Member Contributions

Christmas greeting: Collective bargaining

by Peter Campbell

21 December 2006

I wanted to send you a Christmas greeting, but it is so difficult in today's world to know exactly what to say without offending someone. So I asked my solicitor yesterday, and on his advice I wish to say the following:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral celebration of the summer solstice holiday, practiced with the most enjoyable traditions of religious persuasion or secular practices of your choice with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make our country great (not to imply that our country is necessarily greater than any other country) and without regard to the race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms:

- this greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal;

- it is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting;

- it implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher.

This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and the warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.

Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced.

COMMENT

An interesting union meeting with the staff at Kandai university held on Wed Dec 20. From the discussions:-- There are over 3,400 part time teachers employed by that university (450 teaching English) and as such many arbitrary decisions about their classes and which faculty they will be assigned to are made.

At the union meeting several points were raised and amicably discussed.

The main point being the cutting of member's classes.

The college administration were not aware of this and will look into this. We have no doubt members number of classes will be protected.

As for the other 3,400 part time teachers- they are at the whims of whimsy.

In life one generally needs life insurance before investing in the purchase of a house or undertaking any major investment. Yet the biggest investment of all, one's job -should also have the same amount of fore thought and provision for the future.

Namely, join a union. This acts like insurance. Always there when you need it.

So for the 5 or so union members who went to the meeting. It was like using their insurance policy. A peace of mind.

As for the other 1300 teachers wondering about the future. Two things are virtually assured. In the current six party talks being held in China, North Korea will break off talks and blame America and teachers will need to consider their positions in the light of the declining birthrate of Japan affecting student enrollment.

Being there--being a member
by Peter Campbell

11 February 2004

In December 2003, at a certain university rumors circulated to the effect that part time teachers were to be limited to teaching a maximum of 3 classes.

This caveat of only 3 classes per person, per week, perhaps, was promulgated. Later, it was rescinded. Subsequently, the machinations, meanderings and mendacity behind this reasoning emerged.

Some person anxious to make a name for himself, proposed this measure of limiting teachers to three classes because it would mean teachers would be "fresh". No one at the meeting seriously objected but simply went along with the flow. Then when this new policy was put into effect there were rumblings, mumblings and grumblings and naturally all the part time staff were not gruntled with this decision.

When it was perceived to be unpopular the decision to limit classes was rescinded. But the reason for the remission of this policy was practical. It was difficult to recruit sufficient number of teachers to teach the required classes. What teacher is going to commute to teach one class on one afternoon a week.

The immediate response was for several part time teachers to join the EWA. One member then went to this college to negotiate about his loss of classes. His 3 classes were extended to 5 classes

So the salient lesson learned was--join a union.

Once a decision has been reached in a committee it is very hard to ameliorate or amend such a decision. This is part of the Japanese psyche, the concept of "face".

Now, universities are preparing employment contracts. The key point of which is that these are one year contracts with a termination date. The rationale for these is that with the decline in population, inevitably universities will also suffer decreasing numbers of students. So the logical thing to do is prepare for this eventuality and be ready to axe part time staff.

Money will be a criteria in this. Already universities are losing a great source of revenue with their entrance exams. At ¥35,000 per person per pop, this was perhaps, one of the greatest revenue sources. Think how much a college would make if 3,000 applicants took an exam. Basically about ¥105,000,000 or $1million a year. Two years ago, mid level universities had up to 7,000 applications a year. So you do the math.

As less numbers of students apply to go to university the rationale now swings towards seeking adequate numbers of students for the next source of revenue, tuition fees etc.

So clearly there will be a need to economize and unfortunately this is often directed at the source that can least protest against it. The part time teacher.

So, like insurance, union membership should be part of one's coverage. The knowledge that unfair actions will attract a legal response means universities will consider other ways of cost cutting. Perhaps really retiring tenured professors rather than allow them back ad infinitum.

Often, one hears of the result of a successful union action. But the really successful action of the union is just being there.

At another university, it appeared that the tenured teachers did not want to teach at night school or ni-bu. So an arbitrary act was to cut the teachers concerned with this program. After it was announced as a fait accompli there was a sudden change in attitude. Once it became apparent that sound trucks would be booming outside the said university, the person in charge of scuppering ni-bu, suddenly found alternate "elective" classes in lieu of the previously assigned classes at ni-bu.

These are but two examples of the benefit of union membership. Colleges will seek better alternatives once they realize they are dealing with people who have formed a union to protect their rights.

So the message is clear -- join a union and keep informed. To paraphrase John F. Kennedy-- The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. The eternal vigilance in our case is--our union fee.

From time to time I come across interesting articles of what is happening today in Japan and abroad about unfair labour practices.

I think it would be a good idea for members and others to submit some of these articles to your web site so that others can see the benefits of forming a union (and of course the possiblity with EWA).Some recent articles that I came across;

Many of the special features of the Japanese system are not a result of a unique Japanese culture; rather they are anachronisms imposed during W.W.II.

In order to understand what these structures are, and how they function, it is important to see where they came from and how they grew. Even most Japanese do not know the true roots of many of their institutions and policies that today govern their lives.

They are not, as is often portrayed, a reflection of a unique Japanese character nor are they descended from Japanese social structure.

They were, in the main, set in place during the late 1930’s and 1940’s to achieve specific war related goals. Even during the occupation, many of these institutions were allowed to continue, and many exist today, almost unchanged from over seven decades or over two generations ago.

Article I: In order to exercise full power of the state economy, the objective of the bank of Japan will be to fulfill the role of adjusting the currency, regulating financial flows and maintaining and fostering the credit system, all in accordance with state policy.

Article II: The Bank of Japan will be managed in accordance with its mission, to wit the fulfillment of all state objectives.

If this reads like a piece of wartime legislation, it should. Because the definition of the role of the Bank of Japan --to reign over the Japanese economy, and all in the interests of imposing the will of the state on the people, was established during W.W.II. This law is still in place today.

The law was enacted in 1942 in a conscious imitation of the Reichsbank Act passed by Nazi Germany in 1939.

It is generally believed that Japan underwent drastic changes after her defeat in World War II and indeed she did. Many of the reforms were radical. Radical enough to be called a revolution. The striking changes such as democracy -- including women’s suffrage, freedom of thought and expression, an end to nationalistic education and the adoption of a new constitution, dissolution of the military and the break up of the zaibatsu and sweeping agricultural reform were revolutionary –for Japan.

The Japanese style corporation is often cited as a unique feature of Japan. The definitive areas of difference are:- lifetime employment, seniority based allocation of wages and positions, harmonious labor relations based on enterprise unions rather than trade unions, an ideology that gives top priority to the interests of the company, and a consciousness of the company as a community.

Simply put, the Japanese joint stock company is not an organization dedicated to generating profit for its shareholders, as is the case in other countries, but an organization for the mutual benefit for those who work for it. Rather like a model communist cooperative than a capitalist corporation. This is explained as a result of Japan’s unique cultural heritage.

However, prior to the 1930’s, Japanese corporations were indeed a body for the benefit of the shareholders. The big changes happened during the war years. In 1938 the National General Mobilization law was enacted, including limitations in corporations’ dividend payouts , shareholders’ rights and the right to unionize. The effect was to make the corporation as an employee centered organization.

From the 1920’s onward, heavy and chemical industries took on a growing importance in the economy creating a need for new skilled workers. Companies responded by devising a type of apprentice system, training their own engineers, welders, etc. and encouraged them to stay with the company. A wage guaranteed to rise with age was one enticement.

In 1941 the government introduced a unified wage structure under which the seniority system was extended across the entire country. With one stroke of a pen, wages and prices were frozen by state decree at their levels for September 18, 1939. The government set starting salaries and annual increments. Thus the seniority system was imposed upon Japan. It was not the result of Japan’s unique culture, or a residue from the Tokugawa system of feudal law, it was simply a bureaucratic decision to enhance Japan’s war making capabilities against unexpected set backs in the "Advance" (Japanese high school text book word) of Japanese military forces in China.

The typical Japanese labor union groups members of a single corporation together rather than having unions of people with comparable skills also originated during the war years.

The unions that existed prior to the war were forcibly disbanded and replaced by "industrial patriotic associations" (Sangyo hokoku-kai) Managers and workers alike participated in these associations, the proclaimed aim of which also included "lifestyle guidance."

After the war, many labor unions sprang up, but most were modeled on these patriotic associations, often changing little more than the name. SCAP, or the mainly American occupation forces, looked at the companies and found they had a labor union so checked no further.

The sub contracting system pioneered by Matsushita was pushed as an emergency measure to step up production for the war effort. The need to rapidly transfer new technology and improve productivity meant this system was given government blessing. It also meant that workers in these sub contracts had no union protection and were expected to fulfill quotas without regard to conditions, hours of work or the like.

The corporate management pattern now seen as quintessentially Japanese was actually a plan cobbled together to help the government wage total war.

The version of state intervention – "administrative guidance" was merely a follow on of this plan. The government in 1940 published the "Outline for Establishment of a New Economic Order". This order clearly states that "capital, management and labor should become organized into an organic whole and raise productivity."

In 1942 A "National Financial Control Association" was organized around the Bank of Japan to act as an intermediary in setting up cooperative financing corporations. This allowed banks to finance certain client firms.

This was the start of the banking system as it still exists today where companies have special relationships with banks in return for the bank having a direct say in management. As an example: During the war Yasuda bank was the financier of NKK. After the war Yasuda bank changed its name to Fujii bank and carried on as before as financier to NKK..

Prior to this the financial system closely resembled that of the west. Companies grew through direct financing, principally by issuing new shares to raise funds. However, the government deliberately tilted the playing field by forcing companies who wanted to raise capital to do so by borrowing from state owned banks. This was to ensure that military related industries got the lion’s share of available capital.

This shift was a corollary of the shareholders being reduced to the same status as employees. Similarly company unions were clearly focussed on increasing production and not on members right per se.

So now we have the dead hand of wartime administration influencing the manner of Japanese corporate life.

With the rapid change in demographics and with eight years of economic stagflation it means that little will change until there is a total rethink.

How all this affects EWA members is that we are members of a labor union. Each school or institution has its own in house members union. This is part of management and its main function is merely to protect the status quo.

As most foreigners are not full time employed members of schools, colleges or institutions, there is no real protection from arbitrary decisions of management that affect number of classes, system of payment, salaries or indeed employment itself.

So it is best for all our sakes to belong to a union. Not just join a union when trouble prevails, but actually join in the sense of an insurance policy.

One of the strengths of the EWA is members support. However the real strength is in the knowledge of the union officers. They know the law and how it is applied.

In negotiations, when it is quoted that this is unique to Japanese culture it may help to defuse a situation by reminding the people that it is not unique, not truly Japanese, and stems from a series of war time enactments. I don’t think there is any need to point out how Japan fared in the war.


Message Board email Home	Member Contributions Christmas greeting: Collective bargaining by Peter Campbell 21 December 2006 I wanted to send you a Christmas greeting, but it is so difficult in today's world to know exactly what to say without offending someone. So I asked my solicitor yesterday, and on his advice I wish to say the following: Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral celebration of the summer solstice holiday, practiced with the most enjoyable traditions of religious persuasion or secular practices of your choice with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make our country great (not to imply that our country is necessarily greater than any other country) and without regard to the race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee. By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms: - this greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal; - it is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting; - it implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and the warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher. Disclaimer: No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. COMMENT An interesting union meeting with the staff at Kandai university held on Wed Dec 20. From the discussions:-- There are over 3,400 part time teachers employed by that university (450 teaching English) and as such many arbitrary decisions about their classes and which faculty they will be assigned to are made. At the union meeting several points were raised and amicably discussed. The main point being the cutting of member's classes. The college administration were not aware of this and will look into this. We have no doubt members number of classes will be protected. As for the other 3,400 part time teachers- they are at the whims of whimsy. In life one generally needs life insurance before investing in the purchase of a house or undertaking any major investment. Yet the biggest investment of all, one's job -should also have the same amount of fore thought and provision for the future. Namely, join a union. This acts like insurance. Always there when you need it. So for the 5 or so union members who went to the meeting. It was like using their insurance policy. A peace of mind. As for the other 1300 teachers wondering about the future. Two things are virtually assured. In the current six party talks being held in China, North Korea will break off talks and blame America and teachers will need to consider their positions in the light of the declining birthrate of Japan affecting student enrollment. Being there--being a member by Peter Campbell 11 February 2004 In December 2003, at a certain university rumors circulated to the effect that part time teachers were to be limited to teaching a maximum of 3 classes. This caveat of only 3 classes per person, per week, perhaps, was promulgated. Later, it was rescinded. Subsequently, the machinations, meanderings and mendacity behind this reasoning emerged. Some person anxious to make a name for himself, proposed this measure of limiting teachers to three classes because it would mean teachers would be "fresh". No one at the meeting seriously objected but simply went along with the flow. Then when this new policy was put into effect there were rumblings, mumblings and grumblings and naturally all the part time staff were not gruntled with this decision. When it was perceived to be unpopular the decision to limit classes was rescinded. But the reason for the remission of this policy was practical. It was difficult to recruit sufficient number of teachers to teach the required classes. What teacher is going to commute to teach one class on one afternoon a week. The immediate response was for several part time teachers to join the EWA. One member then went to this college to negotiate about his loss of classes. His 3 classes were extended to 5 classes So the salient lesson learned was--join a union. Once a decision has been reached in a committee it is very hard to ameliorate or amend such a decision. This is part of the Japanese psyche, the concept of "face". Now, universities are preparing employment contracts. The key point of which is that these are one year contracts with a termination date. The rationale for these is that with the decline in population, inevitably universities will also suffer decreasing numbers of students. So the logical thing to do is prepare for this eventuality and be ready to axe part time staff. Money will be a criteria in this. Already universities are losing a great source of revenue with their entrance exams. At ¥35,000 per person per pop, this was perhaps, one of the greatest revenue sources. Think how much a college would make if 3,000 applicants took an exam. Basically about ¥105,000,000 or $1million a year. Two years ago, mid level universities had up to 7,000 applications a year. So you do the math. As less numbers of students apply to go to university the rationale now swings towards seeking adequate numbers of students for the next source of revenue, tuition fees etc. So clearly there will be a need to economize and unfortunately this is often directed at the source that can least protest against it. The part time teacher. So, like insurance, union membership should be part of one's coverage. The knowledge that unfair actions will attract a legal response means universities will consider other ways of cost cutting. Perhaps really retiring tenured professors rather than allow them back ad infinitum. Often, one hears of the result of a successful union action. But the really successful action of the union is just being there. At another university, it appeared that the tenured teachers did not want to teach at night school or ni-bu. So an arbitrary act was to cut the teachers concerned with this program. After it was announced as a fait accompli there was a sudden change in attitude. Once it became apparent that sound trucks would be booming outside the said university, the person in charge of scuppering ni-bu, suddenly found alternate "elective" classes in lieu of the previously assigned classes at ni-bu. These are but two examples of the benefit of union membership. Colleges will seek better alternatives once they realize they are dealing with people who have formed a union to protect their rights. So the message is clear -- join a union and keep informed. To paraphrase John F. Kennedy-- The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. The eternal vigilance in our case is--our union fee. From time to time I come across interesting articles of what is happening today in Japan and abroad about unfair labour practices. I think it would be a good idea for members and others to submit some of these articles to your web site so that others can see the benefits of forming a union (and of course the possiblity with EWA).Some recent articles that I came across; http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20011106b4.htm http://mdn.mainichi.co.jp/news/20011105p2a00m0dm005000c.html Thanks..... Anthony Foth The Japanese System Incorporated by Peter Campbell 8 January 2001 Many of the special features of the Japanese system are not a result of a unique Japanese culture; rather they are anachronisms imposed during W.W.II. In order to understand what these structures are, and how they function, it is important to see where they came from and how they grew. Even most Japanese do not know the true roots of many of their institutions and policies that today govern their lives. They are not, as is often portrayed, a reflection of a unique Japanese character nor are they descended from Japanese social structure. They were, in the main, set in place during the late 1930’s and 1940’s to achieve specific war related goals. Even during the occupation, many of these institutions were allowed to continue, and many exist today, almost unchanged from over seven decades or over two generations ago. Article I: In order to exercise full power of the state economy, the objective of the bank of Japan will be to fulfill the role of adjusting the currency, regulating financial flows and maintaining and fostering the credit system, all in accordance with state policy. Article II: The Bank of Japan will be managed in accordance with its mission, to wit the fulfillment of all state objectives. If this reads like a piece of wartime legislation, it should. Because the definition of the role of the Bank of Japan --to reign over the Japanese economy, and all in the interests of imposing the will of the state on the people, was established during W.W.II. This law is still in place today. The law was enacted in 1942 in a conscious imitation of the Reichsbank Act passed by Nazi Germany in 1939. It is generally believed that Japan underwent drastic changes after her defeat in World War II and indeed she did. Many of the reforms were radical. Radical enough to be called a revolution. The striking changes such as democracy -- including women’s suffrage, freedom of thought and expression, an end to nationalistic education and the adoption of a new constitution, dissolution of the military and the break up of the zaibatsu and sweeping agricultural reform were revolutionary –for Japan. Yet there were many areas of the old system that were left untouched. The Japanese style corporation is often cited as a unique feature of Japan. The definitive areas of difference are:- lifetime employment, seniority based allocation of wages and positions, harmonious labor relations based on enterprise unions rather than trade unions, an ideology that gives top priority to the interests of the company, and a consciousness of the company as a community. All these points are direct results of the wartime economic policy. Simply put, the Japanese joint stock company is not an organization dedicated to generating profit for its shareholders, as is the case in other countries, but an organization for the mutual benefit for those who work for it. Rather like a model communist cooperative than a capitalist corporation. This is explained as a result of Japan’s unique cultural heritage. However, prior to the 1930’s, Japanese corporations were indeed a body for the benefit of the shareholders. The big changes happened during the war years. In 1938 the National General Mobilization law was enacted, including limitations in corporations’ dividend payouts , shareholders’ rights and the right to unionize. The effect was to make the corporation as an employee centered organization. From the 1920’s onward, heavy and chemical industries took on a growing importance in the economy creating a need for new skilled workers. Companies responded by devising a type of apprentice system, training their own engineers, welders, etc. and encouraged them to stay with the company. A wage guaranteed to rise with age was one enticement. In 1941 the government introduced a unified wage structure under which the seniority system was extended across the entire country. With one stroke of a pen, wages and prices were frozen by state decree at their levels for September 18, 1939. The government set starting salaries and annual increments. Thus the seniority system was imposed upon Japan. It was not the result of Japan’s unique culture, or a residue from the Tokugawa system of feudal law, it was simply a bureaucratic decision to enhance Japan’s war making capabilities against unexpected set backs in the "Advance" (Japanese high school text book word) of Japanese military forces in China. The typical Japanese labor union groups members of a single corporation together rather than having unions of people with comparable skills also originated during the war years. The unions that existed prior to the war were forcibly disbanded and replaced by "industrial patriotic associations" (Sangyo hokoku-kai) Managers and workers alike participated in these associations, the proclaimed aim of which also included "lifestyle guidance." After the war, many labor unions sprang up, but most were modeled on these patriotic associations, often changing little more than the name. SCAP, or the mainly American occupation forces, looked at the companies and found they had a labor union so checked no further. The sub contracting system pioneered by Matsushita was pushed as an emergency measure to step up production for the war effort. The need to rapidly transfer new technology and improve productivity meant this system was given government blessing. It also meant that workers in these sub contracts had no union protection and were expected to fulfill quotas without regard to conditions, hours of work or the like. The corporate management pattern now seen as quintessentially Japanese was actually a plan cobbled together to help the government wage total war. The version of state intervention – "administrative guidance" was merely a follow on of this plan. The government in 1940 published the "Outline for Establishment of a New Economic Order". This order clearly states that "capital, management and labor should become organized into an organic whole and raise productivity." In 1942 A "National Financial Control Association" was organized around the Bank of Japan to act as an intermediary in setting up cooperative financing corporations. This allowed banks to finance certain client firms. This was the start of the banking system as it still exists today where companies have special relationships with banks in return for the bank having a direct say in management. As an example: During the war Yasuda bank was the financier of NKK. After the war Yasuda bank changed its name to Fujii bank and carried on as before as financier to NKK.. Prior to this the financial system closely resembled that of the west. Companies grew through direct financing, principally by issuing new shares to raise funds. However, the government deliberately tilted the playing field by forcing companies who wanted to raise capital to do so by borrowing from state owned banks. This was to ensure that military related industries got the lion’s share of available capital. This shift was a corollary of the shareholders being reduced to the same status as employees. Similarly company unions were clearly focussed on increasing production and not on members right per se. So now we have the dead hand of wartime administration influencing the manner of Japanese corporate life. With the rapid change in demographics and with eight years of economic stagflation it means that little will change until there is a total rethink. How all this affects EWA members is that we are members of a labor union. Each school or institution has its own in house members union. This is part of management and its main function is merely to protect the status quo. As most foreigners are not full time employed members of schools, colleges or institutions, there is no real protection from arbitrary decisions of management that affect number of classes, system of payment, salaries or indeed employment itself. So it is best for all our sakes to belong to a union. Not just join a union when trouble prevails, but actually join in the sense of an insurance policy. One of the strengths of the EWA is members support. However the real strength is in the knowledge of the union officers. They know the law and how it is applied. In negotiations, when it is quoted that this is unique to Japanese culture it may help to defuse a situation by reminding the people that it is not unique, not truly Japanese, and stems from a series of war time enactments. I don’t think there is any need to point out how Japan fared in the war.
	Copyright © 2001-2004 EWA \| Legal Notice