Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2017, Publicación: 107ª reunión CIT (2018)

Convenio sobre el derecho de sindicación y de negociación colectiva, 1949 (núm. 98) - Japón (Ratificación : 1953)

Otros comentarios sobre C098

Observación

Solicitud directa

1997

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

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 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 the NIPPON KEIDANREN. The Committee further notes the observations by the National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN) dated 21 September 2017 on obstacles to collective bargaining in practice 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.

Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Collective bargaining rights of public service employees not engaged in the administration of the State in the context of the civil service reform. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need for measures to ensure the promotion of collective bargaining for public employees who are not engaged in the administration of the State in the framework of ongoing consultations on the reform of the civil service. The Committee previously regretted that the package of reform bills, which was the fruit of long consultations with the social partners and civil society over many years and which provided for a new framework in the national public service where both parties to labour–employer relations negotiate and determine autonomously the issue of working conditions and promote reform of the personnel management and remuneration system, was ultimately not adopted by the Diet. As a result, a number of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State remained deprived of their collective bargaining rights. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the steps taken by the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs to engage in consultation with the social partners as required by the Civil Service Reform Law so as to ensure collective bargaining rights for all public servants not engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee notes the JTUC–RENGO’s observations that there has been no progress in the consultations requested by the Committee due to failure to act and pro forma responses by the Government. More specifically, the JTUC–RENGO alleges that since the inception of the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs the Government has not engaged in any meaningful consultation with public service employees’ trade unions on the issues. According to the JTUC–RENGO, in spring 2017 in reply to the request from the Public Service Employee Trade Union Liaison Council (a consultative organization consisting of trade unions affiliated with the JTUC–RENGO and related to non-worksite public service employees), the Minister in charge of national public service employees had merely repeated the same response for three years in succession: “Regarding an autonomous industrial relations system, since a wide range of issues are involved, I would like to engage in prudent considerations while exchanging views with all of you.” On the other hand, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs has, since its establishment, been exchanging continuously with employees’ organizations on various topics. These hearings, however, led the Government to observe that there are still wide-ranging 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 observations from the NIPPON KEIDANREN supporting the Government’s position.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that after the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs was established, the National Personnel Authority (NPA) remained fully functional as a compensatory measure for the restrictions on basic labour rights of public service employees, and actually the Government had revised remuneration of public employees according to the NPA recommendation made after consultation with the social partners in an independent manner. The Committee notes the observations from the JTUC–RENGO that recommendations from the NPA are subordinated to the political decision of the Government. In the case of the recommendation on remuneration, the JTUC–RENGO regretted that the wage revision processes had been conducted in a unilateral and confusing way by the Government, which was illustrative of the fact that the NPA recommendation system is defective as a compensatory measure. Noting the lack of 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 establishment of the autonomous labour–employer relations system that will ensure, in the near future, collective bargaining rights for all public servants not engaged in the administration of the State. In the meantime, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the functioning of the NPA recommendation system as a compensatory measure to the denial of collective bargaining rights to the public service employees.

The Committee recalls that, following observations from the JTUC–RENGO deploring the removal of collective bargaining rights from the national forestry project staff, it requested the Government to indicate the steps taken to ensure that national forestry project staff is afforded the full guarantees of the Convention, including the right to bargain collectively. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that at the time of the revision of the system, a supplementary resolution providing that “in order to ensure the fulfilment of various roles required for national forestry businesses, including maintenance/promotion of the public interest functions and promotion of integrated development/maintenance with privately owned forests, etc., efforts should be made in promoting and securing the appropriate level of the ceiling of the number of officials taking into account severe financial situations and the actual situation of site management, establishment of structures/systems, development of human resources, and transfer of skills, etc. and developing the working conditions of employees engaged in national forestry businesses” was adopted by the Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of the House of Representatives. The Government intends to consider the purport of this resolution by exchanging opinions on the working conditions of employees engaged in national forestry businesses. The Committee recalls once again its previous observation in which it highlighted that national forestry project staff are not among the category of workers that may be excluded from the scope of the Convention. The Committee firmly hopes that the Government will provide in its next report information on the consultations held and the measures taken to ensure that national forestry project staff is afforded the full guarantees of the Convention, including the right to bargain collectively.