ECC Defrauding Applicants?

[ArmandV]

I went to San Francisco on Thursday for the hiring meeting for ECC (a company specializing in teaching Japanese English conversation).

Naturally, there are no guarantees of being hired by any company, but they do owe a duty to inform applicants of the total requirements for being considered for hiring.

When I got there, we were informed that part of the session was a 4-page exam on English vocabulary, such as verbs, adjectives, etc. and a lot of other terms that I never even heard of. They were multiple choice questions and match-up questions.

There were 10 of us in this session. We took the test at 11:00 yesterday and when finished, went to lunch. When I got back from lunch, I was informed that I didn't pass the test and that I could not continue with the rest of the session (which ends with an interview).

The materials and emails ECC sent made no mention of any test (not withstanding that one would have to even pass one for consideration). It seems to me that people taking the time and expense to go to their hiring meetings are owed the duty by the company to be fully informed on what is expected (allowing them to study for the test). One guy came all the way from Phoenix. Of the ten of us, at least 3 did not pass it.

This seems pretty fraudulent to me. I am having my attorney look over the materials they sent. I have also notified the Los Angeles (as ECC's offices are in L.A.) and the San Francisco District Attorneys.

If anyone is considering putting in an application to ECC, be aware of this!

[ArmandV]

My attorney reviewed this and this is his opinion:

They should have mentioned there would be some sort of testing involved. That is a basic duty of dislcosure.

Your damages would be out-of-pocket expenses in taking the test (e.g. travel costs to and from) along with any other damages incurred by your reliance on their representations/lack of representation. Those other damages would arise from any lost opportunities (did you miss out on another job?) you could have taken advantage of.

Fraud MIGHT be an issue here, but it sounds like the damages aren't that great so the fraud isn't that great. You could get punitive damages if there is fraud, but you would have to prove malice, unreasonable behavior and deliberate misrepresentation. This company just left out some information and they could argue testing is a reasonable and foreseeable part of their services, e.g. testing. It might arise to the level of breach of contract or damages from some sort of misrepresentation, but not to the extreme level of fraud.

Without knowing anything more, this sounds like a job for small claims court.

###
While it may be reasonable to have some sort of testing, it was not forseeable as the materials they sent said nothing about testing (it wasn't even listed on the agenda that was sent out). Had the test been disclosed, an applicant could decide not to pursue this (and not make the trip) or have the opportunity to prepare for the test in advance. In that case if an applicant took the test and failed, there'd be no argument.

[made of stone]

Firstly ArmandV san, sorry to hear you didn't get the job. I do trust though that you'll find your way to Japan soon enough :)

I know that legal definitions aren't universal, and litigation is much more of an issue in public consciousness in the US in general than it is here, but I hope you won't mind me posting my opinion...

To me, fraud would have been if they had said 'there will be no test' and yet there was one. That would have been knowing and direct deceit. The fact that they didn't make you aware of it beforehand is terrible practice, I agree, especially when some had travelled so far, but I would put it down to just that rather than fraud. Either way, it doesn't reflect at all well on the company, I'm sure we also agree on that!!

My major concern would be seeing my test results, to make sure that it was really that that cost me a shot at the job(s). Some of these Japan-based companies find very dishonest pretexts for ruling people out when they simply don't like their clothes/hair/eye colour/age/way they dress. I'm not saying that ECC are like that - I don't have any personal insight other than friends who worked there, and actually reported that they were very professional compared to Nova or even Geos - but that would be my concern here myself, rather than fraud. I'd certainly want to check it out. And I think the least they could do would be to go through the test with you and show you where you went wrong, but again just best practice imvho.

[ArmandV]

Firstly ArmandV san, sorry to hear you didn't get the job. I do trust though that you'll find your way to Japan soon enough :)
I know that legal definitions aren't universal, and litigation is much more of an issue in public consciousness in the US in general than it is here, but I hope you won't mind me posting my opinion...
To me, fraud would have been if they had said 'there will be no test' and yet there was one. That would have been knowing and direct deceit. The fact that they didn't make you aware of it beforehand is terrible practice, I agree, especially when some had travelled so far, but I would put it down to just that rather than fraud. Either way, it doesn't reflect at all well on the company, I'm sure we also agree on that!!
My major concern would be seeing my test results, to make sure that it was really that that cost me a shot at the job(s). Some of these Japan-based companies find very dishonest pretexts for ruling people out when they simply don't like their clothes/hair/eye colour/age/way they dress. I'm not saying that ECC are like that - I don't have any personal insight other than friends who worked there, and actually reported that they were very professional compared to Nova or even Geos - but that would be my concern here myself, rather than fraud. I'd certainly want to check it out. And I think the least they could do would be to go through the test with you and show you where you went wrong, but again just best practice imvho.

I agree with my attorney's view that this is misrepresentation or lack of representation rather than fraud. If would be fraud if they had this issue come up previously and still continued to practice it. That would have to be proven. Based on my attorney's advice, I am giving them ten working days to reimburse my costs before litigating. The Small Claims Court requires that a demand has to be made and they refuse to honor it. We'll see.

Unfortunately, their failure to disclose prevented me from preparing for it.

They are holding a session as we speak and another tomorrow. They have two people present, one's a recruiter leading the session and the other sits there with his laptop (he's the one who corrects the tests). If he gets my email as he sits there, the applicants present may witness someone's eyes bugging out.

[made of stone]

Fair enough, good luck, and let us know how you get on!

As I say, things are very different here, but out of interest (and my interest in your nation, among others, has always been great) why should they legally have to disclose that there would be a test? And where is the line drawn (I mean, if I go for any job interview I might expect to be questioned - tested, in a sense - on any ability or knowledge I have that's required for that job; for example, they surely, just for example, needn't let me know all the interview questions in advance so that I could prepare?)

And isn't your attorney's advice more expensive than your losses, or are you just hoping to buck up their unprofessional attitude?

[ArmandV]

Fair enough, good luck, and let us know how you get on!

As I say, things are very different here, but out of interest (and my interest in your nation, among others, has always been great) why should they legally have to disclose that there would be a test? And where is the line drawn (I mean, if I go for any job interview I might expect to be questioned - tested, in a sense - on any ability or knowledge I have that's required for that job; for example, they surely, just for example, needn't let me know all the interview questions in advance so that I could prepare?)

And isn't your attorney's advice more expensive than your losses, or are you just hoping to buck up their unprofessional attitude?

This country is consumer-driven. Failure to disclose pertinent facts is considered a no-no here. If you even fail to disclose that someone was murdered in a house that's up for sale is punishable in some locales. There's something wrong when their documents that they emailed me said nothing.

My attorney is a friend, so I didn't have to pay for anything. In a lot of cases, if you win a lawsuit against a tort-feasor, your legal expenses can be included in the judgment.

Despite what happened, when I first arrived at my hotel in San Francisco, I received call on my cell phone that I have a job. That took the sting out of what transpired the next day.

[Glenski]

You are not going to get anything out of them, IMO. Look at the web page. It says that based on the quality of your application materials:
Invitations will be sent to applicants on file to attend, at their own expense, the seminar/recruitment sessions.

What exactly did ECC say about the test? You mentioned that ECC did say something, but what is the exact wording?

They and others have been doing this sort of business for a long time. Yours is the first complaint of this nature I've heard. People b!tch about having to take a test in the first place, no matter what it involves. Many couldn't tell the difference between a noun and an adjective. I presume your ECC test was the same as the one I took for their kids' division (ECC Junior). One small section (20% of the test?) had EFL terminology in it, and I suspect you are complaining about that. However, you were not called back based on the results of the whole test, not just that one section. How about letting us in on what you felt you did on the rest of the test? Finding grammar mistakes. Choosing the right vocabulary word from a pair (e.g., effect vs. affect). That sort of thing. GEOS has a general knowledge exam. Did you know that? Not just EFL knowledge, but world knowledge. Are you going to complain about that and have your lawyer contact them, too? They need something to weed out people.

Besides, they watch applicants very carefully that first day because it is a screening procedure meant to whittle the huge number of applicants down to a manageable one, and they look at your attitude during the prep lectures, not just at your resume. Were you dressed properly? Did you slouch? Did you even offer one question? Was your demeanor friendly and open or was it quiet and serious?

Fraud? Hardly. Did you even contact them to find out what was going to be on the exam before you went there?

This country is consumer-driven. Failure to disclose pertinent facts is considered a no-no here. Wake up. This is not the USA.

I hope the "costs" you demand don't include lawyer's fees, because based on what you wrote above, that would be fraud!
My attorney is a friend, so I didn't have to pay for anything.

[ArmandV]

You are not going to get anything out of them, IMO. Look at the web page. It says that based on the quality of your application materials:
What exactly did ECC say about the test? You mentioned that ECC did say something, but what is the exact wording?


That's the thing. They said NOTHING in all of the materials and emails they sent me. The only thing about a test was that it was listed on the white board in front. You know more than a practicing California attorney who reviewed their documents? Their website does not mention that an applicant must pass their exam. A glaring omission.


Fraud? Hardly. Did you even contact them to find out what was going to be on the exam before you went there?

Read everything I've posted. They said nothing about a test until we got there. Their agenda that was emailed out with the other materials did not list a test or exam. Had one been listed, I would have contacted their local representative and asked for specifics. Then I would have been able to make a choice. See what I wrote previously:

Had the test been disclosed, an applicant could decide not to pursue this (and not make the trip) or have the opportunity to prepare for the test in advance. In that case if an applicant took the test and failed, there'd be no argument.

I am familiar that other companies have tests, this company did not specifically state one. They have a greater duty to disclose all aspects as people are traveling long distance for their meeting. If it were local, then one can just blow it off.

Wake up. This is not the USA.

The transactions involving recruitment took place in California, not in Japan. Accordingly, they are subject to California law.

[ArmandV]

Here's what their emailed package stated on what's to be covered. Do you see anything about a test?


CONTENTS


1
PLACEMENT
WORK LOCATIONS
What happens from time of offer to arrival in Japan?


2

WHO ARE YOUR STUDENTS?



3

ECC’s STRENGTHS



4
POSSIBLE DOWN SIDES OF ECC

WHERE WILL I BE WORKING?


5 MONEY MATTERS
A SAFE MONTHLY BUDGET vs. 240,000 YEN
-0 Housing and Utilities
-0 Food
-1 Dailies

6
-2 Food, Dailies
-3 Communications
-0 Entertainment / Leisure


7

MONEY MATTERS cont…



8

MONEY MATTERS cont…



9 -10
-11 LOANS
-12 Living Expense Loan
-13 Housing Loan


10 -14
-15 BUSINESS vs. SCHOOL
-16
CONTRACT LENGTH / COMMITMENT

11 -17 TRAINING:
CLASS TYPE REVIEW-
SCHEDULES
TIME OFF


12
Of Particular Concern
DRESS STANDARDS
STATEMENT of HEALTH
-18

13 WORDS FROM THE FOUNDER OF ECC
HISTORICAL TIMELINE
-19 ECC Save the Earth Campaign
-20 All Japan Youth English Oratorical Contest For The Mayor Of Honolulu Trophy

14~
All Japan Youth English Oratorical Contest for the Mayor of Honolulu Trophy cont.

[JimmySeal]

I have to ask, if the same set of questions had been asked of you vocally, in an "interview," would you still be saying all this? I don't see the big distinction of this taking place on paper. When I interviewed for a bunch of tech jobs a while back, some of the interviews had written portions, and some didn't and I can't recall being told about any written tests in advance, but I didn't really think much about it either. Some of the questions I was asked in the spoken interviews were much harder than the questions on any written test.
One interviewer (the name of his company escapes me) was a complete d*ck, and just berated me for half an hour about how I "don't know anything about the real world."
But I never imagined seeking legal action against anyone.

[Mike Cash]

You go to look into employment as an English teacher and you're surprised that they take some steps to ascertain your English competency?

Sounds like they take their work a bit more seriously than did Nova. I was sitting in the teachers' room one day when a recent hire said, "I have to do a lesson on pronouns. What's a pronoun?" The only thing sadder than the fact that a doofus like that was hired to teach English is that a doofus like that is a college graduate.

No sympathy here.

[ArmandV]

I have to ask, if the same set of questions had been asked of you vocally, in an "interview," would you still be saying all this? I don't see the big distinction of this taking place on paper. When I interviewed for a bunch of tech jobs a while back, some of the interviews had written portions, and some didn't and I can't recall being told about any written tests in advance, but I didn't really think much about it either. Some of the questions I was asked in the spoken interviews were much harder than the questions on any written test.
One interviewer (the name of his company escapes me) was a complete d*ck, and just berated me for half an hour about how I "don't know anything about the real world."
But I never imagined seeking legal action against anyone.

An interview is one thing, a test is another. Since being layed off in November, I've taken 4 tests. The first one I didn't pass by one answer. The next two I was given "above average" ratings and passed. Then this one. After missing the first one, I came prepared for the next two because I was informed of them ahead of time.

The grammar correction portion and the correct spelling sections were easy, it was the last part that was the killer. The ECC rep. said that one is the general killer for applicants. Almost a third of the attendees did not pass the test.

In each instance that I took the tests before ECC, when I was called to set up an interview, the HR person would be up front and state that a test would be given and the applicant has to pass it to proceed further. Okay, I have no problem with that. They were up front about it. And they were all local.

ECC has their offices in L.A. They notified me of the hiring meetings in San Francisco and sent a package of materials to be completed and outling what is to be done at the meeting. No mention of any test was made. Period.

We arrived at the meeting and there's a big whiteboard with the agenda. The difference between that and what was emailed is that a test was listed for 1100 to 1200. Nothing more.

I agree that a test is a good tool to determine the best candidates, but it is their duty to disclose that, 1.) A test will be given; and 2.) A passing score is required to proceed in the process (to get to the interview). Neither was done prior to our arrival.

The issue is not the test itself. The issue is disclosing it to applicants as most would be traveling long distance to the meeting.

Suppose you were the guy that came from Phoenix, Arizona for this. You reviewed all their materials, checked the website for the requirements and flew or drove to San Francisco for the meeting. For me, I'm only out of $90 for gas. Suppose your round-trip ticket cost you over $200. Plus, you have to pay for a hotel room. (Some attendees paid over $100. Mine was cheaper.) You get there and then get the whammy of having to take and pass an unexpected and previously undisclosed test. Wouldn't you be a bit pissed? Logically, had you been advised prior that this test would be given and passing it is a must, you could make the choice in going and risk failing the test after preparing for it or deciding against going.

It is the contention that ECC has a fiduciary duty to disclose all steps in the process so that an applicant can make an informed judgment on whether or not to pursue it further.

[orochi]

ArmandV,
Were you looking at the right page of info for that day?
You said the day ended with an interview, but that's not written in your above post.

[ArmandV]

ArmandV,
Were you looking at the right page of info for that day?
You said the day ended with an interview, but that's not written in your above post.

That was the whole page I copied and pasted. The interview was listed on the board and we were advised of it via email as well.

[orochi]

That is a little weird. Looking at the schedule you posted, it looks like this is just a session for ECC to show you guys what they are all about. But then it turns out that it's actually part of the hiring process. I agree they could be a little more specific about what the purpose of the day is and what is planned out.

[JimmySeal]

Suppose you were the guy that came from Phoenix, Arizona for this. Wouldn't you be a bit pissed? Logically, had you been advised prior that this test would be given and passing it is a must, you could make the choice in going and risk failing the test after preparing for it or deciding against going.

I still maintain that any test question could potentially be asked in an interview, so the exact presentation of the questions wouldn't make much of a difference to me. If an interviewer handed me a piece of paper and said, "Here, answer these questions," I wouldn't think that unreasonable either. The only difference between a test and an interview is that an interviewer has more freedom to fudge the outcome. In the end, both methods are a way of deciding whether you are accepted or not.

On the other hand, I do find it strange that they went to those lengths to itemize the day's contents and left out mention of the test. That is odd, I will admit.

[orochi]

On the other hand, I do find it strange that they went to those lengths to itemize the day's contents and left out mention of the test. That is odd, I will admit.

And the test is in the morning. Failing the test means you miss out on the rest of the day's activities. That's definitely a wasted trip for somebody who came a long distance, got a hotel room, etc. They could have pulled the "surprise test" if, at the end of the day, the test results were compared to the interview results and an overall decision was made, But it's pretty odd to pull a surprise test in the morning only to send you packing home halfway through the session.

[Mikawa Ossan]

Regarding the test, I applied for a job at ECC some years ago, but I did it so here in Japan. There was no paper test as you took, but there was a mandatory mock lesson that we had to "teach" to the other applicants.

I think it strange if they didn't mention the test, but I don't think there was any malice involved with this omission, and taking them to court over it would be more hassle than it's worth.

Glad to hear that you got another job, though!

[anjusan]

ArmandV,

Please accept my views in the spirit of good will. It is not my intention to debate the fairness, or lack thereof, of EEC. My question for you is what do you hope to gain from filing a small claims suit?

You mentioned that you were laid-off a few months ago. Believe me, in today's economy, I really feel for you… but you also mentioned that you had been offered another job, so, problem solved.

I have to wonder at the advice from your legal "friend". What are his interests in having you pursue legal action? It seems rather imprudent to me. I know that California has some rather queer statutes from the rest of the country, but a contract is a contract and what you were offered was merely an "invitation". In legal terms the two are miles apart.

If you pursue this it can only turn out badly for you and ruin your reputation for any future dealings with EEC. Considering the amount of social networking done in the Japanese business world, you may find this "little legal action" on your part has certain unpleasant ramifications for your future possible employment in Japan.

I can understand your unhappiness over the way things turned out. But, consider the alternative at least you didn't have to fly to Japan to go through all of this. It could have been much worse for you if you had had the expense of a round-trip airfare on top of all the other disappointments.

Are you really going to pursue a matter of a few hundred dollars? Even if you win, what have you really gained?

[ArmandV]

ArmandV,
Please accept my views in the spirit of good will. It is not my intention to debate the fairness, or lack thereof, of EEC. My question for you is what do you hope to gain from filing a small claims suit?

My expenses. Roughly $175. Perhaps this will force them to modify their approach and fully inform future applicants.

You mentioned that you were laid-off a few months ago. Believe me, in today's economy, I really feel for you… but you also mentioned that you had been offered another job, so, problem solved.
I have to wonder at the advice from your legal "friend". What are his interests in having you pursue legal action?

Two things: nil and none. No attorneys are allowed to represent a plaintiff in Small Claims.

If you pursue this it can only turn out badly for you and ruin your reputation for any future dealings with EEC. Considering the amount of social networking done in the Japanese business world, you may find this "little legal action" on your part has certain unpleasant ramifications for your future possible employment in Japan.

It's more like David vs. Goliath. Do you think ECC would want the bad publicity if I should win? All transactions were conducted in the U.S., not in Japan. They'd probably want to sweep this under the rug, if anything.

I can understand your unhappiness over the way things turned out. But, consider the alternative at least you didn't have to fly to Japan to go through all of this. It could have been much worse for you if you had had the expense of a round-trip airfare on top of all the other disappointments.
Are you really going to pursue a matter of a few hundred dollars? Even if you win, what have you really gained?

My money back. Also, this may wake them up and admit that they screwed up and be up front to future applicants to inform them on what to expect. That's only fair. That way, people can make better and informed decisions. "Do I want to go though with this or not?"

[anjusan]

I can see you are still quite upset over this... so I will refrain from further comments...

[ArmandV]

And the test is in the morning. Failing the test means you miss out on the rest of the day's activities. That's definitely a wasted trip for somebody who came a long distance, got a hotel room, etc. They could have pulled the "surprise test" if, at the end of the day, the test results were compared to the interview results and an overall decision was made, But it's pretty odd to pull a surprise test in the morning only to send you packing home halfway through the session.

Well, in all honesty, I am glad that they graded the tests during lunch and immediately let everyone know. It would've been worse to be informed of the results at 4:00-5:00 PM.

The meeting was scheduled to last to 5:00. At least I got home at a decent hour instead of driving half the night.

[ArmandV]

I can see you are still quite upset over this... so I will refrain from further comments...

I'm not that upset. But there's some principles involved. If this benefits future applicants in similar or worse situations, then it would be worth poking the Goliath in the eye.

If this causes ECC to re-evaluate their procedures and causes them to be forthright, then it's all to the good.

[Mike Cash]

You know, outcome of the test aside, you're precisely the sort of person the Eikaiwa mills don't want working for them. I don't offer that as a personal judgment against you. But part of the reason for constantly having fresh faces cycling through the schools is to take advantage of the fact that fresh arrivals are just glad to be here and are unaware when they are being screwed by their employers and unlikely to make a fuss about it.

[ArmandV]

You know, outcome of the test aside, you're precisely the sort of person the Eikaiwa mills don't want working for them. I don't offer that as a personal judgment against you. But part of the reason for constantly having fresh faces cycling through the schools is to take advantage of the fact that fresh arrivals are just glad to be here and are unaware when they are being screwed by their employers and unlikely to make a fuss about it.

Like my dad used to tell me, "Don't let 'em sh*t on you, open your mouth!" :D

[Glenski]

Armand,
I have been on discussion forums for about 10 years. Everyone there seems to know that there is an exam that ECC and certain other employers want candidates to take. I can't imagine why you didn't know. This piece of information is very widely talked about. Go to the best place (the place you should have been researching) for this sort of info -- ESL Cafe (a place I always tell people to visit) -- and you'll get a huge number of threads in response to a search on just the keywords "ECC test". Boatloads of information! Moreover, with just the words "Japan ECC interview" (not test), I got this lovely little link on the second hit: http://www.all-about-teaching-english-in-japan.com/teachinjapan.html The test is mentioned right there, so ESL Cafe is not the only place you have to go.

And on the ESL Cafe job ad posted on 15 January 2008, it clearly states the test is there! http://www.eslcafe.com/joblist/index.cgi?read=16587 It's listed as required for Toronto and Australia, not any other location, but it's mentioned and should give you a heads-up that one exists. This was the 6th hit item on that same search.

Even for their puny little ECC Junior slot a few years ago, there was a heads-up announcement of that in the interview materials.

Whether you fail the test or not does not mean you fail the whole interview. According to some people, they bombed the test and were actually asked to repeat it because they did so well in other parts of the process. (Some of the threads on the ESL Cafe describe in intimate detail what the special EFL terms are that you need to know in that last, most difficult section. I had to keep from laughing when someone actually asked what the word "elicit" means, though! Makes you wonder how far he got in the interviewing process.)

You snidely wrote You know more than a practicing California attorney who reviewed their documents?Well, I can pretty much say that in some respects, yes, I do know more simply because I've gone through the process. In another aspect, no, simply because I didn't have the documents that you did. Fair enough?

As for your copy/paste, what exactly is that? It looks like the outline/agenda only for the presentation of ECC to candidates. It is nothing about the whole interview. For example, I don't see where it says you do a demo lesson or have a panel interview or take a lunch break. Please clarify what this copied info really is. To say "Contents" at the top is pointless. Contents for what? You only said "what is to be covered". As I just wrote, that could mean only what is covered in the 1-hour presentation they plan to give which covers what they want to describe about the company.

As for this statement The transactions involving recruitment took place in California, not in Japan. Accordingly, they are subject to California law. I think that is also due to interpretation. After all, the interview may have taken place in the USA, but the outfit itself is based in Japan, and all complaints should be directed there anyway. I suggest you file one there. I'm serious. I really think it behooves you to make that much effort just to see if they reply with some apology, or if they explain their policy, even if that means a policy of not announcing a test which IMO anyone who strives to teach EFL should be able to pass. (I say this last part only because at least one other person who took it said that the EFL terms could easily enough be figured out largely through the process of elimination. I guess that doesn't include the doofus who didn't know the meaning of the word "elicit".)

Not really upset, Armand? Could have fooled me. You talk to a lawyer (friend or not, it's still a big move) and you write half of the 26 posts on this thread in just one day!

[Mike Cash]

Not really upset, Armand? Could have fooled me. You talk to a lawyer (friend or not, it's still a big move) and you write half of the 26 posts on this thread in just one day!

And contacted two District Attorneys' offices.....

[JimmySeal]

Sorry for getting a little off topic, and I know this is vastly different from your situation, but...

The head of a little Seattle startup just happened to be passing through my town and in the same cafe as me about 2 hours ago. I told him I was looking for a programming job in Japan, and he asked me to write a binary search algorithm on paper, so I did, and then he asked me to write a non-recursive one, and I did that too. Now the guy is seriously considering hiring me at some point in the not-too-distant future because I showed, on the spot, that I can write code.

The moral of the story is, if you're looking for a job (or even if you're not), always be ready to have your knowledge tested, even if you're not given advance notice.

[Mike Cash]

My long-standing policy exactly. Knowledge you have to cram for is not knowledge. I have always had a firm belief that studying for a test is the same thing as cheating on it.

[ArmandV]

Armand,
I have been on discussion forums for about 10 years. Everyone there seems to know that there is an exam that ECC and certain other employers want candidates to take. I can't imagine why you didn't know. This piece of information is very widely talked about. Go to the best place (the place you should have been researching) for this sort of info -- ESL Cafe (a place I always tell people to visit) -- and you'll get a huge number of threads in response to a search on just the keywords "ECC test". Boatloads of information! Please clarify what this copied info really is. To say "Contents" at the top is pointless. Contents for what? You only said "what is to be covered". As I just wrote, that could mean only what is covered in the 1-hour presentation they plan to give which covers what they want to describe about the company.
As for this statement I think that is also due to interpretation. After all, the interview may have taken place in the USA, but the outfit itself is based in Japan, and all complaints should be directed there anyway. I suggest you file one there. I'm serious. I really think it behooves you to make that much effort just to see if they reply with some apology, or if they explain their policy, even if that means a policy of not announcing a test which IMO anyone who strives to teach EFL should be able to pass. (I say this last part only because at least one other person who took it said that the EFL terms could easily enough be figured out largely through the process of elimination. I guess that doesn't include the doofus who didn't know the meaning of the word "elicit".)
Not really upset, Armand? Could have fooled me. You talk to a lawyer (friend or not, it's still a big move) and you write half of the 26 posts on this thread in just one day!

Glenski, since I was unaware of the websites you mentioned, I could not peruse them. As for whether ECC's testing was "widely talked about" here, I don't look at every single thread.

The agenda thing I posted is exactly what was sent to me. I cannot clarify it further than that. They put the word "contents" in there, not me. As for the number of posts, I was responding to the other posters besides yourself. This seems to be a "popular" thread considering the hits and responses in one day. I must ask you, you made two extensive posts on this thread, what is your interest in this (do you have stock in ECC)? Yet you criticize me. I find that interesting.

Perhaps I should have mentioned it here before going and you learned people would have told me what to expect. Hindsight is always 20/20, right?

It is all well and good that there are sites that you mentioned, but the crux of the matter is, if their own website does not spell everything out, then one would take it that what is listed is all there is to it. It is their responsibility to spell out their procedures. Maybe I've been in claims too long where the rule is, "If it ain't in the file, it doesn't exist." I took it under good faith (maybe I am too trusting) that what was given to me from the get-go was all there was too it.

As for talking to a lawyer, we talk all the time. No biggie there. I felt it necessary to get his opinion before going forward. He felt it was misrepresentation rather than fraud, but actionable. If he felt there was nothing to my concerns, he would have said so and advised me to drop it.

As for my "snide" remark, you have a snide manner yourself (whether you realize it or not) and I was responding accordingly. If you took offense, then I apologize.

Mike Cash, bless his heart, seems to take issue about reporting this to the D.A.s. Well, since what occurred seems unethical and possibly illegal (almost akin to a "bait & switch" tactic), they should look into this. ECC dangled a carrot to people without providing the full details on what is expected, and then people travel distances to attend their session only to find out there was more to it than was advertised. If the D.A.'s offices feel that there was a violation of statute, then they will pursue this if they choose. (Maybe you guys have been out of the country too long.)

The jurisdiction for this is California. I have no doubts about this as the meeting took place in San Francisco and was handled by their Los Angeles office in which their USA representative is based in Torrance, in Los Angeles County. Therefore, this is subject to California law.

Perhaps this experience will help others in the future or forces ECC to be more explicit about their hoops and jumps. Then some good will come out of this.

Mikawa Ossan wrote:

Regarding the test, I applied for a job at ECC some years ago, but I did it so here in Japan. There was no paper test as you took, but there was a mandatory mock lesson that we had to "teach" to the other applicants.

I am curious about when this written test was started since he didn't have to do it. A mandatory mock lesson was also part of the session in the afternoon. But I was advised about this before leaving L.A. I was actually looking forward to it.

[ArmandV]

The moral of the story is, if you're looking for a job (or even if you're not), always be ready to have your knowledge tested, even if you're not given advance notice.

I agree with you. But this came up on short-notice (about a week or so ago) and I had to determine if I even had the funds to even make the trek.

This boils down to "shoulda, woulda, coulda." I have to deal with the situation as it stands.

[Glenski]

Glenski, since I was unaware of the websites you mentioned, I could not peruse them.It's obvious you were unaware of them, but did you even take the time to do a simple search as I did? No. That's all it would have taken.

As for whether ECC's testing was "widely talked about" here, I don't look at every single thread. Not here. On the ESL Cafe. Bet you haven't even gone there yet.

This seems to be a "popular" thread considering the hits and responses in one day.It is, and most of us are trying to show how ill-informed you were/are, and how small your chances are at getting any sort of money out of ECC.

I must ask you, you made two extensive posts on this thread, what is your interest in this (do you have stock in ECC)? Yet you criticize me. I find that interesting. No stock in any school. My reasons are purely altruistic, as they have been for the past 11 years of posting on this and half a dozen other sites. I offer accurate information for free to help out the misinformed and the uninformed. Look at the FAQ in the Practical section of this site alone. http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26209 See what I contributed? I have a boatload of info on one 2-Mbyte file alone that I used to pass out to people to give them a head start on job hunting. Since then, I edit one teachers' organization blog, I serve as a moderator on a discussion forum (and have turned down offers for 2 others), and have written many FAQs for other forums on teaching. Why do I spend the time? Some days, like now, it just doesn't seem worth it, but essentially I do this to help people. I was in the same position myself when the Internet was in its infancy, so I had to do things the hard way a lot to get my information before coming here for my first teaching job. Now I try to make it easier for people. Some posters prefer to write only the rosy view of life and work here, so I also show a balanced POV. For that, I get slammed by some people. I don't care.

Perhaps I should have mentioned it here before going and you learned people would have told me what to expect. Hindsight is always 20/20, right?Don'T get sarcastic with that "learned" crack. We are more experienced than you, and the first thing I'd have done is tell you exactly what I've done so far. Get off this site first and go to one that is devoted to EFL (the ESL Cafe is the most well-known). You'd have learned about the test immediately.

It is all well and good that there are sites that you mentioned, but the crux of the matter is, if their own website does not spell everything out, then one would take it that what is listed is all there is to it.Where did you hear of ECC? If it was a friend, he should have mentioned it, too. If it was an ad like the one on ESL Cafe, it shows the exam. I would like to know where you missed out.

It is their responsibility to spell out their procedures.Not necessarily. As people have been trying to explain to you here, and as is written in some of those ESL Cafe posts, the test exists, it is widely known by others, and there is essentially no practical way of studying for it, but ECC chooses to use it to screen people.

Answer me this. Do you know what part(s) you failed? I'm guessing no, because nobody I know has ever been told. Regardless, if you did indeed fail part of it, it would probably be that EFL terminology section, but we don't know how good your other sections were! Who knows how much was botched there, as well?

Maybe I've been in claims too long where the rule is, "If it ain't in the file, it doesn't exist."I was in a customer service group once myself, and that sort of rule is bogus. Files get lost, misplaced, or accidentally destroyed/deleted. Sounds like a government bureaucracy answer to me.

As for talking to a lawyer, we talk all the time. No biggie there. I felt it necessary to get his opinion before going forward. He felt it was misrepresentation rather than fraud, but actionable. If he felt there was nothing to my concerns, he would have said so and advised me to drop it. Can I ask if his specialty is in contract law or in Japanese law?

As for my "snide" remark, you have a snide manner yourself (whether you realize it or not) and I was responding accordingly. If you took offense, then I apologize. My hide is thick enough to take a certain level of indignities. Your remark was far from that. I only responded the way I did because I, not your lawyer friend, have been around this business and seen what he has not.

Let us know what you plan to do and how it turns out if you go ahead with legal proceedings.

[ArmandV]

It's obvious you were unaware of them, but did you even take the time to do a simple search as I did? No. That's all it would have taken.
Not here. On the ESL Cafe. Bet you haven't even gone there yet.

I checked the sites you posted earlier in this thread. Yes, it would have been helpful to have seen the one outlining what to expect. I did notice this line on the one about ECC schedules: "(a face-to-face interview, teaching demo and grammar test will be required in Toronto)." That implies that the demo and grammar test is just required in Toronto. It says nothing about this in the Los Angeles/San Francisco section. I would contend that they need to be just as specific in the LA/SF section, otherwise, it would be misleading. But this is not an official ECC website from what I could tell. Misleading as this one may be, still, ECC needs to tighten up their own site and the materials that are sent out so that people aren't being misrepresented. Besides that, it would be in ECC's own interests to do so to protect themselves.

Don'T get sarcastic with that "learned" crack.

Sorry, I didn't intend it that way. It was an admission that you know way more about the ins and outs of this than I do.


Where did you hear of ECC? If it was a friend, he should have mentioned it, too. If it was an ad like the one on ESL Cafe, it shows the exam. I would like to know where you missed out.

I first heard of it in Japan 4 years ago through an actor (in Japan) friend.


Answer me this. Do you know what part(s) you failed? I'm guessing no, because nobody I know has ever been told. Regardless, if you did indeed fail part of it, it would probably be that EFL terminology section, but we don't know how good your other sections were! Who knows how much was botched there, as well?

No, they didn't tell us. I can only say that the spelling, grammar correction sections seemed to go okay. I would agree that the EFL terminology section was most likely the killer. Many of the terms were completely unfamiliar to me. A lot of the mix and match section I did the best I could with the process of elimination. Obviously, I didn't do well enough.


I was in a customer service group once myself, and that sort of rule is bogus. Files get lost, misplaced, or accidentally destroyed/deleted. Sounds like a government bureaucracy answer to me.

I beg to differ. It may not be the case in the customer service business you were in, but it is a reality in the insurance claims business. We are governed by statutes and the Department of Insurance regulations and claim files are both hard files (paper) and electronic which contains notes and scanned documents. There is no such thing as an "accidentally destroyed/deleted file." There are safeguards in place as quite often the file is subpoenaed for trials. If a file does not contain something, whether it is a document or even a note, then it does not exist. I do take very meticulous notes as I have nailed many people for insurance fraud. One company gave out $1,000 bonuses for convictions. I garnered several from that company.

Can I ask if his specialty is in contract law or in Japanese law?
My hide is thick enough to take a certain level of indignities. Your remark was far from that. I only responded the way I did because I, not your lawyer friend, have been around this business and seen what he has not.

He is in personal injury and contract law. He's been in business for about 25-30 years. As stated previously, this is under California's jurisdiction as ECC has to be licensed by the state to do any kind of business here. Japanese law is not applicable. You may disagree.

Let us know what you plan to do and how it turns out if you go ahead with legal proceedings.

It really depends upon the response by ECC. What would you say if I did proceed and actually won a judgment?

[Mike Cash]

I don't "take issue" with you reporting it to anyone you like, D.A. or otherwise. I only mentioned it as one of the points which makes it hard to believe you weren't upset by this, as you claimed.

[ArmandV]

I don't "take issue" with you reporting it to anyone you like, D.A. or otherwise. I only mentioned it as one of the points which makes it hard to believe you weren't upset by this, as you claimed.

I admit being mad, but not frothing mad.

[Glenski]

Armand,
Did your actor friend work for or apply to ECC? I'm guessing not.

It's nice that you had such a nice error-free business in insurance claims, but to say that "There is no such thing as an "accidentally destroyed/deleted file" is stretching it. People make mistakes, fires happen, storms blow circuits, disks get lost, etc.

What would you say if I did proceed and actually won a judgment?I would say good for you, and hope to use the information to help others. I'm not above that sort of thing. Please keep us informed of any actions you and ECC take.

[ArmandV]

Armand,
Did your actor friend work for or apply to ECC? I'm guessing not.
It's nice that you had such a nice error-free business in insurance claims, but to say that "There is no such thing as an "accidentally destroyed/deleted file" is stretching it. People make mistakes, fires happen, storms blow circuits, disks get lost, etc.
I would say good for you, and hope to use the information to help others. I'm not above that sort of thing. Please keep us informed of any actions you and ECC take.

Before the advent of the Internet, etc., lost/destroyed files did happen. As I said, there are now safeguards in place to prevent the loss of any file. They are periodically uploaded and stored away from the premises. You would not believe the layers of safeguards. Many storage sites are Internet sites.

I don't know if he applied at ECC. They only thing I remember him saying was that he met with one of them about a possible position and they told him that they teach "the proper English." He asked if they meant the Queen's English, and they said no. Then he asked where do they find this "proper English." "Michigan" was the response.

[Glenski]

The fact that safeguards exist doesn't mean that everyone uses them. We're veering way off topic here anyway. You were mostly concerned with information that wasn't on the ECC web page, not data that was lost.

Michigan, eh? I hope that wasn't from Da Yoopers' section of the state!

[JimmySeal]

Michigan, eh? I hope that wasn't from Da Yoopers' section of the state!
Or Detroit. The adult literacy rate there is barely over 50%.

[epigene]

They only thing I remember him saying was that he met with one of them about a possible position and they told him that they teach "the proper English." He asked if they meant the Queen's English, and they said no. Then he asked where do they find this "proper English." "Michigan" was the response.
Meaning University of Michigan, Ann Arbor?
I'm asking because a lot of books on English language education I've seen in the past were published by UM Ann Arbor... :relief:

[ArmandV]

Meaning University of Michigan, Ann Arbor?
I'm asking because a lot of books on English language education I've seen in the past were published by UM Ann Arbor... :relief:

He meant the area in general.

After they told him "Michigan," his response was, "What?! Who told you that?"

[Iron Chef]

I once applied to ECC in 1998 after my initial stint as an ALT in Sapporo had expired. I filed the necessary forms and was contacted to come in for an interview. I made the mistake of going with a female friend of mine at that time who accompanied me and waited paitently in the lobby. My language skills weren't up to snuff yet and she knew the area better than I did at the time. During the course of my interview I was videotaped and told this was normal and perfectly routine as part of the hiring process. I didn't mind really, no biggie. What I DID mind though was:

1) I was told I would have to grow my hair out and immediately shave my goatee if I were hired. The interviewer stressed the reason for this was that they wanted to maintain a professional image for their teachers and apparently I didn't fit their image lol. My immediate response was of course the length of my hair or the fuzz on my chin had no bearing on my ability to teach in class. And that his time interviewing me would be better spent on more substantive issues. Of course, that got me off on the wrong foot simply because I chose to contest his proposal. Like he expected me to just say "Yes sir! Right away sir! Whatever you want, I will freely comply." Puhleeze...

2) During the videotaped session the interviewer made an excuse that he needed another battery for the camera and politely excused himself. I did not know at the time but learned after the fact that the man had then went into the lobby, introduced himself to my friend who had been waiting for me, and then abruptyly proceeded to ask her questions. Things like "Is he your boyfriend?" "How long have you known him?" etc etc. Things that were frankly none of his damn business and should have had no bearing on my interview. What a rude little ****.

So yeah, needless to say even though I was eventually offered the position I turned them down without regret. That about sums up my experience with ECC. 8-)

[ArmandV]

I once applied to ECC in 1998 after my initial stint as an ALT in Sapporo had expired. I filed the necessary forms and was contacted to come in for an interview. I made the mistake of going with a female friend of mine at that time who accompanied me and waited paitently in the lobby. My language skills weren't up to snuff yet and she knew the area better than I did at the time. During the course of my interview I was videotaped and told this was normal and perfectly routine as part of the hiring process. I didn't mind really, no biggie. What I DID mind though was:
1) I was told I would have to grow my hair out and immediately shave my goatee if I were hired. The interviewer stressed the reason for this was that they wanted to maintain a professional image for their teachers and apparently I didn't fit their image lol. My immediate response was of course the length of my hair or the fuzz on my chin had no bearing on my ability to teach in class. And that his time interviewing me would be better spent on more substantive issues. Of course, that got me off on the wrong foot simply because I chose to contest his proposal. Like he expected me to just say "Yes sir! Right away sir! Whatever you want, I will freely comply." Puhleeze...

One could argue that your rather unorthodox (to them, anyway) style would be an asset as the students' attention would definitely be focused on your head. Apparently they thought the same since they made you an offer.

This appears to counter Mike's theory on the the kind of candidate they're looking for as stated on page 1. ;-)

[epigene]

One could argue that your rather unorthodox (to them, anyway) style would be an asset as the students' attention would definitely be focused on your head. Apparently they thought the same since they made you and offer.
This appears to counter Mike's theory on the the kind of candidate they're looking for as stated on page 1. ;-)
I think the interviewer saw something great about his teaching capability despite everything else (appearance, female companion, etc.). Although there are "basic requirements" that the candidate must satisfy, there is always margin of discretion that the interviewer can exercise in screening applicants. Appearance is a "must" for some; others see value in other aspects and see "appearance" as "correctable."

I confess that I had been an interviewer for an English language school (not one of the major ones but a relatively small school) and things were up to me to decide who to hire. If I were Iron Chef's interviewer, I probably would have hired him if he did great in other areas.
(Disclaimer: This was more than two decades ago before I got married... :relief: )

ArmandV,
This is totally conjecture, but I have a sneaking suspicion that ECC had been looking for young people fresh out of university? This is something a school wouldn't say at an interview but something discovered usually after you are hired.

Edit: I know it's too late now, but I'll still add that the comment above (about ECC probably only recruiting young ones) was made because, if I were an interviewer, I would find you very promising, shown by the sense of humor you show in your posts.

[ArmandV]

This is something a school wouldn't say at an interview but something discovered usually after you are hired.

If their feet were totally set in concrete on hiring only recent grads, then one would conclude that said discovery could not possibly be made by someone more advanced in years.

[epigene]

If their feet were totally set in concrete on hiring only recent grads, then one would conclude that said discovery could not possibly be made by someone more advanced in years.
So true! :p

So, that's the reason why you need to gather info at ESL Cafe, etc., as Glenski recommends... :bluush:

[GodEmperorLeto]

I'm not necessarily siding with Armand here. If he can get away with the lawsuit, more power to him. Personally, I've applied to ECC, but I'm not sure I want to spend the serious dough it would take to get from New Jersey to Toronto, just to flunk because I don't know ESL terms like:

"dialogues, role-playing, TPR, chain sentence formation etc."

Dialogues, role-playing, easy. What the hell is TPR and "chain sentence formation"? I work in ESL for Pete's sake, and I haven't encountered these terms before. I can guess at "chain sentence formation" but the acronym escapes me. And if that segment is the killer, well, I see how it functions as an effective tool in the weed-out process, I'm not sure they are weeding out exactly who they should be. There are no guides or lists of terms online that ECC will put on the test. I'm confident I'll ace everything else on the test, but I'd hate to flunk it based on one segment like that.

[JimmySeal]

TPR is Total Physical Response. I wouldn't have known that if I hadn't been in EFL for the last 2 years, and I admit it's a bit sucky that Armand only found out about the session a week in advance and didn't know he would be tested on that stuff, but I don't see what the big deal is with learning some terminology to apply for a job. How hard could it be? Use an SRS (http://ichi2.net/anki/download/) and it will be effortless.

Count yourselves lucky that you're not Japanese 新卒 and don't have to take a 常識試験 or the SPI.

[Glenski]

Jimmy,
Don't help him. If he works in EFL and doesn't know those terms, it's a lost cause. He seems to have a terribly negative attitude anyway. That alone, not a test score, would cause him to fail the interview.

[ArmandV]

After I've spent most of this morning going over things with the adjusting company that am doing work for, I decided to drop this matter. As it is a new position, I need to concentrate on that as the first priority and not be distracted by any legal battles which may cause me to lose time from work. That's not a wise thing to do when starting out with a new company.

Since my total expenses were under $180, it isn't worth the hassle. I've got bigger and better things to do.

Still, ECC does need to be explicit to applicants on what their hiring procedures are, for their own protection as well as for applicants.

[GodEmperorLeto]

Don't help him. If he works in EFL and doesn't know those terms, it's a lost cause. He seems to have a terribly negative attitude anyway. That alone, not a test score, would cause him to fail the interview.
I hope you aren't talking about me. I know plenty of ESL concepts, and have read summaries of Krashen's theories, thank you very much. I looked up TPR today. It is one of a small number of techniques my institute doesn't use, partially because it is mostly for children. If you are talking about ArmandV, well, personally, I think you should go a little lighter on him.

Nevertheless, I think that ECC probably assumed that applicants knew about the tests. I know about these tests, and about what is on them. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of specific ESL terms and jargon, and dozens of linguistic theorists who coined them. If ECC puts some very basic ones on the test, that's cool. But I've read some of the manuals and textbooks for my univerity's MA program in TESL, and to be a neophyte tested on this stuff must be daunting. If they want someone with a firm ESL background, it might help to restrict applicants to TESL-certified only.