Spread the love

By Our Reporter

For many Nepali youths, the Korean language test has come to carry hopes far beyond what it was designed to offer. Passing the exam is often taken as a promise of work in South Korea. The reality under the Employment Permit System (EPS) tells a different story. The language test is only an entry point into a long and uncertain process, not a job offers.

Each year, more than 100,000 Nepalis sit for the Korean language test. The structure of the exam allows a large number of candidates to pass, since scores of 38 or 39 out of 40 still qualify. Around 1,000 candidates take the test daily, and dozens secure near perfect scores. All successful candidates enter a roster managed under the EPS. From there, the process shifts out of Nepal’s control.

South Korea seeks only about 5,000 to 7,000 workers annually from Nepal. Employers choose workers from the roster through a computerized system based on their own needs. Factors such as age, education, physical standards, gender, and sector specific skills guide selection. Those who do not match employer preferences stay on the roster, often for years. This gap between the number who pass the test and the number actually hired fuels confusion and frustration.

The pressure peaked two years ago when over 18,000 roster listed youths protested after long waits despite clearing language and skills tests. Many belong to manufacturing, agriculture, skill building, or the CBT group of returnee workers whose former employers did not rehire them. The uncertainty has taken a heavy toll, draining savings and causing stress at home. The demands raised by these youths reflect real pain, yet the system remains employer driven, leaving limited room for guarantees.

The core issue lies in messaging and preparation. Passing the language test has been oversold as an assurance of overseas work. Government agencies need to present a clearer picture from the start. Aspirants must know that the test only makes them eligible for employer review, not selection. Authorities should also work with the Korean side to seek modest roster extensions, limited sector flexibility, and fair options for returnee workers, while being honest about what is and is not possible.

For students, the lesson is sobering but necessary. The Korean language test should be treated as one option, not the only plan. Candidates should avoid heavy loans based on assumptions of quick departure. Building skills useful at home or in other labor markets can reduce risk. Better information, realistic expectations, and shared responsibility can ease disappointment and prevent thousands from being trapped between hope and waiting.