Member Contributions

Labor Relations in Japan

by Neo Yamashita, Vice Chair of EWA

Neo Yamashita, Vice Chair of EWA, made a presentation about Labor Relations in Japan at one of the workshops in JALT 2010 Conference on November 21.

Here is a Handout

The gathering gale or trending typhoon ( take your pick)

by Peter Campbell

3 February 2010

Japan's population peaked at about 127.5 million people in 2005. Since then it has gone into reverse mode and if the newspapers are correct. This reverse mode is rapidly decelerating to an estimated 105 million people by 2050. Currently birth figures are down to 1.29 children per women in the latest survey.

This is going to affect us all in the land of Wa. Shoshika, or the trend towards having fewer children, is, as usual has some unique problems stemming from Japan's history. The difficulty the government has on the issue of 'making babies' is, that Japan is significantly more sensitive than perhaps in other countries about this issue. The main reason for this is historic. From the 1930s, Japan's leaders urged women to produce as many children as possible to fuel the war effort. Using the slogan "umey?, fuyasey?" (let's give birth!) contraceptive goods disappeared and abortion clinics were closed (White, 2002). As a consequence of such policies, Japan's politicians today tip toe around this issue.

Another contributing factor is of course - women. A recent study of Japanese women and childbirth, examined the reasons why Japanese women are recently less inclined to have children. Most of the reasons were social and included a tendency to marry at a later date, not marry at all or to work instead of having children. Prime Minister Hashimoto publicly expressed his regret at the huge number of women entering formal education. Others see this as one of lifestyle choices. Today many women would rather seek a career than start a family simply because of the costs involved.

First, the incredible costs of being pregnant in Japan. Regular examinations during pregnancy are not covered by health insurance since it is neither a sickness nor an injury. The cost of such visits usually averages around 5000 yen per time. Then there is the cost of delivery (around 300 - 400,000 yen), which, although it is refunded in part by insurance, is still an initial out-of-pocket expense. If delivery occurs at night or on a holiday, the cost will be much greater. Next, comes the cost of health care for infants. This is free for children until the age of 3 in some prefectures, age 5 in others. Naturally if you consider the price of schooling and university education, the average family can realistically only afford one child, two with a sacrifice. Many people believe that the overall cost of having and raising children, is the major reason for the declining birth rate.

Many married couples say that they want to have more children but simply can't afford it. seeing it costs about 4.4 million yen on average to raise a child to the age of 6, the cost is a huge burden on young families. This cost that seems to be largely overlooked by the government. While child support is paid (5000 yen per month per child for 1 or 2 children and 10,000 yen a month for nos. 3 on, dependent on income) this barely covers the cost of talcum powder. On top of this is uncertainty about the future.

That is the background to our union difficulties for 2010. I call this paper the gathering gale paraphrasing that great unionist- Winston Churchill. To brother Rube, Churchill was a great unionist, he led the union of English speaking peoples!

With population numbers declining, the burden of the huge cost of fees and the uncertainty of employment, student numbers will undoubtedly decline. Currently permanent job offers figure is .47. This means for every 100 applicants from college- there were only 47 jobs on offer. This figure and colleges having to publish the number of students attaining full time employment means this year many high school students are looking at alternatives like cooking or nursing or even- the Japanese self defense forces.

Already at Osaka University of Economics they have publicly announced the cutting of about 40 English classes for next year - 2011, and the merging of side issues or repeater students with mainstream courses.

Other colleges are facing declining rolls. Just compare the number of students you had in class three years ago with the number you get this year!

So now to move to the ghost busters theme - What'ch gonna do!

Short answer -a form of unemployment insurance. However, be careful about what insurance you choose. Insurance companies are in business to make money. A case in point is the Katrina fiasco. Most homeowners 'thought' they were covered by insurance. The insurance cover was basically for wind damage and in the fine print excluded c..Water damage, meaning flood surface water, waves, tidal water, tsunami, seiche (lake waves), overflow of a body of water or spray from any of these. Post Katrina insurance companies visited stricken policy holders asserting their damage was water related and not due to wind. It was left to the Coast guard to pick up the mess.

So insurance companies will not get involved in many issues in order to save money. So what does that leave us.

In my case the 'insurance' I chose was to join a union -EWA. The members of a union have rights and a duty to support each other in times of trouble.

I pay Y3,500 a month union fees. Looking at this membership from a selfish standpoint- what have I got from an outlay of 800 a week or Y42,000 a year.

One: At one university I had my classes cut. After the EWA interceded - I was offered another class in lieu of the class I lost. The result of a single union negotiation. Other teachers at that university who did nothing or belonged to nothing - got nothing- except their komas cut.

Two: At another university I had two classes cut. A fax from the union brought fourth the reply. A clerical error so apologies and my schedule was suitably amended. The teacher's help at that university said I was inflammable now because they know I am a union member and will be safe from subsequent cuts planned in the future.

Three: Most important of all- peace of mind. I do not have to worry about the state of affairs as I have a union do it for me. With the more egregious tactics of colleges are well known to the Union hierarchy, it means the college will pick on those least able to defend themselves from dismissal. The Japanese women teaching part time at many universities are an obvious target. They play the traditional role of Madame butterfly when told they will have their koma cut. So, I think as part of union duty should encourage these vulnerable women to join our union.

Others argue that, as more students now study Chinese and there are so many Japanese people able to speak and 'teach' Engrish, there will be less need for foreign staff. This will be the target for cuts as it is politically less troublesome than firing Japanese.

Four: In simple cost terms, an outlay of little more than one koma for one month, or 800 yen a week more than reimbursed my potential loss of income.

So the moral of this tale is- you pay for insurance premiums before the fire- not during or after it. Then there is the hassle of proving your claim while the insurance companies dispute it.

The same with a union, you pay your premiums before a fire, not during or after. The major difference is- the union is there for you with rapiers raised and as in Dumas pere's great toast -one for all and all for one. It will fight each case for you.

So like the Winston poster said- join up and do your bit. Before it is too late!


Message Board email Home	Member Contributions Labor Relations in Japan by Neo Yamashita, Vice Chair of EWA Neo Yamashita, Vice Chair of EWA, made a presentation about Labor Relations in Japan at one of the workshops in JALT 2010 Conference on November 21. Here is a Handout The gathering gale or trending typhoon ( take your pick) by Peter Campbell 3 February 2010 Japan's population peaked at about 127.5 million people in 2005. Since then it has gone into reverse mode and if the newspapers are correct. This reverse mode is rapidly decelerating to an estimated 105 million people by 2050. Currently birth figures are down to 1.29 children per women in the latest survey. This is going to affect us all in the land of Wa. Shoshika, or the trend towards having fewer children, is, as usual has some unique problems stemming from Japan's history. The difficulty the government has on the issue of 'making babies' is, that Japan is significantly more sensitive than perhaps in other countries about this issue. The main reason for this is historic. From the 1930s, Japan's leaders urged women to produce as many children as possible to fuel the war effort. Using the slogan "umey?, fuyasey?" (let's give birth!) contraceptive goods disappeared and abortion clinics were closed (White, 2002). As a consequence of such policies, Japan's politicians today tip toe around this issue. Another contributing factor is of course - women. A recent study of Japanese women and childbirth, examined the reasons why Japanese women are recently less inclined to have children. Most of the reasons were social and included a tendency to marry at a later date, not marry at all or to work instead of having children. Prime Minister Hashimoto publicly expressed his regret at the huge number of women entering formal education. Others see this as one of lifestyle choices. Today many women would rather seek a career than start a family simply because of the costs involved. First, the incredible costs of being pregnant in Japan. Regular examinations during pregnancy are not covered by health insurance since it is neither a sickness nor an injury. The cost of such visits usually averages around 5000 yen per time. Then there is the cost of delivery (around 300 - 400,000 yen), which, although it is refunded in part by insurance, is still an initial out-of-pocket expense. If delivery occurs at night or on a holiday, the cost will be much greater. Next, comes the cost of health care for infants. This is free for children until the age of 3 in some prefectures, age 5 in others. Naturally if you consider the price of schooling and university education, the average family can realistically only afford one child, two with a sacrifice. Many people believe that the overall cost of having and raising children, is the major reason for the declining birth rate. Many married couples say that they want to have more children but simply can't afford it. seeing it costs about 4.4 million yen on average to raise a child to the age of 6, the cost is a huge burden on young families. This cost that seems to be largely overlooked by the government. While child support is paid (5000 yen per month per child for 1 or 2 children and 10,000 yen a month for nos. 3 on, dependent on income) this barely covers the cost of talcum powder. On top of this is uncertainty about the future. That is the background to our union difficulties for 2010. I call this paper the gathering gale paraphrasing that great unionist- Winston Churchill. To brother Rube, Churchill was a great unionist, he led the union of English speaking peoples! With population numbers declining, the burden of the huge cost of fees and the uncertainty of employment, student numbers will undoubtedly decline. Currently permanent job offers figure is .47. This means for every 100 applicants from college- there were only 47 jobs on offer. This figure and colleges having to publish the number of students attaining full time employment means this year many high school students are looking at alternatives like cooking or nursing or even- the Japanese self defense forces. Already at Osaka University of Economics they have publicly announced the cutting of about 40 English classes for next year - 2011, and the merging of side issues or repeater students with mainstream courses. Other colleges are facing declining rolls. Just compare the number of students you had in class three years ago with the number you get this year! So now to move to the ghost busters theme - What'ch gonna do! Short answer -a form of unemployment insurance. However, be careful about what insurance you choose. Insurance companies are in business to make money. A case in point is the Katrina fiasco. Most homeowners 'thought' they were covered by insurance. The insurance cover was basically for wind damage and in the fine print excluded c..Water damage, meaning flood surface water, waves, tidal water, tsunami, seiche (lake waves), overflow of a body of water or spray from any of these. Post Katrina insurance companies visited stricken policy holders asserting their damage was water related and not due to wind. It was left to the Coast guard to pick up the mess. So insurance companies will not get involved in many issues in order to save money. So what does that leave us. In my case the 'insurance' I chose was to join a union -EWA. The members of a union have rights and a duty to support each other in times of trouble. I pay Y3,500 a month union fees. Looking at this membership from a selfish standpoint- what have I got from an outlay of 800 a week or Y42,000 a year. One: At one university I had my classes cut. After the EWA interceded - I was offered another class in lieu of the class I lost. The result of a single union negotiation. Other teachers at that university who did nothing or belonged to nothing - got nothing- except their komas cut. Two: At another university I had two classes cut. A fax from the union brought fourth the reply. A clerical error so apologies and my schedule was suitably amended. The teacher's help at that university said I was inflammable now because they know I am a union member and will be safe from subsequent cuts planned in the future. Three: Most important of all- peace of mind. I do not have to worry about the state of affairs as I have a union do it for me. With the more egregious tactics of colleges are well known to the Union hierarchy, it means the college will pick on those least able to defend themselves from dismissal. The Japanese women teaching part time at many universities are an obvious target. They play the traditional role of Madame butterfly when told they will have their koma cut. So, I think as part of union duty should encourage these vulnerable women to join our union. Others argue that, as more students now study Chinese and there are so many Japanese people able to speak and 'teach' Engrish, there will be less need for foreign staff. This will be the target for cuts as it is politically less troublesome than firing Japanese. Four: In simple cost terms, an outlay of little more than one koma for one month, or 800 yen a week more than reimbursed my potential loss of income. So the moral of this tale is- you pay for insurance premiums before the fire- not during or after it. Then there is the hassle of proving your claim while the insurance companies dispute it. The same with a union, you pay your premiums before a fire, not during or after. The major difference is- the union is there for you with rapiers raised and as in Dumas pere's great toast -one for all and all for one. It will fight each case for you. So like the Winston poster said- join up and do your bit. Before it is too late!
	Copyright © 2001-2004 EWA \| Legal Notice