"Rejection of Reappointment" 4 (Reminiscence of a fool)

 

 4. The chairman of the faculty is the president. However, when the president at that time arrived, I heard a story I did not understand.

 

　"That's right, that big guy is here, isn't here?"

　"He'll move soon after the settlement of the matter is reached."

 

　I could hear such a voice. Apparently this president looks big, they said. And it seems that the issue to be settled was a reappointment matter of associate professors.

 

　There is no promotion personnel within the university even though it holds the signboard of the university. I have to say that this is extremely abnormal for a university.

 

　However, if an associate professor is promoted within the university, there will be no post for retired people at national universities.

 

　It seems that the president at that time was the big guy who was sent to solve this difficult problem of reappointment restrictions.

 

　It seems that there was an expectation that because the president was big, the associate professors who would be thrown out after two reappointments would not be able to resist. The man who seemed to know the situation told me later.

～～～

　The faculty meeting has begun. Certainly there are fewer attendees than usual.However, I felt that there were many associate professors.

 

　There are few materials distributed on the desk.

 

　There were only few sheets of paper this day, even though the usual amount of material was attached to the amount that I couldn't read.

 

　There are two proceedings. One was a trivial matter and took just few seconds. I felt that this was also a strategy.

 

　I felt that the associate professors' strong sense of resist was coming into.

 

　The section manager in charge entered the purpose of the proceedings in question. I felt the heavy air and pressure on me that I couldn't say anything, and at that time I realized the weight of the task that was imposed on me for the first time.

 

　The proceeding entitled "Revision of School Regulations" stated that "the number of reappointments of professors will be 3. The number of reappointments of associate professors will be 2."

 

　"Do you have any objection by deciding on this matter as in “draft”?" The voice of the president, who was the chairman, echoed, as in the usual bland proceedings.

 

　"Surprising pressure, why am I always doing this?" I muttered in my mind and raised my hand, "No."

 

　"Yes, Mr.〇〇, please." My name was called.

 

　I said, "We can't do this. It's not something that can be decided by the faculty. It's invalid if we decide."

 

　The president said, "No, because it is a school rule, the procedure for revising or abolishing school rules can be done because it is subject to the discussion of the faculty."

 

　I said, "No, it's not. We can vote for exams, curriculum, and recruitment at the faculty council, but since this case concerns the status of the current teachers, it should be left to the collective agreement. For some reason, it is just written in the school rules at our university, but it is not something that can be changed by the discussion of the faculty meeting even though it is written in the school rules."

　Silence.

　There are a lot of clerks and executives around the chairman. However, an unexpected ally appeared with almost no time left.

 

　Our ally's teacher said, "Mr.〇〇, right? That's what you said. It is recognized by the Supreme Court, and I am teaching in the lecture as an expert in labor law."

 

　I didn't know that there was a labor law teacher at our university. An unknown professor fired a great shot for support.

 

　The president said, "Then, this is a continuous deliberation. Do you have any other proceedings? "

～～～

　There were no words such as "Good job! You did it." Also impressions of "Thank you."

All of the professors including associate ones left the meeting room as usual.

 

　No one wanted to get involved with me. "That's what Mr.〇〇 did on his own, and it doesn't matter to us."

 

　After that, there was no bill that would have been a continuing deliberation. I think I saved the associate professors in the end, but there was no reaction to that.

～～～

　There was another thing that came to my mind about my wife's word "After all."

(to be continued)

 

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝

Thank you very much for reading. Sorry poor English. 

This is a fantasy. So there are no real individuals and groups.

「再任拒否」の４（愚か者の回想一）

　四　教授会を仕切るのは学長。だが、その時の学長が着任したとき私にはよく分からない話が耳に入ってきた。

 

　「そうなんだ、あの大物がねぇ～。」

　「決着がついたらすぐ移動するだろうけど。」

 

　こんな声が聞こえていた。どうやらこの学長は偉い人らしい。そして、決着をつけるべき事柄というのが助教授問題だったようだ。

 

　大学の看板を掲げているのに学内の昇格人事が無い。これは大学として極めて異常だと言わざるを得ない。

　しかし、学内で助教授を昇格させたら国立大学の定年退職者の受入ポストが無くなる。

　この解決困難な問題を再任制限というやり方で解決すべく送り込まれた大物がこのときの学長だったようだ。

　大物であれば２回の再任で放り出される助教授連中も抵抗はできないだろうという読みがあったらしい。後日、事情通が教えてくれた。

 

　教授会が始まった。たしかに出席者がいつもより少ない。その割には助教授の数が多く感じた。

 

　机上配布の資料は少ない。

 

　いつもならば、その多さに目を通す気にもなれない程の量の資料が添付されているのに、この日は数枚であった。

　議事は二つ。一つはたいしたこともない事項でまさに数秒で終わった。これも作戦かなと感じた。

 

　助教授連中の臨戦意識が私に移ったような気がした。

 

　担当課長が問題の議事の趣旨説明に入った。何とも言えない重い空気と圧力が私にのしかかって来る感じがして、このとき初めて私に課せられた任務の重さを実感した。

　「学則の改正」という見出しの議事には確かに「教授の再任回数を３とする。助教授の再任回数を２とする。」との記載があった。

 

　「この件について『（案）』の通り決することでご異議は御座いませんでしょうか。」と、いつもの当たり障りのない議事のときと同じように議長である学長の声が響いた。

 

　「すっげぇ～圧力。何でこんなときばかり俺なの。」と腹でつぶやきながら、「はぁ～い。」と手を上げた私。

　「あっ、○○先生どうぞ。」と私が指名された。

 

　私「これはできないですね。教授会で決められることではないですね。仮に決めても無効ですから。」

　学長「いや、学則だから学則の改廃手続は教授会の議を経ることになっているのでできますが。」

　私「いや、そうではないんです。試験やカリキュラムや採用の可否投票は教授会でできますが、この議事は現職教員の身分にかかわる事項なので、本来は労働協約に委ねるべきものなのですね。それが何故か本学では学則に書いてあるだけなので、学則に書いてあるから教授会の議を経れば変えられるというものではないですね。」

 

　静寂。

 

　ひな壇では事務方と執行部がもぞもぞ。しかし、ほとんど間をおかず思わぬ味方が登場。

 

　味方の先生「いま〇〇先生（＝私）ですか、おっしゃたことはそうなんですよ。最高裁でも認められていることで、私も労働法の専門家として講義で話していることですね。」と。

 

　本学に労働法の先生がいるとは知らなかった。名も知らぬ教授の先生が援護射撃をしてくれた。

 

　学長「それでは、これは継続審議とします。他に議事はありますか。」

～～～

　「いやぁ～、やったね～。」とか、「ありがとう。」とかいう言葉や感想は一切なく、いつものように助教授連中は会議室を出て行った。

 

　誰も、誰一人として私と関わりを持ちたくないのである。「あれは〇〇が勝手にやったことでじぶんたちには関係ない。」ということだ。

　万一、執行部の目に止まれば、とばっちりを受けるかも知れない。それが怖いのだ。

 

　その後、継続審議となったはずの例の議案は出てこなかった。結果的に私は自分を含め助教授連中を救ったのだと思う。だが、それに関して何の反応もなかった。

 

　妻の「やっぱり」にはもう一つ思い当たることがあった。（つづく）

"Rejection of Reappointment" 3-2 (Reminiscence of a fool)

"What should I do?" said the secretary.

"They have no alternative. They can't do what they can't do," I said.

"But if they decide, we can do nothing," said the secretary.

"What do you want to do?” I said.

～～～

              Even if I said to them "It is natural.", those who have no idea about law can’t understand me. So I had to tell them the detail about it.

              “Whether the reappointment is restricted or not is originally a matter of employment, so it is the union that  has to  act as a counterpart with the employer. But there is no union at this university. That's why they can't do it.”

              It seemed no one can understand my talking.

              "That is, "The term of office is 5 years and it does not prevent reappointment. It is probably stipulated in the establishment law of this university. It would be invalid to make a different decision at the faculty meeting. If they really want to change this, they just have to revise the law." I said. This time everyone seems to understand.

              They should have understood my interpretation but are still anxious.

              “Do you still have anything to ask me?” asked I.

              “What if the bill came up to the faculty meeting? What would happen if it was decided by saying, “If you agree, please raise your hand.” ” said the secretary and interrupt man.

              “It's invalid in the end, but if you're worried, you should block the vote. When they have done explaining the agenda, just explain what I've just said and make them withdraw the agenda.” said I.

              “Who will do it？” said the secretary.

              “What’s” said I.

              When I look around, unusually, everyone's eyes were turning to me. Even though I've never been treated properly. ”I see.” In sum, all of associate professors and lecturers there had no knowledge of law except me.

              “Is it me?”

              “Is it okay?”

              “Okay. No problem. ”

              So it was decided that it would be me to fire first in "the summer team"(Natu no Jin).

 (to be continued)

(It's my poor translation assisted by Google.Thank you.)

「再任拒否」の３の２（愚か者の回想一）

「どうしよう。」と幹事。

「どうもこうもないでしょう。できないものはできませんよ。」と私。

「でも決まっちゃったらダメでしょ。」と幹事。

「で、どうしたいのですか。」と私。

～～～

　「当然です。」と言っても法律の知識のない人には分からないので、結局、これができない理由を縷々説明することになった。

　「再任制限の可否は、元来雇用に関する事項ですから組合が雇い主との窓口になるわけです。でも、この大学には組合が無いでしょ。だからできないのですよ。」と私。

　「・・・」（全員）。

　「つまり、『任期は５年、再任を妨げない。』ということはこの大学の設置法に規定されているのですから、たぶん。教授会でこれと異なる議決をしても無効ですね。どうしてもこれを変更したいのなら法律を改正すればいいだけですね。」と私。今度は全員が分かったようだ。

～～～

　分かったはずなのにまだもぞもぞしている。

「まだ何か。」と尋ねた。

「教授会に議案が出てきたらどうしようか。『賛成の方は挙手をしてください。』ということで決まってしまったらどうなるのかなぁ。」と幹事と割り込み男。

「しょせん無効ですが、心配ならば、採決を阻止すればいいじゃないですか。議事内容の説明が終わったら、今私が話した内容を説明して議案を撤回させればいいだけですよ。」と私。

「誰が。」と幹事。

「えっ。」と私。

　見渡すと珍しく全員の目がこちらを向いていた。これまでまともに相手をされたことが無かったのに。

　「なるほど。」

　つまり、その場いる助教授や講師の中で、曲がりなりにも法律の知識のあるものは私一人だった。

「私ですか。」

「いいかな。」

「別に。いいですけど。」

ということで夏の陣で口火を切るのは私ということになった。（つづく）

"Rejection of Reappointment" 3 (Reminiscence of a fool)

              3. Although the term system was used, reappointment was naturally allowed until now, so many faculty members were able to concentrate on research and teaching materials without paying too much attention to the term system.

 

              However, it seems that the operation of this term system will be reviewed and the number of reappointments will be limited. The professor is up to three times, and the associate professor is up to twice.

 

              Although this is certainly the hottest part of midsummer, we will have to hold an associate professor's meeting.

 

              However, there are also reasonable reasons for reappointment restrictions.

 

              This university uses radio waves from TV and radio to deliver lectures. Radio waves are public and it is dangerous for a university that is guaranteed "academic freedom" to monopolize this radio wave. Even if used as a means of brainwashing thought, Japan would fall into a totalitarian state.

 

              On the other hand, the purpose of providing university education to people who do not have the opportunity to attend school is a mechanism to realize the "right to receive education" guaranteed by the Constitution of Japan, and should be highly recommended.

 

              Therefore, since the faculty members of this university have other full-time jobs and belong to this university for a certain period of time to carry out their work, it is possible to say that a fixed-term system is necessary even if the faculty members to which they belong are not fixed.

 

              ――However, this is just only public prima facie reason. It is not possible, except for those who have a full-time job and can work at this university, except for those who are nominally assigned the status of visiting faculty when creating courses.

 

              Moreover, for the associate professors, if they were thrown out of this place, there would be a lot of things that would get lost, including myself.

 

              As long as the established facts support the current situation, it would be impossible to do such things as reappointment restrictions now. The system is also impossible.

 

              If it's a private school, the president's whims is likely to cause this, but this university is not a private school in the first place. If anything, it is public. The reality is that it is a saucer for people who retired from national universities. That's why there is no system for promotion within the university, because it would be a problem if the professor's post disappeared.

 

              Even so, as long as the reappointment is repeated, it is not a dream that one day "progress" to another university. However, I can't say that I would be disrespectful if reappointment restrictions were added.

～～～

              When asked the secretary, "What happened?", the board seems to submit a reappointment restrictions agenda to the next faculty meeting. I got the answer.

 

              "They can't do that," I said. That's right. Anyone who has ever studied the law a bit will know such a thing. Employment with a term system is also employment. Since it is employment, the employment contract must have been concluded. If it is a private school, the contents of the employment contract will be confirmed and the status and treatment will be specified by using a paper-like employment contract.

 

             I don't know how to treat a national university, but as a public university, I have never seen an employment contract, although there is a resignation.

 

              Probably the comprehensive processing has been done by the establishment laws of this university. It is impossible that the contents of employment contracts will be treated as a matter for discussion by the faculty council with a light process of changing the school rules. This is what I said earlier that "it is impossible in terms of system."

 

              In a similar case, there is Supreme Court decision in which employment contracts stipulated by internal rules were invalid.

 

              "No, a bill is to be submitted to the extraordinary professor's meeting in August. It may be decided by a large number of professors because there are fewer associate professors at this time. It seems that there are also documents that encourage attendance."

 

              A man who seems to know the situation cut in between the secretary and me. (to be continued)

(assisted by Google translation)