghanistan the company fired him. According to the dismissal letter, his performance was subpar and was hurting the company's image.

Take unpaid leave and then get summarily fired anyway for reasons which you cannot defend since you are conveniently unable to communicate with the company. The same thing applies if you become seriously ill:

Another of the teachers named in the suit, Catherine Campbell, was fired earlier this month after taking too long to recover from late-stage breast cancer cancer [sic]. In June 2009, Campbell took a year of unpaid leave to undergo chemotherapy and radiation treatment. Because Berlitz Japan failed to enroll Campbell in the shakai hoken health insurance scheme, she was unable to receive the two-thirds wage coverage it provides and had to live with her parents in Canada during treatment. The company denied Campbell's request to extend her leave from June to Sept. 2010 and fired her for failing to return to work.

Berlitz Japan work rules allow for leave-of-absence extensions where the company deems it necessary.

Never mind that this is unpaid leave, it's Catherine's fault for not healing faster. Her situation is also a good example of why it's important to pay into a health insurance scheme. She would not have been financially crippled had she been enrolled in the company's shakai hoken health insurance plan. Insurance is always a waste of money until you need it, eh?

As the article points out, the heart of the dispute is a battle for a wage increase. The teachers went on strike for a 4.6% increase after going without a raise for 16 years while Berlitz and its parent company, Benesse, enjoyed record profits.

One of the reasons why conditions are so bad in eikaiwa is because the schools have been allowed to get away with their shady practices and abuse for so long. Part of it has to do with the lack of regulation of the industry, but another reason is that few teachers have chosen to stand up to their employers. It's always been easier to jump ship and find something better. But with Japan's moribund economy, those days are over. There are few good options left for teachers: 1) Don't teach English in Japan (don't bother with it in the first place) or 2) Don't be a pushover in the first place.

As I've said before, this is worth fighting for. You can't let yourself be pushed around. The alternative is to let eikaiwa schools forever stomp on you.

In other news, Louis Carlet is the executive president of Zenkoku Ippan (Tozen):

On Dec. 3, 2008, Berlitz Japan claimed the strike was illegal and sued for a total of ¥110 million in damages. Named in the suit were the five teachers volunteering as Begunto executives, as well as two union officials: the president of the National Union of General Workers Tokyo Nambu, Yujiro Hiraga , and Carlet, former NUGW case officer for Begunto and currently executive president of Zenkoku Ippan Tokyo General Union (Tozen).

Hoofin' has the details on how that happened.

UPDATE: The author of the article, James McCrostie, was kind enough to email me and offer a few extra morsels that didn't make the editor's cut:

• To add insult to Catherine Campbell's fight with cancer, Benesse supports the Pink Ribbon campaign through their health insurance union （ベネッセ健康保険組合） [PDF, see p.3].

• Union members told James McCrostie in an interview that the fight against Begunto really seems to be part of a wider policy of union busting at Benesse Corp. In April, Simul International fired the president of their union, someone with 12 years experience at the company. Also, Berlitz threw away 15 years of established practices for collective bargaining in English. Two lawyers from the law firm suing the Berlitz teachers now run Berlitz's side of negotiations in Japanese and demand the union provide an interpreter. During negotiations, Berlitz managers ask the lawyers for permission before they speak. The law firm in question is famous in Japanese legal circles for union busting.

Stay classy, Berlitz.

UPDATE 7/27: Something just didn't sit right with me after re-reading the article and it's the union's case with the Army Reservist. It's a weak case, especially when it looks like Berlitz was being reasonable in granting several unpaid leaves. Expecting to be able to take multiple unpaid leaves and still keep your job is a stretch in Japan. It's also difficult to see how the union could pin his dismissal on him being the only one in his school to strike. It seems like a moot point to argue when all Berlitz has to do is point out that the teacher has been away from work for extended periods of time.

For the life of me, I cannot wrap my head around why Kim Hyon Hui is in Japan. She blows up KAL flight 858 in 1987, killing all aboard, is arrested, sentenced to death, pardoned, marries one of her bodyguards, writes a book about her days as a spy, and now leads a presumably comfortable but secluded life in South Korea. But because she met some of the Japanese abductees, Japan has seen fit to let her into the country despite her crimes where she has been kicking back at Yukio's summer pad in Karuizawa and is slated to take a helicopter tour of Mt. Fuji today. What the hell?

Unless she has a photographic memory or has extensively traveled to North Korea in recent years, Kim hasn't been a source of information for a very long time. Anything she knows about the abductees is over 20 years old now. She may have some comforting words to say to the Iizukas or Yokotas but that's about it. Sure enough, Shigeru Yokota, father of Megumi, said as much:

北朝鮮による拉致被害者・横田めぐみさんの両親の滋さんと早紀江さんは２２日朝、長野県軽井沢町で記者会見を開き、来日中の大韓航空機爆破事件実行犯の金賢姫（キム・ヒョンヒ）元死刑囚との面会した結果について、

滋さんによると、金元死刑囚はめぐみさんの写真は何度か見たことはあるが、会ったのは１度だけだと話したという。早紀江さんは「めぐみと近しいところにいた金さんと会えて、夢のようだった」と話し、金元死刑囚にベージュ色の上着をお土産としてプレゼントしたと話した。

Kim had nothing to offer that he hasn't already heard. Moreover, she only met Megumi once. But that hasn't stopped Prime Minister Naoto Kan from saying that he hopes Kim's visit will help resolve the abductee issue. Really? If this is Japan's idea of a diplomatic gesture, then its efforts to bring some sort of closure to the abductee issue are truly dead in the water. Let's have bread and circuses instead. After watching the coverage on TV, the one thing that sticks in my mind is this: Why is Japan pallin' around with a terrorist?

*I can't believe I quoted Sarah Palin. I feel dirty, but this visit by Kim doesn't make any sense to me.

This got buried in my stack of stuff to do, but why not haul out the rotten corpse that is Fortress Japan for another round of flogging? To recap, the Consumer Affairs Agency shut down Fortress Japan in February for six months over its coercive methods of signing up new students. The agency's report [PDF] contains five case studies that illustrate how Fortress Japan did business.

You are probably already familiar with Fortress Japan's sleazy conduct, but the stupidity of its victims also shines through. Why did they sign? Where they mentally worn down to the point of being unable to leave the room or were they scared into signing? Fortress Japan's suspension ends August 18 and I wonder if they will return to their dirty tricks if they return at all. Here's a summary of the case studies.

CASE 1

In March 2009, Employee Z from Fortress Japan stopped Consumer A, who was in the midst of looking for a job, in a train station and asked if he would answer a questionnaire. He agreed.

Days later, Z called A on the mobile phone number he left on the questionnaire. She identified herself as Z from Global Trinity and asked A if remembered the questionnaire from the other day. For the next 20 minutes, she told him about an information session that would be useful in A's job, saying that it included one-on-one counseling, that it was popular, and that seats would fill up quickly. A was interested and said he would attend the session at Fortress Japan.

A went to Fortress Japan at the appointed time and date, where Z led him into small room. Using newspaper clippings, Z proceeded to explain to A the importance of being able to speak English and how it would benefit him in a severe the job market. Z also produced a pamphlet which she used to introduce Global Trinity to A, explaining that it offered employment skills and personal development seminars in order to succeed in finding a job as well as English lessons that A could take at any time without any restrictions.

A, realizing that two and half hours had elapsed and that Z wasn't about to finish, informed Z that he was leaving. Z replied that she was almost done and to wait a bit longer. On hearing the exchange, Z's boss jumped in to tell A that Z's presentation was almost finished. So, A let Z continue. A asked how much English lessons were after thinking that studying English would give him an edge in his job search. Z replied that she would tell him the next time they met. Wanting to know how much lessons cost, he arranged for another meeting.

Days after the first meeting, A returned to Fortress Japan where Z led him to the same small room and proceeded to talk about importance of English and the lesson fees. Z informed A that it cost 570,000 yen for 10 months and that A could take any number of lessons at any time he wanted in any course offered, all at the same price. On hearing the cost, A informed Z that he wanted to talk things over with his parents since he had no savings and couldn't carry a loan by working part-time. Z told him that A could increase his hours at his part-time job. A replied that getting more hours would be difficult, to which Z replied that he would be a failure in life and accomplish nothing if he didn't start now, and that he should work more hours. Z also pressured A into making the decision himself by saying that A was an adult and didn't need his parents to make decisions for him. Just then, Z's boss, Y, appeared and told A the reason he couldn't decide was because he didn't have the resolve and was weak. A signed a contract, thinking that they would not let him leave unless he did so.

A later took a level check at a Global Trinity school and was told he was at Level 1. Just as he was about to start his studies based on the curriculum for his level, he was unable to book a lesson three out of four times he tried. Moreover, A found that there were times when the lesson schedule that was released two weeks in advance of classes was suddenly released only 3 days in advance, making it difficult for A to book a class. He was never able to take lessons as he intended due the large number of Level 1 students all trying to make lessons reservations.

CASE 2

In April 2009, Employee X from Fortress Japan stopped Consumer B at a train station while he was on his way to university and asked him if he would fill out a questionnaire about English. B agreed.

That night, X called B on the mobile phone number he gave on the questionnaire. She identified herself as X from Global Trinity and thanked B for his help with the questionnaire at the train station earlier that day. She asked about B's university life and search for a job, and informed him of a popular English conversation information session that was filling up fast. Since B was aware how important being able to speak English was, he made an appointment with X for the next day.

B met X at the train station closest to Fortress Japan, where X escorted him to the building where Fortress Japan had an office. B was led into a small, partitioned room on a different floor than Fortress Japan. X then began a one-way spiel and informed B that Fortress Japan operated an English conversation school and job seminars, and that it had a lot of good things to offer. X also informed B that taking Fortress Japan's English lessons and job seminars would make him a go-getter, instilling within him assertiveness, responsibility, and ambition. X asked B to come tomorrow for a more detailed explanation about the English lessons. Since B was interested in studying English, he agreed to meet the next day.

The next day, B went to the same place to hear more about the English lessons. As with the previous day, X told him about the lessons and job seminars. Interested in signing a contract, B asked about how much it all cost. X didn't answer his question and repeatedly told B that the English lessons were a great opportunity for busy university students such as himself as he could take lessons any time he wanted. B thought that taking the classes would change him. After speaking for nearly four hours, X informed B that she would discuss lesson fees the next time they met and that he should come again tomorrow. Although B was busy that day, he made an appointment for another day.

Several days later, B met with X to talk about lesson fees. As with previous meetings, X again repeatedly told B of the importance of English and job seminars, telling him that English lessons were a great opportunity for busy university students such as himself since he could take lessons any time he wanted. Concerned about how much everything cost, he asked about the price. X told him it was 500,000 yen for 10 months and that he could make a lump sum payment or pay in 24 monthly installments of 24,000 yen by credit card. Knowing it would be difficult to make monthly payments of 24,000 yen and go to school at the same time, B asked for some time to think things over. X pressured B into making a decision by telling him things such as, "500,000 may seem expensive, but it's an investment in yourself. It's cheap when you consider you'll be able to speak English," and "You can decide on your own. You're older than 20." X pressured B for more than two hours before he finally signed a contract.

After signing the contract and going to the school to find out if he could take lessons any time he wanted to, the receptionist told him that all lessons had to be booked and that there was a curriculum for each particular language level. B realized that he would not be able to take lessons at a time of his choosing.

When B tried to book lessons in the fee time he had in between his university studies, classes were filled quickly and he was only able to make a reservation about half the time he tried.

CASE 3

In the Spring of 2008, University Student C, who had filled out a questionnaire on English conversation while on his way to school, received a call on his mobile phone from an unknown number but decided not to answer.

In May 2009, he received a call on his mobile phone and answered it. The person on the line was W from Fortress Japan. She introduced herself, told C that he had filled in a questionnaire at the train station a year ago, and asked him how his studies were progressing. She engaged in small talk while asking him about his search for a job, and then asked if he was interested in visiting an English conversation school that would help him with his job hunt. C was interested in studying English and arranged for a meeting at the school. C went to the school and was taken to a room. There, W informed him that "companies demand assertiveness, responsibility, and go-getters," and "English will help your search for a job. You need it in today's society." W made C anxious by telling him he wouldn't make it in society without being able to speak English or that he would earn less if he could not speak English. Since W didn't tell C about the English conversation school, C made an appointment to meet the next day.

C went to Fortress Japan the next day and after W reminded him again of the importance of English, told him that while all lessons have to be reserved, he could make a reservation without any restrictions at any time and that he was free to choose the day of the lesson. C liked the idea of being able to take lessons whenever he wanted but when he asked about the price, W told him it was 500,000 yen for 10 months, or monthly payments of 24,000 yen by consumer credit loan, and that this was considerably cheaper than other English conversation schools. C replied that a 500,000 loan was out of the question. W ignored C's rejection, telling him it wouldn't be a problem since he had a part-time job. Despite his job, he was a student with an unstable income. C said no and expressed his desire to go home and think it over. W refused to let him go, saying things like he would "regret it if he didn't decide now," or that she needed a decision right now or "You're a failure as a working adult." Wanting to leave as quickly as he could, C signed a contract, believing he had no other choice.

When C tried to book a lesson, he found he was unable to since the class schedule for the next half month was released two weeks in advance. The school was flooded with reservations. Moreover, C's university and part-time job schedules were set a month in advance, and when he tried to make a reservation that fit his schedule, he would only be able to fit in lessons once or twice a week. C tried more than 20 times to book a lesson but could never get the dates he wanted. Ultimately, he was never able to take more than half of the lessons he intended as they were all booked.

CASE 4

In June 2009, Consumer D was stopped in front of the entrance of his university by V, who introduced herself as being from Trinity, an English conversation school and job hunting juku. She asked D if he would take 30 seconds and fill out a questionnaire. V told D that Trinity was holding a free job search seminar and that he should attend. D was worried about his job prospects and decided that it would be a good idea to attend.

Days later, D met V at the train station closest to Trinity, where V escorted him to a small booth on the 9th floor of the building that Trinity occupied. V used newspaper clippings to illustrate how bad the job market was while explaining to D for three hours how difficult it would be to find a job and that companies want people who can speak English and are good communicators. D understood the need for personal development but didn't hear anything about how much everything cost, so he asked about the price. V replied that she would talk about prices during the second meeting, but D didn't seem like a university student who would have problems with money, so he should come to the next meeting tomorrow. D decided that he would make up his mind after learning about the price and promised to attend the second meeting the next day.

When D showed up at the appointed time the next day, V introduced him to U, who would be giving the presentation that day. U informed D that while the English lessons were by reservation-only, he could take as many lessons as he wanted during the 8-month course. U then spoke about the price of the lessons, informing D that it cost 650,000 yen, or under 30,000 yen a month in 24 monthly consumer loan payments. D thought the course was expensive and clearly refused to sign a contract as he wanted time to think it over. U, looking disappointed, told him that talking to his parents was pointless since they'd be the ones footing the bill and that it was too bad that D couldn't make the decision himself. When D explained that he had no choice but to talk with his parents since he probably wouldn't be able to get more hours at his part-time job, U replied that he should take responsibility for signing the contract without his parents input. The back and forth continued for some time. Finally, D decided to work more hours at his job and said he would join the school.

CASE 5

In August 2009, Consumer E was passing through a train station during his search for a job when he was stopped by T, who asked him if he would fill out a questionnaire about his job hunt. T asked E if he was interested in studying English and whether he felt that it was important. E thought both were important and filled out the questionnaire, leaving his name and phone number on the form.

That evening, T called E using the information on the questionnaire and introduced herself as T from Hearts. She then asked E about university life and his search for a job, and asked if he was interested in attending a free job seminar. E had just started looking for a job and thought the seminar would be crowded with people but would be worth attending for the information. He agreed to attend.

Days later, E went to the train station where he first met T. S escorted him to a booth and told him that today was decision day. E replied with a vague, "I see" although his intention was to listen to the spiel and go home without joining Hearts.

S started her presentation by saying that with the Hearts program, E would have to work part-time and earn money on his own. When E replied that he didn't have a part-time job, didn't have time for a job, and didn't intend on getting one, S attacked him for not having a job as it would hurt his job prospects. She said things like, "Not being able to work and go to school at the same time gives a bad impression because society demands that you do various things at the same time," and " Businesses don't like to hire people dependent on their parents because they've had to deal with complaints about their child's employment environment." After some time, S asked E if he had any questions. E replied that Hearts had something to offer but wasn't sure if he wanted to study there. S asked why he was confused, to which E replied, "I have university, seminars, and my own job hunting to worry about so doing a part-time job and studying at Hearts is impossible." S told him that he could do both.

Since the discussion was going nowhere, E asked to see some information about prices. S showed him a chart that said that it would cost 20,000 yen a month, a price that even a university student could afford it while working part-time. E felt that 20,000 a month was doable but the chart that S showed him listed a lump sum price of 500,000 yen payable in monthly installments of 20,000 yen over three years. E pointed out that at 20,000 yen a month, the cost would be more than 600,000 yen. He didn't have the money or time for a part time job, let alone study at Hearts. S tried to persuade him by saying the money was an investment in himself which would yield huge returns and that it was important to work and do something for yourself while he was still young. Again, E declined, "It all sounds good but I have my doubts about some things and am not quite convinced." S asked why he was confused again, to which E replied, " I'm not interested. I'm surrounded by highly-motivated friends at university who are more interesting." S countered by saying that there were plenty of people like that at Hearts and that relying on those close by wasn't a good thing. It was better for him to create his own environment. E thought the discussion was never going to end, so he made himself clear, "I'm really not interested right now."

S, however, pressed on saying, "You think like an old man," "All you think about is risk, not the challenge. You're young but indecisive. If you fail, it's better to do so while in university. It's better to do something and regret it than regret not doing something," and "You can take the lessons when your schedule allows it and you can take as many as you want at no extra charge." E was firm, "The risk is considerable if I fail given the large amount of money involved and other things may take a backseat if I start studying at Hearts. There are other ways than Hearts to grow personally, so I can't make a decision right now." S was persistent in maintaining that joining Hearts was the only way to succeed despite E's many protests, "You're being evasive. You're saying that activities beyond money, your schedule, and Hearts are more important so you can avoid having to make a decision." E kept refusing for over three hours but S wouldn't take no for an answer, so E decided to sign the contract.

It was only when E went to take an English level check that he learned the truth: He had to book lessons, but there was only about one class a week for a given curriculum, he could only make one reservation at a time, and he had to go to the school in person to book a lesson for the same day.

F*cked Gaijin links to an entry by Jim Gannon on jetwit.com about how the JET Program has been put on the chopping block by the DJP jjigyo shiwake government waste panel.

As an exercise in teaching English, I think it can be said that JET is an abject failure. Japan has one of the lowest TOEIC scores in Asia and 23 years of JET have done nothing to improve it. As Gannon notes, the budget panel sees JET as a teaching program, not a cultural exchange project, hence its recommendations to essentially do do away with it [PDF in Japanese].

If you're a JET Alumni, you of course don't want to see the program go, but Gannon also notes that intellectuals and policy leaders are trying to convince Japan rethink its position. More importantly, Gannon writes, "For its part, the US State Department also seems to be taking the position that the JET Program makes valuable contributions to the long-term underpinnings of US-Japan relations and cutting it will be harmful."

Even if you believe the JET Program to be wasted effort in teaching English, this is where the real value in JET exists: the goodwill that Japan has bought over the years is invaluable. Teaching and cultural exchange aside, the JET Program has succeeded in creating a corps of "ambassadors" that are interested in and like Japan, and these people tend to want to continue to stay connected to Japan in some way after JET.

I know a few ex-JETS who have gone on to work at embassies in Japan, and I wonder what the ratio of people who go on to work in some Japan-related government or NPO capacity really is. If JET does get the axe, then Japan doesn't just lose a teaching program, but a valuable diplomatic tool as the State Department suggests.

According to the Mainichi shuimbun, G.communication is to close two schools this month in Nagano. G.communication operates four GEOS schools and two children's schools in the prefecture. The Matsumoto school will close on the 20th and the Saku school on the 31st. A spokesperson called the closures the result of an "overall management decision."

Students were informed late last month about the closures. The Matsumoto school will merge with the NOVA Matsumoto ekimae school, while students at the Saku school have been given the option of going to the NOVA Nagano Ueda ekimae school or taking Ocha no ma ryuugaku lessons via videophone.

A mother with a son who has been taking lessons for the past four years at the children's school in Saku says that going to Ueda isn't an option since it's too far away.　

A brief report in the Chunichi shimbun fleshes out the "overall management decision" comment slightly by adding that the closures had to do with unpaid rent when G.com took over GEOS. (So, G.com didn't want to pay the rent?)

Help Douglas out by taking part in his survey:

Dear colleagues,

My name is Douglas Meyer, and I am organizing a nation-wide survey on our EFL profession. I am interested in the various working conditions, opinions and thoughts on language education in Japan, and have made an easy-to-complete (5-6 minute) anonymous online survey to gather your input. Please forward this message to friends if you have already completed the survey.

In order for this survey to be successful, we need responses from a few hundred language teachers from across Japan. Can you do your part by helping to spread this survey (and the job survey links) to 3 or 4 of your teaching colleagues?

The only way we can make any positive changes in our profession will be to add hundreds of voices to this call. The more responses we can get, the harder it will be for educational institutions to ignore the results of this national survey.

Here are the links:
For elementary, junior, and high school teachers
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/D5LM52D

For college and university teachers
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NZZ85RV

Please note that this is a personal research project, and not connected to JALT in any way. I am hoping to use this data in a report on our EFL profession in Japan. Should a large number of teachers reply, the Ministry of Education may be interested in the results. If you are also interested in the results, please complete the survey (if you haven't already) and pass it on to your teaching colleagues. Thank you for your time!

Sincerely yours,
Douglas Meyer
National EFL Job Survey Organizer
Osaka, Japan.

Comedy gold!

Page launched an unfair dismissal claim against GEOS, which comes under the umbrella of the GEOS Corporation founded by Japanese businessman Tsuneo Kusunoki.

But the company responded by claiming that Page "accepted understanding of the 'Japanese way' of doing business". They went on to say he was used to Kusunoki "ranting", "berating" and "humiliating" people "so this was nothing new".

But the Employment Relations Authority said the company's failings were "fundamental and profound".

"Ranting," "berating," "humiliating," "nothing new." Man loses job because he didn't make enough money for the company, so GEOS counters with he was used to abusive behavior so that makes it OK. That's so pathetic it's laughable. One of the biggest failures of the large schools is their inability to properly educate, inform, and train their employees. Orientation generally consists of lots of don'ts--don't bother the manager, don't be late, don't cause trouble. Just show up and teach. Despite the instructors being the product the schools are selling, they are treated with contempt and expected to obey without question orders from head office. Instructors may be employees, but they are transient ones, whose only use to help line the pockets of the school they work for.

This dispute in New Zealand gets to the heart of the shake up in eikaiwa: the rot in management. There are two things that have characterized eikaiwa for a long time. One is the bicycle business model where the company must keep pedaling (collecting revenue) or else it will fall over. It worked for Nova and GEOS, but the moment that cash flow is interrupted, things go downhill very quickly. Then there are the autocratic owner/presidents. With Nozomu Sahashi, there was his plush penthouse-cum-office that would make Hugh Heffner jealous, plus his continued assertions that he did nothing wrong when he pilfered an employee. Kusunoki was more of the same, constantly demanding more and more from his staff and berating them for not meeting their monthly targets. When GEOS' Australia schools closed, he issued a half-assed apology that the closures there wouldn't affect operations in Japan. GEOS went bankrupt shortly after that announcement.

To use "the Japanese way" as an excuse just discredits eikaiwa even more. Dishonesty and bullying are the Japanese way? No wonder the major schools are in trouble. They can't fail fast enough. The major eikaiwas have never been about learning a language; they've always been about making money for their owners.

Recently, the Japan Electric Vehicle Club set a record for an electric vehicle (EV) by driving over 1,000 km on a single charge. The English version of the Asahi reported it as thus:

The Japan Electric Vehicle Club drove its test car 1,003.184 kilometers, far outstripping its own previous world record of 555.6 km.

The group will apply to register the new record with Guinness World Records.

The new record was set with the "Mira EV," a minivehicle made by Daihatsu Motor Co. and modified by the club. It was equipped with 8,320 cylindrical lithium-ion batteries produced by Sanyo Electric Co.

The minivehicle circled the 689-meter circuit at Tsukuba Circuit in this city 1,456 times in about 27 hours and 30 minutes from Saturday to Sunday.

The Telegraph also praised the achievement:

The achievement is timely: Japan and other nations are bracing themselves for an electric car boom as car manufacturers race to produce competitive versions of the environmentally-friendly vehicles.

However, the biggest inconveniences for many potential e-car owners relate to charging – from finding a nearby charger to making sure that the car does not run out of power during the school run.

The latest epic electric vehicle drive of over 1,000km effortlessly beat the previous world record of uncharged driving 555.6km, which was achieved last November by the same Japanese organisation.

However, there are gaping holes in both stories. The Japanese version in the Asahi shimbun contained far more detail, particularly this:

挑戦するＥＶは、もちろん、ミラＥＶだ。１０００ｋｍに挑戦するにあたり、徹底して車両を軽くした。２人乗りシートを約４０キロ軽い超軽量タイプに取り換え、転がり抵抗を軽くするタイヤを採用した。

そして、ドライバーをどうするか。舘内代表が１人でハンドルを握り続けた東京－大阪間よりも長時間の挑戦になるため、今回は舘内代表や自動車ジャーナリスト、関係者ら１７人が約１時間ずつ交代して記録に挑んだ。

２２日午前１１時スタートしたミラＥＶは、電圧低下で３０分間中断するというトラブルに見舞われながら未明のコースをひたすら走り続けた。夜が明けた翌２３日午後８時過ぎ、今度は雨が降り始めた。雨が降ると路面の走行抵抗が増す。ＥＶにとっては大敵だ。「こりゃ、大きなマイナスだな」。次第に雨脚が強くなり、ＥＶクラブの関係者が詰めていた本部席からため息が漏れた。

　記録挑戦に参加したドライバーたちは運転席で速度計と電流計をみながら、一定の速度で走るのに全神経を集中した。中にはアクセルを微妙に操作するため裸足でペダルを踏む人もいた。

　

ミラＥＶのハンドルを２回握ったモータージャーナリストの竹岡圭さんは、二度目の挑戦時は雨に見舞われた。電力消費を抑えようと、ワイパーを使うのは１周２回に抑えた。「同じスピードで走っても２回目は多くの電力が必要だった。電池切れしないようにアクセルを踏み過ぎないように心がけた。まるで『修行』のような走りでした」と振り返る。

They fitted the car with ultra light seats for a weight savings of 40kg and used special tires to reduce rolling resistance. It started raining, which increased rolling resistance. To save power, drivers only switched on the windshield wipers two times per lap. Lap being a key word here as they were driving on a closed test track with no need to switch gears or touch the brakes. They also had a light touch on the accelerator to keep the car at a steady 40km/h.

For the Telegraph to call this an "epic drive" that "effortlessly" broke the previous record is pure BS. It's also bad that the Asahi whittled the English version down to be utterly meaningless. Sure, a distance record was broken, but the group went to great lengths to control the driving environment and modify the car. This isn't as big a deal as the newspapers are making it out to be. EVs may be sexy technology but their practicality is still very limited. l'll be impressed when EVs can drive 1,000km under real conditions: traffic jams, bad weather, uneven acceleration and deceleration, poorly inflated tires, a full passenger load, plus groceries and other assorted junk loaded in the back.

When I wrote previously that the takeover of GEOS went smoothly, I remembered an old article sitting in my stack of stuff to do. It comes from JC-NET and was published on April 24, shortly after the bankruptcy was announced. As the title of this post says, the story suggests that there was a coup d'etat at GEOS that allowed for G.communication to swiftly move in and take over the company.

I don't know anything about JC-NET and certainly can't vouch for the accuracy of the article, but when GEOS went bust on April 21, I wondered if anything was going on behind the scences. The bankruptcy was incredbily smooth. G.communication and GEOS apparently reached a deal four days before the bankruptcy was announced. The president of G.communication initially stated he took over the company to protect the students. In a later interview, he said:

"People may be worried because of the experience with Nova. In Nova's case, we took over some of their schools awhile after the company went bankrupt and we had to start in a situation where more than 1,000 teachers didn't have places to work," Sugimoto said.

"This time, we raised our hand (to rescue Geos) at an early time," he said. "If it was a week later, it would have been more chaotic."

So just how early did Sugimoto "raise his hand?" The bankruptcy has been so smooth it's virtually a non-event in the news. The JC-NET article, however, suggests that there was a lot of maneuvering behind the scenes and that Kusunoki was essentially stabbed in the back by a nephew. Here's a summary of that article.

Et tu, Tabuchi?

The JC-NET article starts off with the observation that Kusunoki wasn't present at the press conference announcing GEOS' bankruptcy and that this was odd, especially when you consider that he didn't agree to the bankruptcy in the first place. Instead, leading the coup d'etat was a director named Tabuchi.

The bankruptcy was filed with the Tokyo District Court by Hitomi Suhara and two other directors. Sitting beside Suhara at the press conference was Tabuchi.

However, JC-NET notes that Tabuchi may in fact be Kusunoki's nephew, who happens to have been in charge of operations in the Chubu area, G.education's home turf. So here's the plot: Worried about GEOS's stability, Tabuchi approaches G.communication and offers to sell the company to them. We already know that an agreement was signed on April 16th. The offer to sell, however, may have been made much further in advance of the April 16 signing. G.communication may have decided to sign on the 16th after having reviewed information about GEOS' schools and sorting the schools into the ones it would keep and the ones it would close. A source says this is why GEOS' directors (Suhara and Tabuchi) could speak with such clarity about GEOS's schools during the press conference in the wake of the bankruptcy.

JC-NET believes that Tabuchi and other kept Kusunoki out of the loop. Some reports had Kusunoki considering selling GEOS to another large eikaiwa school other that G.communication. At the same time, two directors approached G.communication. JC-NET says that Tabuchi and Suhara took files on each school to G.communication without telling GEOS's board of directors. In a takeover, the articles of incorporation have to be reviewed, but taking documents without the knowledge of the board would appear to be a breach of confidentiality. JC-NET's source says that Tabuchi did this to save his own skin, but this doesn't make much sense. The backroom dealings aside, there's no way G.communication would go public and employ either Tabuchi or Suhara. If this is true, then it appears that Kusunoki may have been stabbed in the back by his nephew.

As is known from press releases, GEOS filed for bankruptcy on March 16 [sic. Mistake in the report? Should be April 16] and signed an agreement with G.education to take over GEOS, its kodomo schools, and e-GEOS businesses. On April 23, G.education reopened 170 GEOS schools and 223 kodomo classrooms while shutting down 100 other schools. Students affected by the closures were given the option of transferring to the nearest GEOS or Nova school, or taking Ocha no ma ryuugaku lessons online at a 75% discount.

G.communication, the parent company of G.education, held a press conference on April 21, but Kusunoki was not in attendance. According to a JNN interview, Kusunoki maintains that he was looking to sell the company to another school when his directors betrayed him. "It's like a coup d'etat," he said.

Comment: As I said at the outset, I don't know what to make of the allegation that Tabuchi is related to Kusunoki or if there's any truth to the story at all. If it's true, the takeover of GEOS is more a fait accompli on G.communication's part than a coup within GEOS.