On July 17th, at the 24th Central
Executive Committee Meeting, RENGO endorsed its stance on the “Amendment
to the Guidelines for Part-time Workers*” prepared by the Ministry of Health,
Labour and Welfare Labour Policy Council’s Equal Employment Opportunity
Subcommittee. (*Guidelines for Employers on Improving, Employment Management,
etc. of Part-Time Workers; hereafter referred to as the Guidelines.) Based
on RENGO’s principles, the Subcommittee members for the labor side will
attend deliberation of the amendment scheduled to begin on July 22 and work to
reflect RENGO opinion so the amendment to the Guidelines will help establish equal
treatment of part-time workers no matter how slight. In its report, “Directions
For Future Part-time Labor Measures” compiled in March, the Subcommittee
only presented a revision of the Guidelines without changing the current language
in the Part-Time Work Law (Law Concerning the Improvement of Employment Management,
etc. of Part-Time Workers); namely that ‘employers shall endeavor to promote…’
Subcommittee members for the labor side added a statement in opposition to this.
|
1. Progress
| (1) |
The Subcommittee members for the labor side added a statement against the
“Directions For Future Part-time Labor Measures (Report).”
The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare Labour Policy Council’s Equal
Employment Opportunity Subcommittee compiled “Directions For Future Part-time
Labor Measures (Report)” (hereafter referred to as the Report) on March
18, this year. Subcommittee members for the labor side added an “opposition
statement” from the following points: [1] the report does not clarify that
equal treatment principles must be legislated, [2] RENGO is demanding that the
Democratic Party of Japan formulate the “Part-Time/Fixed-Term Labor Law.”
|
| (2) |
The report was compiled on the basis of opinions gathered from members representing
the public interest and members representing employers. The report said that the
Guidelines in Article 8 of the current Part-Time Work Law should be revised without
changing the basic idea in Article 3 that stipulates that: “employers shall
endeavor to promote…in due consideration of the actual work conditions of
part-time workers concerned, and maintain balance with regular workers by securing
proper working conditions…etc.” which has no binding legal power. |
| 2. |
Whether to Attend
the Equal Employment Opportunity Subcommittee & Deliberation Schedule |
| (1) |
Whether to Attend the Equal Employment Opportunity Subcommittee |
| |
Subcommittee members for the labor side who oppose the Report may choose not
to attend however, they should try to attend and promote RENGO’s opinions
at the subcommittee.
Reasons for attendance are by discretion of the following criteria: [1] the fact
that RENGO is seeking legislation to establish equal treatment principles but
has been dismissed as a minority opinion, and the Report was compiled from majority
opinions which seek revision of the Guidelines. [2] RENGO will continue to seek
legislation to establish equal treatment. Given the present conditions, it is
expedient to promote RENGO’s opinions at the Subcommittee to advance its
movement so the “Guidelines Amendment” which would have a real impact
on part-time workers can work to establish equal treatment for part-time workers
even if only slightly.
|
| (2) |
Equal Employment Opportunity Subcommittee Schedule |
| |
Amendment of the current Guidelines will be submitted and discussed at the
July 22 Subcommittee and scheduled to be discussed and reported on July 28. |
| 3. |
RENGOĦs Items for Revision and Platform |
| (1) |
Platform Stance |
|
| [1] |
Express RENGO views from the standpoint of: whether or not the
Guidelines Amendment is formulated in accordance to the Report; whether or not
there are items with omitted words from the Report; if there are such changes
and/or omissions, it is necessary to specify the reason for the change(s). |
| [2] |
Further, state opinions at the Subcommittee keeping in mind an ‘administrative
notice,’ which will be formulated after the Guidelines are revised. |
| [3] |
The following was assembled at sessions of the Part-time Labor Project Meeting,
Equal Employment Opportunity Subcommittee Members’ Meeting and elsewhere. |
|
| (2) |
RENGO Items For Revision |
|
| [1] |
Insert “realization of fair treatment” into “Article 1.
Purpose.”
| Reason: |
the ‘fair treatment’ in the Report includes the notion of creating
social rules. The tone of the Report that suggests these Guidelines will be the
bedrock of realizing fair treatment should be clearly specified in the Guidelines. |
|
| [2] |
Change the following new proposed addition to the Amendment Guidelines “Article
2. The basic idea when employers enact measures they should take for the improvement
(etc.) of employment management for short-time workers…” to “Article
3. The basic idea when employers consider the balance (etc.) they should take
between short-time workers and regular workers.” Include the idea presented
in the Report ‘treatment of part-time workers who have same type of work
as regular workers’ into the Amendment.
| Reason: |
if workers protection legislation which should be applied to all the part-time
workers and the concept of balancing the treatment of regular workers with part-time
workers doing the same type of work were treated together as a basic idea, then
the Guidelines might lead to limit to only the specific part-time workers. |
|
| [3] |
Put the following items in the Report into the Amendment: whether or not the
type of work is the same and whether or not the structure and implementation of
worker utilization is the same, these matters should be judged while taking the
real conditions of the workplaces into consideration. When doing so, sufficient
consideration is necessary so as not to bring about confusion. It is also desirable
that attention be paid to family responsibilities such as child care/nursing care
in the structure and implementation of worker utilization.
| Reason: |
Consideration of the real conditions of workplaces and family responsibilities
are important matters when conducting legislation. |
|
| [4] |
RENGO seeks that the following line: “The basic idea when employers
consider the balance they should adopt between short-time workers and regular
workers” be included in Article 3. Put in the amendment that regular wages,
annual bonuses and extra pay, retirement allowances, and annual paid holidays
are matters that employers should consider when employers handle part-time workers
who do the same type of work as regular workers.
| Reason: |
Clarify those items which should be decided proportionally. |
|
| [5] |
Change “the same” to “similar” in the following part
of the Amendment: “for part-time workers who have the same type of work
as regular workers.”
| Reason: |
if the word were ‘the same,’ it may be understood as ‘only
the case where exactly the same work is performed.’ Part-time workers engaged
in ‘equivalent’ work should be included. |
|
| [6] |
Article 3-3: “Employers shall endeavor to take steps for treatment,
in due consideration of the content of work, motivation, ability, experience,
accomplishment, etc.,” should be changed to “Employers shall…to
take steps for treatment concerning the balance between part-time and regular
workers in due consideration of the content of work….”
| Reason: |
There are many part-time workers who have different work than that of regular
workers. It is necessary to improve treatment for those part-time workers by positioning
them in the Guidelines. |
|
| [7] |
Add the following to the Article 3-3: “Employers should endeavor to
establish mechanisms to improve the treatment of part-time workers along with
changing the content of their work and roles or improving their ability.”
| Reason: |
it is crucial to try to provide incentives for part-time workers by creating
mechanisms to regulate a system for treatment such as by raising wages and promotions.
The Part-Time Labor Study Group of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
also states this in Rule 3 of its Guidelines on the Balanced Treatment of Short-Time
Workers. |
|
| [8] |
“Article 3-5 (1) …when an explanation of the treatment of a short-time
worker is asked for…” This should be changed to “…when
an explanation ‘of disparities or reason(s) in the treatment between regular
workers and’ short-time worker…”
| Reason: |
The presence or absence of disparity in treatment, rationality, and plausibility
are important issues. The Part-Time Labor Study Group of the Ministry of Health,
Labour and Welfare also states this in Rule 1 of its Guidelines on the Balanced
Treatment of Short-Time Workers. |
|
|
| (3) |
Items of Possible Great Influence in the Treatment of Workers through Interpretation |
|
| [1] |
Regarding the criterion for judging whether or not a type of work is the same,
include the following; the range of work in normal conditions, combinations of
work, the minimum ability necessary to perform the work, the difficulty of the
work, the extent of responsibilities required and the amount of authority given
when performing the work. |
| [2] |
If “whether or not the business has such a principle policy” is
taken into account when considering a “system of utilizing human resources,”
this may result in the fear of discriminatory treatment due to the fact that the
employment management of regular workers and part-time workers is different. Try
not to take that concept, instead judge by rationality and real conditions. |
| [3] |
See that criterion for judgment of “motivation, ability, experience,
accomplishment, etc.” is not subjective but objective. |
| [4] |
Add “to provide information” in the following item “Employers
should endeavor to introduce systems and develop necessary conditions…with
regard to short-time workers changing to regular worker status.” |
| [5] |
Employers should not treat workers unfavorably because workers asked for
an explanation of their treatment. |
|
|
