Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2000, Publicación: 89ª reunión CIT (2001)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Japón (Ratificación : 1965)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report, as well as the observations made by the Japan Federation of Prefectoral and Municipal Workers’ Unions (JICHOREN), the National Network of Fire-Fighters (FFN), the Tokyo Zenrodosha Kumiai Labour Union (NUGW), the Japan National Hospital Workers’ Union (JNHWU/ZEN-IRO), and the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC-RENGO). As concerns these last two observations, the Committee notes that no reply has yet been received from the Government. It therefore requests the Government to respond to the matters raised therein in its next report.

1.  Denial of the right to organize of fire-fighting personnel.  In its previous comments, the Committee recalled that the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference, when discussing the proposed system to establish fire defence personnel committees, had welcomed these developments with satisfaction as an important step towards the application of Convention No. 87. The Committee further noted, however, the hope expressed by the JICHOREN and the FFN in its previous comments under Convention No. 87 that the Local Public Service Law be amended in order to provide fire-fighting personnel with the right to organize. The Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of any relevant developments in the operation of the fire defence personnel committees and to indicate any steps envisaged to guarantee further the right to organize for fire defence personnel.

The Committee notes from the latest observations made by the JICHOREN and the FFN that they have considered the fire defence personnel committees as an advancement in providing an opportunity to state their own opinions and that they had made certain suggestions for further improvements. They further indicated that a survey conducted in 1999 demonstrated that there were a number of aspects of the present system that have not been working effectively. They maintain that the current system is not an alternative to the right to organize in regulations and once again express the hope that this right will be realized as soon as possible for fire defence personnel.

In this respect, the Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report concerning the functioning of the fire defence personnel committees and the results of their discussions. The Government has indicated that more than 150,000 pamphlets describing the system have been distributed to fire defence personnel and that, in order to ensure smoother application, the Government is providing each fire defence headquarters with guidance and advice. Moreover, in the future, the Government intends to continue to make efforts for smooth operation and firm establishment of this system, in cooperation with the parties concerned, such as organizations of workers, fire defence headquarters, etc.

The Committee takes due note of the concerns raised by the JICHOREN and the FFN, as well as of the efforts made and envisaged by the Government to ensure a smoother functioning of the fire defence personnel committees, in cooperation with the parties concerned. The Committee once again 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 guarantee further the right to organize for fire defence personnel.

2.  Prohibition of the right to strike of public servants.  In its previous comments, the Committee, having noted the comments 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 schoolteachers, emphasized the importance of taking measures so that public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State were not sanctioned for having exercised the right to strike.

The Committee notes the distinction made in the Government’s report in this regard to "specified independent administrative institutions" and "independent administrative institutions other than specified". In the former, the Government indicates that the personnel are national public employees and the right to strike is not granted, whereas in the latter, they are not national public employees and the right to strike is granted. The Government adds that the treatment of personnel differs between the two because operation delays in specified independent administrative institutions are deemed to directly and markedly hamper the stability of national life or the society and the economy.

The Committee recalls that the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service should be limited to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 158). It recalls that the earlier comments of JTUC-RENGO had also referred to public schoolteachers who the Committee does not consider to fall within the abovementioned category. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State, including public schoolteachers, are not sanctioned for having exercised the right to strike. Furthermore, it requests the Government to provide further information on the types of institutions classified as "specified independent administrative institutions".

3.  Compensatory guarantees for hospital workers.  In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1897 submitted by the Japan National Hospital Workers’ Union to the effect that the National Personnel Authority (NPA) which had been set up to compensate for the prohibition of the right to strike of public servants had issued a decision concerning night duty of nurses which had still not been implemented over 30 years later. The Committee drew the Government’s attention to the need to provide compensatory guarantees to workers whose right to strike was restricted. Such compensatory guarantees should be impartial and rapid and arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and implemented rapidly and completely (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 164.) Noting the recent comments made by the Hospital Workers’ Union, the Committee requests the Government to send any observations it might have on the matters raised in its next report.