Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Japan (Ratification: 1965)

Other comments on C087

Observation

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the observations made by the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) dated 24 July 2017 and communicated with the Government’s report, as well as the Government’s reply thereto, and the observations by the Japan Business Federation (NIPPON KEIDANREN) dated 3 August 2017 which were also forwarded with the Government’s report. The Committee takes note of the observations received on 1 September 2017 from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) endorsing the observations of NIPPON KEIDANREN. The Committee further notes the observations by the National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN) dated 21 September 2017 on violations of trade union rights in the public service and the Government’s reply thereto. The Committee observes that the Government’s report and comments also provide replies to the observations received in 2014 from ZENROREN and the Federation of Prefectural and Municipal Workers’ Unions (JICHIROREN).

Article 2 of the Convention. Right to organize of firefighting personnel and prison officers. The Committee recalls its previous comments concerning the need to recognize the right to organize for firefighting personnel and prison officers. With regard to firefighting personnel, the Committee had previously noted that a committee on the right to organize of fire defence personnel, established within the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications to study the right to organize of firefighting personnel in view of both respect for basic labour rights and assurance of reliability and safety for the people, issued a report in December 2010 which found no practical obstacles to granting the right to organize to firefighters. The Committee had also noted the information provided by the Government on efforts made over the past decade and a half to introduce the Fire Defence Personnel Committee System to guarantee fire defence personnel participation in determining working conditions. The Government, however, informed that the Bill on Labour Relations of Local Public Service Employees which would have granted the right to organize for fire defence personnel was dropped by the Parliament and further meetings to exchange views were conducted by the Minister in charge of civil service reform.

The Committee recalls that in its 2014 observations, JICHIROREN indicated that the Fire Defence Personnel Committee System functioned since 1995 with defects that remained uncorrected and cannot stand as the compensatory scheme for the right to organize of firefighters as contended by the Government. The Committee also notes the renewed concern by the JTUC–RENGO in relation to the ongoing denial of the right to organize to firefighters and its apprehension that the denial of this fundamental right will become permanently enshrined. The JTUC–RENGO also denounces an increasing number of incidents of harassment at the firefighters’ workplace, which it regards as the result of the denial of the right to organize. Measures against harassment taken in July 2017 by the Fire and Disaster Management Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications in this regard are considered as insufficient stopgap measures. The Committee takes note of the information provided in the Government’s latest report in relation to the concerns raised. It notes the indication that the Fire and Disaster Management Agency advised all fire departments to take measures in relation to the proposals made in July 2017 by a working group on countermeasures against harassment. The Committee further notes that the Government is considering a new initiative comprising fact-finding surveys on how the Fire Defence Personnel Committee System is being administered which will allow both the management and the staff nationwide to express their opinions through a questionnaire. The Government indicates that further measures will be taken based on the results of the initiative. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the conduct of the surveys, their outcome and the measures taken or contemplated as a result. The Committee expects that this new engagement of the Government will contribute to further progress towards ensuring the right to organize for firefighting personnel.

In respect of prison officers, the Committee notes the Government’s reiteration, supported by NIPPON KEIDANREN, that it considers prison officers by the nature of their duties to be included in the category of police; they are therefore denied the right to organize in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention. The Government provides details on the number of prison officers (17,600 in 2017) and on the distinction among staff in penal institutions: (i) prison officers with a duty of total operation in penal institutions, including conducting security services with the use of physical force, who are allowed to use small arms and light weapons; (ii) penal institution staff other than prison officers, who are engaged directly in the management of penal institutions or the treatment of inmates; and (iii) penal institution staff designated, by virtue of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to carry out duties of the judicial police officials with regard to crimes which occur in penal institutions and who have the authority to arrest, search and seize. The Committee also notes that, according to the JTUC–RENGO, the Government has not given concrete consideration to the issue of the right to organize of prison officers despite the Committee’s request. The Committee considers that even though some of these officers are authorized by virtue of the law to carry a weapon in the course of their duties, this does not mean that they are members of the police or armed forces. Noting the clarification from the Government on the distinction among staff in penal institutions, the Committee requests the Government, in consultation with the national social partners and other concerned stakeholders, to take the necessary measures to ensure that prison officers other than those with the specific duties of the judicial police may form and join the organization of their own choosing to defend their occupational interests. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on progress made in this regard.

Article 3. Right to strike of public sector employees. The Committee recalls its long-standing comments on the need to ensure that public service employees could enjoy the right to strike without risk of sanctions, with the possible exceptions of public servants exercising authority in the name of the State and workers employed in essential services in the strict sense of the term. In that connection, the Committee had previously observed that the bills establishing the new labour relations system had not been adopted by the Diet and that the Amendment Act which was adopted in April 2014 provided that the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs would “make efforts to reach agreements on measures for the autonomous labour–employer relations system, based on section 12 of the Civil Service Reform Law, gaining the understanding of the people, hearing from employees’ organizations”. In its report, the Government indicates that the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs has since been exchanging continuously with employees’ organizations on various topics. These exchanges, however, led the Government to observe that there are still various issues to be considered in addition to the changing environment in labour relations. The Government therefore intends to continue to consult employees’ organizations on the measures for the autonomous labour–employer relations system. The Committee notes the JTUC–RENGO’s observations regretting the absence of progress in the recognition of the right to strike of public service employees. Noting that there is no meaningful progress despite the continuous dialogue between the Government and the social partners on measures for the autonomous labour–employer relations system, the Committee expects that the Government will make every effort to expedite its consultation with the social partners concerned, and that it will adopt measures for the autonomous labour–employer relations system that will ensure basic labour rights for public service employees. The Committee requests the Government to report any progress made in this regard, and in particular any measure taken or envisaged to ensure that public service employees who are not exercising authority in the name of the State and who are not working in essential services in the strict sense of the term can enjoy the right to strike and to exercise industrial action without risk of sanction.

In respect of the compensatory guarantees for workers who are deprived of the right to carry out industrial action, the Committee had previously noted the authority of the National Personnel Authority (NPA). The Committee notes the observations made by the JTUC–RENGO reiterating that the NPA recommendation system is defective as a compensatory measure. In particular, the JTUC–RENGO is of the view that the NPA is subordinated to the Government and its recommendations are left to political decision. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in order to perform its compensatory functions properly, the NPA has established a Deputy Director-General for Employees’ Organizations’ Affairs and a Counsellor to hear opinions from the employees’ organizations. In 2016, the NPA held 217 official meetings with employees’ organizations and made recommendations. The Government concludes that the NPA is fully functional as a compensatory measure for the restrictions on basic labour rights of public service employees. In view of the persistent divergent views on the adequate nature of the NPA as a compensatory measure for restrictions placed on basic labour rights of public service employees, the Committee encourages the Government to consult the social partners concerned in search of the most appropriate mechanisms which would ensure impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration procedures, in which the parties have confidence and can participate at all stages, and in which the awards, once made, are binding and fully and promptly implemented. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard and, in the meantime, to continue to provide information on the functioning of the NPA recommendation system.