Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 363, Marzo 2012

Caso núm. 1991 (Japón) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 12-OCT-98 - Cerrado

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 163. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns allegations of anti-union discrimination arising out of the privatization of the Japanese National Railways (JNR) taken over by the Japan Railway Companies (the JRs), at its March 2009 meeting [see 353rd Report, paras 128–132]. On that occasion, recalling that it had dealt with this case in some depth since 1998, and observing that it was apparently not possible at the time to bring the parties together with a view to rapidly finding a negotiated solution to these matters that had been pending for two decades, the Committee once again expressed its hope that the courts would bring a rapid resolution to this long-standing dispute. It once again requested the Government to keep it informed of developments in this respect, and to transmit copies of the court judgments in the various pending cases as soon as they were handed down.
2. 164. In a communication dated 29 August 2011, the Government indicates that a compromise solution has eventually been found between 904 out of the 910 plaintiffs and the defendant to bring this case to a satisfactory conclusion for all parties concerned.
3. 165. The Government indicates that, on 9 April 2010, four Japanese political parties offered a proposal to the Government for a political resolution of the conflict covering 910 plaintiffs belonging to the unions concerned. The outline of this proposal was as follows: (i) the defendant would pay compromise money of about ¥15.63 million to each plaintiff; (ii) the defendant would pay the plaintiffs as a group additional money of ¥5.8 billion; (iii) employment by the JRs would be requested; and (iv) the defendant and plaintiffs would enter into a judicial compromise and withdraw all lawsuits.
4. 166. The Government further indicates that 904 out of the 910 plaintiffs and the JRs agreed to this proposal on 28 June 2010, with the understanding that the settlement money would be conclusive, and that re-employment by the JRs would be sought but could not be enforced.
5. 167. The Government adds that, on 13 June 2011, it conducted mediations by submitting to each of the JRs concerned the list of plaintiffs who were seeking employment. The Government indicates that the JRs did not accept to employ the workers concerned.
6. 168. With respect to the lawsuits concerning three workers out of the six among the 910 plaintiffs who did not consent to the compromise solution and continued the lawsuits, the Government indicates that the Supreme Court confirmed the judgment of the Tokyo High Court (which awarded “consolation money” to the plaintiffs).
7. 169. In a communication dated 26 October 2011, the National Railway Workers’ Union-Kokuro indicates that it had decided at its Extraordinary National Conference held on 26 April 2010 to accept the political agreement reached on 9 April 2010. It adds that consequently a settlement was reached at the Supreme Court and all pending cases involving KOKURO were dropped. It had further urged the Government to play an active role in the implementation of the political agreement, with a view to obtaining the re-employment of the dismissed workers. When the JRs expressed their intention not to accept the re employments, the issue was discussed with the Democratic Party of Japan’s Diet members, but it was understood that it would be extremely difficult to change this position. After long consideration of the matter, KOKURO decided to close the dispute, following the decision of the workers not to further seek re-employment. KOKURO adds that, while regretting that it was not possible to obtain the requested re-employment of the dismissed workers, it decided, at its 80th Annual National Conference in July 2011, taking due account of the compromise solution which had been reached, to officially confirm the end of the dispute. KOKURO underlines that support from the ILO greatly contributed to the settlement of the case and expresses its appreciation.
8. 170. The Committee wishes to underline that it has been dealing with this case in some depth since 1998, with two detailed examinations on the merits [318th and 323rd Reports] and seven follow-ups [325th, 327th, 331st, 334th, 343rd, 349th and 353rd Reports]. Since its first examination, and on almost every occasion throughout its treatment of this case, the Committee had urged the parties concerned to engage in serious and meaningful consultations with a view to reaching a satisfactory solution to the underlying dispute. The Committee therefore wishes to recognize the efforts made by all the parties concerned and to express its satisfaction at the fact that it has eventually been possible to find a compromise solution to this long-standing dispute, essentially through an important financial compensation for 904 out of the 910 workers concerned. The Committee also notes that, concerning three of the six workers who did not accept the compromise solution, the case has been judicially settled by a final decision of the Supreme Court confirming the judgment of the Tokyo High Court which awarded “consolation money” to the workers concerned.