Workplace reviews and discussion: 巨匠雲科技教育股份有限公司

No need to prepare teaching materials yourself.

The entire company really is a “traditional” company. Overall, it feels like an educational institution that only wants to make money.

At the beginning, the person responsible for the interview did not clearly explain that this was a “contractual appointment” relationship rather than a standard employment relationship. This was clearly an attempt to skirt the gray areas and avoid the burden of labor and health insurance contributions. Employees have to pay the so-called supplementary premium themselves every month, which is equivalent to working unpaid for one to two hours every month. They only said that enrolling in insurance through a trade union could avoid this expense.

Although the teaching environment provided its own teaching materials, the materials were loosely structured and full of errors (including obvious Chinese-style Japanese). In short, they were very difficult to use. I once suggested that the relevant personnel at the company needed to proofread and revise them, but no action was taken for a long time. They only hoped that the contract instructors would proactively point out the issues. May I ask where the relevant full-time employees responsible for this are?

The lessons mainly consist of 50-minute classes, with a maximum of six students per small class. Teachers are required to cover the entire lesson within the allotted time, including review, vocabulary, grammar, textbook dialogues, and exercises. Aside from the fact that the schedule is too tight to explain things in detail, no additional pay is provided for overtime. On one occasion, a clear mistake in the company's teaching-material design caused the lesson to run significantly over time. After I reported it, they simply apologized briefly, with no subsequent additional compensation.

During class, students do not need to turn on their cameras, so it is impossible to know whether they are actually paying attention (I once encountered a student attending class while lying down). The placement system is also not rigorous enough. There is supposedly a level-up exam, but students are essentially allowed to take it open-book, so even students with poor proficiency can pass. This often results in classes with widely varying student levels.

In addition, there is supposedly lecturer management, but although they show concern at the beginning, they do not regularly follow up to understand the contract instructors' recent situations. Furthermore, the company cannot guarantee stable teaching hours. Even when teaching hours are drastically reduced, it does not proactively help open new classes. After the issue is raised, they simply tell you, “Everything is scheduled by the system.” The company also has no non-compete clause and suggests that instructors take part-time work on other platforms. It is extremely passive.

In the past, when a student did not show up, teachers only had to wait in the classroom, and the company would provide recordings of previous lessons for the student. Later, however, they began requiring teachers to record the lesson themselves even when the student was absent, citing the need to protect the privacy of other students. Yet they then provided the lesson videos for sale to other students. Is this not completely hypocritical?