Is it all down to lack of respect???

[citygirl]

They can claim whatever they want no matter what the contract says because that contract has NO LEGAL VALUE. For legal matters it may as well be a page from your journal.

You can certainly continue to think that way. I will certainly continue to take the advice of my legal counsel and continue to have the employees sign the employment agreement which outlines their salaries, titles, responsibilities, etc. I will also continue to be thankful I have it in the event of a lawsuit since it has already proved its worth

 

[Saturnine]

I do. The fact that "theArgie" signed a contract doesn't mean that the rest of the country did. Most likely, if that contract he signed got as far as a lawsuit, it would have been totally dismissed as it if didn't exist. The things he lists as included there are mostly covered by other registrations. Employment here is not just a relationship between employer and employee, there are several public institutions included in the act of hiring someone (AFIP, Anses, probably an union and others).

I might be wrong, but following your logic about TheArgie, if you didn't sign a contract doesn't mean the rest of the country didn't either.
Guillo, I don't see St. John or anyone else telling you contracts have priority status before the law. In any lawsuit, the contract would come last, after the law, the professional/guild regulations, etc. But in my part of the world it comes, last or not. Employment is not a relationship solely between employer and employee in most countries.
We have labor laws and regulations too, you know, outside of Argentina, as different as they may be

I signed a contract here, by the way. Looked shorter than anything I've ever signed in Europe, but it has legal standing. I've checked

There's always a certain number of job specifics that cannot be regulated only by law - office hours, vacations, incentives and bonuses. The law gives you the general frame, but it leaves room for the particular details to be set between employer and employee. It's how it works all over this big silly capitalist world and Argentina has not reinvented the system, maybe just ways to bypass it.
Case study: I'm a journalist. The company I work for has to abide by the Argentine labor law. And the guild's regulations. However, no journalist is going to work 9-5, so I need that silly contract to state my "office hours" as well as my working days, among other particulars. How would you regulate that sort of details?

And why are we talking about employment contracts anyway???

 

[John.St]

Guillo, I don't see St. John or anyone else telling you contracts have priority status before the law.

Au contraire. A normal employment contract specifically mentions the laws (names and numbers) as the baseline, next the conventions (like union rules), etc., then defines conditions not fixed by law or general conditions. The purpose of the contract is to have a written consensus of bilateral obligations and rights.

If employment contracts aren't the norm or at least very common in Argentina, then Argentina is one of the very few countries in the world without.

And why are we talking about employment contracts anyway???

Because the teacher mentioned in the OP's first post is assumed to have a contract.

 

[John.St]

"Constituye trabajo, a los fines de esta ley, toda actividad lícita que se preste en favor de quien tiene la facultad de dirigirla, mediante una remuneración"
REMUNERACIÓN. Do you know what that is?

And about contracts.

ARTICULO 1° - El contrato de trabajo y la relación de trabajo se rigen:

a) Por esta ley.
b) Por las leyes y estatutos profesionales.
c) Por las convenciones colectivas o laudos con fuerza de tales.
d) Por la voluntad de las partes.
e) Por los usos y costumbres.

Exactly what I have been saying all the time: d) Por la voluntad de las partes. which is called an employment contract, preferably in writing. Of course the laws etc. comes first.

 

[bebero]

john, check your spanish, that is not what voluntad means.the opposite, actually.
i can't believe that you try to argue about how things work. whether you like them or not they are like thst.

i'm sorry but i will not spend anymore time trying to explain you anything because is like talking to a wall, you don't understand. grab a dictionary and check the meaning of voluntad. i feel sorry for your lack of understanding. why are you in denial like this? ask people around you and you'll see that i am right.

 

[John.St]

john, check your spanish, that is not what voluntad means.the opposite, actually.
i can't believe that you try to argue about how things work. whether you like them or not they are like thst.

i'm sorry but i will not spend anymore time trying to explain you anything because is like talking to a wall, you don't understand. grab a dictionary and check the meaning of voluntad. i feel sorry for your lack of understanding. why are you in denial like this? ask people around you and you'll see that i am right.

"Diccionario de la Lengua Española", ISBN 978-968-6321-27-2, Grupo Océano.

Voluntad f.
Potencia del alma, que mueve a hacer o no hacer una cosa.
Acto con que la potencia volitiva admite o rehúye una cosa.
Amor, afición, benevolencia o afecto.
Disposición o mandato de una persona.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Diccionario Oxford Edición Rioplatense, Español-Inglés, ISBN 978 0 19 431245 5, Oxford University Press

Voluntad nf 1. will. 2. wishes.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Diccionario Español-Inglés, ISBN 978-84-494-2051-1, Océano practico

Voluntad 1. will (facultad). 2. wish, desire (deseo). 3. willpower (fuerza de voluntad)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

All in all: What you want, feel like, by your own free will (por propia voluntad).

What is your translation of "Por la voluntad de las partes." except "What the (two) parties want/wish"?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Diccionario de la Lengua Española", ISBN 978-968-6321-27-2, Grupo Océano.
Contrato. m. Pacto establecido con ciertas formalidades entre dos o más personas, en virtud del cual se obligan recíprocamente a ciertas cosas.

 

[Saturnine]

Au contraire. A normal employment contract specifically mentions the laws (names and numbers) as the baseline, next the conventions (like union rules), etc., then defines conditions not fixed by law or general conditions. The purpose of the contract is to have a written consensus of bilateral obligations and rights.

If employment contracts aren't the norm or at least very common in Argentina, then Argentina is one of the very few countries in the world without.

Originally Posted by Saturnine
And why are we talking about employment contracts anyway???

Because the teacher mentioned in the OP's first post is assumed to have a contract.

St. John, that's not what I was really asking, c'mon
I think the whole post went went awry with this entire debate about lawfulness. The OP, as I understand it, was talking about "lack of respect", aka moral, ethics, you name it. While most laws were initially based on "moral laws", there's no law regulating morals and principles.
You may argue until the bitter end with bebero and guillo about how the Argentine law works and no one will be the victor. I'm just saying you're allowing yourself to miss the point.
If there's nothing behind her decision to quit in mid term (health issues or whatever), staying because her contract binds her to give X days notice doesn't make her a more ethical person, nor does it erase what fifs2 calls her "lack of respect".
Laws and rules are just a basic way of making us more "civilized" or socially responsible, but abiding by them does not make us intrinsically better or morally respectable. Lack of laws (or their inappropriate enforcement) only enlarges the mirror and makes it easier to see what people are really made of.
I would say the teacher fails the test regardless of the apparently incredible specifics of Argentine labor practices (barring an unknown context which would entitle her to act this way).

 

[John.St]

St. John, that's not what I was really asking, c'mon
I think the whole post went went awry with this entire debate about lawfulness.

There is a "law" - almost one of the natural laws - which says that any non-scholarly debate (and even some of those) will branch out to include every aspect connected to the subject, until the debaters get hungry and depart for lunch or dinner. If you read a couple of hundred threads on this forum, you'll see this law in function full speed ahead

... I'm just saying you're allowing yourself to miss the point.
The OP, as I understand it, was talking about "lack of respect", aka moral, ethics, you name it. While most laws were initially based on "moral laws", there's no law regulating morals and principles. ...
If there's nothing behind her decision to quit in mid term (health issues or whatever), staying because her contract binds her to give X days notice doesn't make her a more ethical person, nor does it erase what fifs2 calls her "lack of respect".
Laws and rules are just a basic way of making us more "civilized" or socially responsible, but abiding by them does not make us intrinsically better or morally respectable. Lack of laws (or their inappropriate enforcement) only enlarges the mirror and makes it easier to see what people are really made of.
I would say the teacher fails the test regardless of the apparently incredible specifics of Argentine labor practices (barring an unknown context which would entitle her to act this way).

When it comes to a debate of morals and ethics of the school teacher, we only have a second hand story, which origins with the school, while we lack the teacher's version.

The OP wrote as follows:

On monday this week we received a school note advising us that our son's teacher was leaving, the next day for a better paid job in the public sector meaning less work days and hours and more pay. ... not to mention that this teacher only joined the school in March after many previous applications ...

We don't know if the teacher had given the school a months notice, or perhaps even informed the school in March that this was a temporary job until she was to start at her new job. For all we know for sure, the school may have forgotten, omitted, or didn't care to tell this to the parents.

This is not very likely, but we do not know.

I am pleased to say 92% of the mums felt infuriated re lack of prior notice, lack of respect with such a sudden mid-term departure. not to mention thatthis teacher only joined the school in March after many previous applications but the 2 parents (the 8%) who disagreed basically said "well she can get more money elsewhere good luck to her"...they simply couldnt understand the idea of vocation., notice period, quitting mid-term or not applying for a new job if you have intentions to leave it within 2 months ...

This is the first moment where can safely debate morals and ethics - the parents' - and 8% (only two persons) found the sudden departure OK, the remaining 23 persons did not - not so bad, considering what has been written about Argentino morals.

I have a lot of sympathy with the OP's son, loosing a teacher at that age is traumatic, something I know from experience - one of the anchors in a young life suddenly gone missing - but I would like to hear the teacher's version before I condemn her to the galleys or the gallows.

 

[Guillo]

The point that started the law discussion, was that if the teacher had a contract, things would have been different. Well, that's false, no contract can force her to stay if she wanted to leave, doesn't matter what you guys want to post and discuss, and thats how things are here, whether you like it or not, or how do you think things should be. Now you can continue to discuss as much as you want, that won't change reality.

 

[Davidglen77]

The fact that a teacher decides to leave a job, while may not be pleasant for your child, is totally legal and within his/her rights as a human being. Indentured servitude no longer exists anywhere in the world unless I am unaware of it. Maybe this is a good opportunity to teach your child that in life sometimes things don't go the way we want them to, life can be tough / unfair, and you can only push people so much and can't force people to do something they don't want to, or loss in it's many forms it part of life. I am SOOOO tired of parents who get their panties in a bunch for stuff like this. I have seen parents get angry/violent because their kids don't find an egg at an easter egg hunt, aren't first in line, get one cookie less at snacktime and the clown got stuck in traffic and showed up late at their birthday party and ran out of blue baloons! This is not an Argentina issue its an issue of spoiled parents!
GROW UP!