Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

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

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's reports. It further notes the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1897 which was examined in November 1997 (see the 308th Report approved by the Governing Body at its 270th Session). It also notes the observations made by the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC)-RENGO, Japan Federation of Prefectural and Municipal Workers' Unions and by the National Network of Firefighters and the Government's replies thereto.

1. Denial of the right to organize of fire-fighting personnel. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted with interest that, following consultations with the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Fire Defence Agency and the All-Japan Prefectural Municipal Workers' Union (JICHIRO), the Bill to amend the Fire Defence Organization Law was passed on 20 October 1995. It requested the Government to supply a copy of the amended law and to provide information on the operation of the new system. The Committee notes with interest that, according to the Government's report, section 14-5 of the Fire Defence Organization Law as amended provides that a fire defence personnel committee shall be established in each fire defence headquarters in order to contribute to the effective operation of the fire service by discussing opinions proposed by fire defence personnel with regard to, inter alia, matters concerning remuneration, working hours and other working conditions and welfare of the fire defence personnel.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its latest report that the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Fire and Disaster Management Agency, in cooperation with the parties concerned such as the labour organizations and the fire defence headquarters, made thorough preparations by, inter alia, holding a national meeting with local governments to inform them of the new system. As a result of these efforts, the municipal regulations on the fire defence personnel committees have now been enacted and such committees have been established in all fire defence headquarters in Japan (as of April 1997 there were a total of 923 headquarters). In accordance with the municipal regulations, one-half of the members of the fire defence committees have been appointed by fire defence personnel and discussions concerning working conditions and other matters have begun.

The Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC)-RENGO indicated in its communication dated 6 October 1998 that these fire defence personnel committees have been effective in many of those fire district headquarters where there exist autonomous firefighter organizations. JTUC-RENGO added that it expected to continue to be actively involved in the management of the committee system so that the working conditions and organization of work at fire stations can be steadily improved and to continue its efforts so that firefighters can be guaranteed the same organizing rights as other public servants.

In a communication dated 1 June 1998, the National Network of Fire-Fighters (FFN) indicates that it is engaged in activities to guarantee the right to organize of firefighters in opposition to the Government which considers that the issue has already been resolved by setting up fire defence personnel committees at fire defence headquarters. The FFN states that the Government has not yet resolved this issue given that the Local Public Service Law has not yet been amended to provide fire-fighting personnel with the right to organize. It adds that there are a number of structural faults and problems with the fire defence personnel committees set up by the Government. These difficulties include a lack of representativeness of personnel, limitation to one meeting a year and censure on certain proposals for discussion. The Japan Federation of Prefectural and Municipal Workers' Union (JICHIROREN), for its part, recognizes the fire defence personnel committees as a significant advance allowing the personnel to express their views; however, it emphasizes that these committees are not equivalent to giving personnel the right to organize. JICHIROREN raises concern about the limited powers vested in these committees and their ability to improve working conditions effectively. Finally, JICHIROREN proposes a number of changes which would be necessary in order to make these committees more effective and insists that the law on local public personnel needs to be amended in order to ensure fully the right to organize for fire-fighting personnel.

The Committee takes note of this information and of the comments made by the various trade union organizations representing fire defence personnel. The Committee notes the difficulties raised by the FFN and the JICHIROREN and in particular their hope that the Local Public Service Law be amended in order to provide fire-fighting personnel with the right to organize. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, when discussing the proposed system to establish fire defence personnel committees to discuss opinions proposed by fire defence personnel with regard to, inter alia, matters concerning remuneration, working hours and other working conditions and welfare of the fire defence personnel, the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference welcomed these developments with satisfaction as an important step towards the application of Convention No. 87. The Committee therefore requests the Government to keep it informed of any pertinent developments in the operation of the fire defence personnel committees and to indicate any steps envisaged to further guarantee the right to organize for fire defence personnel.

2. Prohibition of the right to strike of public servants. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the observations made by JTUC-RENGO to the effect that there was a total ban on the right to strike for government employees both at the national and local levels, including for public school-teachers, and that dismissals and other sanctions due to strike action were quite common.

The Committee notes from the statement made by the Government in its report that the Supreme Court of Japan has maintained its judgement that the prohibition of strikes by state public employees is constitutional.

In its most recent communication, JTUC-RENGO indicates that new arrangements are being considered in respect of government employees who might be placed into new agencies outside the jurisdiction of the National Government Organization Law. These employees would apparently be given the choice between retaining their status as civil servants or becoming private sector workers. The former however would continue to be covered by the prohibition on strike action. The Committee recalls that the prohibition of strikes by public servants other than public officials acting in the name of the public powers may constitute a considerable restriction of the potential activities of trade unions (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 147). The Committee emphasizes the importance of taking the necessary measures so that public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State are not sanctioned for having exercised the right to strike. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any measures taken or envisaged in this respect in its next report.

Moreover, the Committee notes the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1897 concerning the trade union activities and strike action undertaken by the Japan National Hospital Workers' Union (JNHWU). While noting that the right to strike may be prohibited or restricted in the hospital sector, the Committee on Freedom of Association emphasized in Case No. 1897 that adequate protection should be given to the workers to compensate for the limitation thereby placed on their freedom of action. It underlined that such restrictions on the right to strike should be accompanied by adequate, impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration proceedings in which the parties concerned can take part at every stage and in which the awards, once made, are fully and promptly implemented. The Committee notes from these conclusions that, while the National Personnel Authority (NPA) set up to compensate for the prohibition on the right to strike of public servants had issued a decision concerning night duty of nurses in 1965, this decision was not implemented until 1996 (over 30 years later), despite several requests from the union and hospital directors, (see 308th Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, paragraph 479). The Committee draws once again the Government's attention to the need to provide compensatory guarantees to workers whose right to strike is restricted.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure in the future that adequate guarantees are provided to protect workers who have thus been denied one of the essential means of defending their occupational interests.