EWA

Why Form a Union Before a Problem Arises?

Before answering this question, let me talk about an on-going dispute against "XYZ" University.

Three years ago a part-time teacher was told that her classes would be reduced by half (6 to 3). She came to EWA and the another union to consult with respectively. EWA recommended that she join the union and negotiate with the university to find the solution. EWA did not promise to keep her classes. Then she went to the other union and was told that it was too late to reinstate her classes. She gave up on joining the union.

Then last year she was told that her classes would be cut from 3 to 2 (spring 4, fall 0.) She came to EWA and joined this time. EWA started negotiation with the university, but the university replied that they could not reinstate her classes because it had been decided by the faculty meeting. We also demanded them to stop using illegally dispatched teachers and make classes for her. They refused and said it was not dispatched teachers but sub-contracted teachers. We complained that they were lying and the negotiation was not good in faith. They did not accept our demands at all. So we brought the case to Osaka Labor Relation Commission against their unfair labour practices.

At the commission meeting, their lawyers claimed that they decided her classes would be cut because the number of students had decreased and not because of her union membership. They also stressed they have no intention to replace union members with sub-contracted teachers. This is, they emphasized, becacause all decisions were made before union forming and what they did was not against the Trade Union Law.

While we are fighting against them at the commission, we have negotiated with them. We requested that they find a job for her for fall semester. They replied they had not made contract with her for fall semester. We told them that if her contract is just for spring semester it makes unfair labor practice, for she renewed her one-year contract seven times and received a half year contract only after declaring union membership. In addition, she wrote an extra clause on the contract as suggested by EWA which said the duration means teaching period and employment period is same as last year (one year.) This contract was accepted by them. So they were confused at the negotiation and said they wanted to discuss with lawyers and then return to the negotiation.

I am not sure we can win her case but I am sure she can fight her case even in the Labor Commission again. I hope the university gives up fighting against us and makes an agreement.

You may now start to see the difference between declaring and not declaring the existence of a union.

Now I will answer your questions.

1) Why is it really necessary to declare the existence of a new EWA branch BEFORE tackling a particular problem?

Once a university causes a particular problem, it is rather difficult for them to eliminate it because of the structure of the institution. If we declare the existence of EWA branch and request the negotiation before facing a specified problem, they can not go ahead without negotiation with EWA. They can unilaterally do that, but they must be brought to the Labor Relations Commission. The commission will easily make an order to eliminate the problem because what they did is against Trade Union Law.

2) In the case of this university, the 'specific problem' is the POSSIBLE introduction of agency teachers. What schools have declared a union WITHOUT there being a specific, real problem that they wanted to fight? In other words, do you know of any teachers that have created a branch of the EWA even though they were happy with their working conditions?

We sometimes declare a union not only a specific problem to fight but also improve working condition or stable employment of union members. These cases have happened mostly for Japanese members.

3-1) If the rumor at this university turns out to be true, what is the difference, LEGALLY, between having declared the union first and not having declared the union first? What does the law say, exactly? Why does the timing make any difference?

I already pointed it out through the above case.

We are using Trade Union Law, Article 7;

Article 7. The employer shall not commit the acts set forth in the following items: (1) to discharge or otherwise treat in a disadvantageous manner a worker by reason of such worker's being a member of a trade union, having tried to join or organize a trade union, or having performed proper acts of a trade union; or to make it a condition of employment that the worker must not join or must withdraw from a trade union. However, where a trade union represents a majority of workers employed at a particular plant or workplace, this shall not prevent an employer from concluding a collective agreement which requires, as a condition of employment, that the workers must be members of such trade union;

(2) to refuse to bargain collectively with the representative of the workers employed by the employer without proper reasons; (3) to control or interfere with the formation or management of a trade union by workers or to give financial support in defraying the trade union's operational expenditures, provided, however, that this shall not prevent the employer from permitting workers to confer or negotiate with the employer during working hours without loss of time or pay and this shall not apply to the employer's contributions for public welfare funds or welfare and other funds which are actually used for payments to prevent or relieve economic misfortunes or accidents, nor to the furnishing of minimum office space;

Though a university has no intention to discriminate union members, we use this law as a weapon to protect union members.

3-2) A related story: a friend of mine had a problem at *****. He asked the another union for help. They were able to help him. At the time, my friend was not a member, although he joined when negotiations started (and back-dated his membership by a few months). In his case, there was no necessity to negotiate on two issues - acceptance of a union branch, and having his classes cut. Why is the EWA different?

Can you imagine what happened if ***** refused to accept the union's demands? The union would have to bring the case to a court or commission without such a strong weapon. EWA has also solved problems of members who had not joined beforehand through negotiations with universities. It depends on nature of problem and the university. As I mentioned above, a problem is often solved through negotiation/ labour dispute, and sometimes through a court and/ or a commission.

4) In practical terms, what is the difference between declaring the union before an action starts, and declaring it after? How does declaring the existence of a new EWA branch make things easier? How does NOT declaring a union first make things more difficult? And who does it make things easier or more difficult for? Us? The union? Both?

See above.

5) If declaring a union branch makes it easier when something bad happens, shouldn't we declare it for all universities we work at, even though at the other places nothing has been a problem yet?

It is not necessary to declare a union where no problem is expected at all. But you may know that most of universities are now facing serious problems which may cause part-time teachers employment to be unstable.

6) What would happen if the other union members wanted to act as well? Do the two unions work together?

Sure!

7) What cases do you know of where declaring a union has caused unpleasantness for union members? Suppose in the future, *** tells us there were not enough classes for them to keep us? How could we check the truth of this, given that the decline in student numbers is a reality? And what about black-listing union teachers for other work?

Once we declare a union and start negotiation with ***, they have to discuss with us about the class issue. We have the right to obtain full information about ***. They cannot refuse to show any evidence which may cause union members problems at the negotiation.

I have never heard union members being black-listed in Japan. We have a lot of members whose names were publicized in papers/web, and they are hired at other universities. Universities evaluate teachers on their performance and not union membership.

Neo Yamashita

The Sample of Union Declaration

October **, 2003

Neo Yamashita

Chair, EWA

To *****

Chair, Board of Trustees, Educational Foundation *****

To *****

President, **** University

Notification of EWA ***** University Branch and Request of Collective Bargaining

We notify you that teachers of ***** University have joined EWA and formed EWA ***** University Branch on October **, 2003. **** was elected as the Chair of Branch.

Accordingly, we request collective bargaining as follows.

We hope that you faithfully accept our request and respond to us no later than October ***, 2003.

Date; October **

Time; p.m.

Place; *** University

Negotiation Matter; Demands as follows,

Related matters

Demands ①that you abide by the labor laws such as Trade Union Law

②that you require the consent of the union when any changes to working conditions of union members are made.


Map email Home	Why Form a Union Before a Problem Arises? Before answering this question, let me talk about an on-going dispute against "XYZ" University. Three years ago a part-time teacher was told that her classes would be reduced by half (6 to 3). She came to EWA and the another union to consult with respectively. EWA recommended that she join the union and negotiate with the university to find the solution. EWA did not promise to keep her classes. Then she went to the other union and was told that it was too late to reinstate her classes. She gave up on joining the union. Then last year she was told that her classes would be cut from 3 to 2 (spring 4, fall 0.) She came to EWA and joined this time. EWA started negotiation with the university, but the university replied that they could not reinstate her classes because it had been decided by the faculty meeting. We also demanded them to stop using illegally dispatched teachers and make classes for her. They refused and said it was not dispatched teachers but sub-contracted teachers. We complained that they were lying and the negotiation was not good in faith. They did not accept our demands at all. So we brought the case to Osaka Labor Relation Commission against their unfair labour practices. At the commission meeting, their lawyers claimed that they decided her classes would be cut because the number of students had decreased and not because of her union membership. They also stressed they have no intention to replace union members with sub-contracted teachers. This is, they emphasized, becacause all decisions were made before union forming and what they did was not against the Trade Union Law. While we are fighting against them at the commission, we have negotiated with them. We requested that they find a job for her for fall semester. They replied they had not made contract with her for fall semester. We told them that if her contract is just for spring semester it makes unfair labor practice, for she renewed her one-year contract seven times and received a half year contract only after declaring union membership. In addition, she wrote an extra clause on the contract as suggested by EWA which said the duration means teaching period and employment period is same as last year (one year.) This contract was accepted by them. So they were confused at the negotiation and said they wanted to discuss with lawyers and then return to the negotiation. I am not sure we can win her case but I am sure she can fight her case even in the Labor Commission again. I hope the university gives up fighting against us and makes an agreement. You may now start to see the difference between declaring and not declaring the existence of a union. Now I will answer your questions. 1) Why is it really necessary to declare the existence of a new EWA branch BEFORE tackling a particular problem? Once a university causes a particular problem, it is rather difficult for them to eliminate it because of the structure of the institution. If we declare the existence of EWA branch and request the negotiation before facing a specified problem, they can not go ahead without negotiation with EWA. They can unilaterally do that, but they must be brought to the Labor Relations Commission. The commission will easily make an order to eliminate the problem because what they did is against Trade Union Law. 2) In the case of this university, the 'specific problem' is the POSSIBLE introduction of agency teachers. What schools have declared a union WITHOUT there being a specific, real problem that they wanted to fight? In other words, do you know of any teachers that have created a branch of the EWA even though they were happy with their working conditions? We sometimes declare a union not only a specific problem to fight but also improve working condition or stable employment of union members. These cases have happened mostly for Japanese members. 3-1) If the rumor at this university turns out to be true, what is the difference, LEGALLY, between having declared the union first and not having declared the union first? What does the law say, exactly? Why does the timing make any difference? I already pointed it out through the above case. We are using Trade Union Law, Article 7; Article 7. The employer shall not commit the acts set forth in the following items: (1) to discharge or otherwise treat in a disadvantageous manner a worker by reason of such worker's being a member of a trade union, having tried to join or organize a trade union, or having performed proper acts of a trade union; or to make it a condition of employment that the worker must not join or must withdraw from a trade union. However, where a trade union represents a majority of workers employed at a particular plant or workplace, this shall not prevent an employer from concluding a collective agreement which requires, as a condition of employment, that the workers must be members of such trade union; (2) to refuse to bargain collectively with the representative of the workers employed by the employer without proper reasons; (3) to control or interfere with the formation or management of a trade union by workers or to give financial support in defraying the trade union's operational expenditures, provided, however, that this shall not prevent the employer from permitting workers to confer or negotiate with the employer during working hours without loss of time or pay and this shall not apply to the employer's contributions for public welfare funds or welfare and other funds which are actually used for payments to prevent or relieve economic misfortunes or accidents, nor to the furnishing of minimum office space; Though a university has no intention to discriminate union members, we use this law as a weapon to protect union members. 3-2) A related story: a friend of mine had a problem at ***. He asked the another union for help. They were able to help him. At the time, my friend was not a member, although he joined when negotiations started (and back-dated his membership by a few months). In his case, there was no necessity to negotiate on two issues - acceptance of a union branch, and having his classes cut. Why is the EWA different? Can you imagine what happened if * refused to accept the union's demands? The union would have to bring the case to a court or commission without such a strong weapon. EWA has also solved problems of members who had not joined beforehand through negotiations with universities. It depends on nature of problem and the university. As I mentioned above, a problem is often solved through negotiation/ labour dispute, and sometimes through a court and/ or a commission. 4) In practical terms, what is the difference between declaring the union before an action starts, and declaring it after? How does declaring the existence of a new EWA branch make things easier? How does NOT declaring a union first make things more difficult? And who does it make things easier or more difficult for? Us? The union? Both? See above. 5) If declaring a union branch makes it easier when something bad happens, shouldn't we declare it for all universities we work at, even though at the other places nothing has been a problem yet? It is not necessary to declare a union where no problem is expected at all. But you may know that most of universities are now facing serious problems which may cause part-time teachers employment to be unstable. 6) What would happen if the other union members wanted to act as well? Do the two unions work together? Sure! 7) What cases do you know of where declaring a union has caused unpleasantness for union members? Suppose in the future, * tells us there were not enough classes for them to keep us? How could we check the truth of this, given that the decline in student numbers is a reality? And what about black-listing union teachers for other work? Once we declare a union and start negotiation with *, they have to discuss with us about the class issue. We have the right to obtain full information about . They cannot refuse to show any evidence which may cause union members problems at the negotiation. I have never heard union members being black-listed in Japan. We have a lot of members whose names were publicized in papers/web, and they are hired at other universities. Universities evaluate teachers on their performance and not union membership. Neo Yamashita The Sample of Union Declaration* October , 2003 Neo Yamashita Chair, EWA To * Chair, Board of Trustees, Educational Foundation * To * President, University Notification of EWA * University Branch and Request of Collective Bargaining We notify you that teachers of * University have joined EWA and formed EWA * University Branch on October , 2003. ** was elected as the Chair of Branch. Accordingly, we request collective bargaining as follows. We hope that you faithfully accept our request and respond to us no later than October , 2003. Date; October * Time; p.m. Place; *** University Negotiation Matter; Demands as follows, Related matters Demands ①that you abide by the labor laws such as Trade Union Law ②that you require the consent of the union when any changes to working conditions of union members are made.
	Copyright © 2001-2004 EWA \| Legal Notice