Posts Tagged ‘dispatch’

Japanese TV news reports on poor working conditions of foreign English teachers

NTV’s “Real Time News” sometimes airs some pretty dumb special reports, but it also devotes considerable time to serious issues. Here’s a very good report on how using dispatch companies to employ foreign English teachers is killing the quality of English education in Japanese public schools and making foreigners endure poor working conditions (subtitled in English):
Part 1

These videos were originally uploaded by the General Union, which seems to be doing some good work fighting for better working conditions and posting the latest news on this issue.

• Akihabara News – Gadgetry from Japan (Subscribe)
• dannychoo.com – Your portal to Japan (Subscribe)
• Kirainet.com – A geek in Japan (Subscribe)

The Law Doesn’t Matter? Taking Your Dispatch Employer To Court (Rodou Shinpan) Part 2

Roudou Shimpan (Labour Court) Part 2

A special report by David Klan

[THIS IS THE SECOND PART OF A 3 PART SERIES. LINKS TO THE OTHER PARTS: PART 1, PART 3]

In the previous article I discussed the events that led up to my involvement in the Japanese legal system. After working for nearly 3 years as a System Engineer with a major manufacturer, my contract was abruptly terminated and I was dismissed from both my job and the dispatch company I was working through. After exhausting the options available through the Labour Standards offices, Hello Work, and the Dispatch Administration office, my lawyers and I submitted the case to the Roudou Shimpan (Labour Court). On October 30th at 10am I arrived at the court building located between Sakuradamon and Kasumigaseki.

I wisely chose Exit A1:

Image stolen from Google Earth:

Surrounded by people with problems, just like me… Except that their pharmaceuticals are making their livers explode:

And finally the building where all the magic happens:

Two lines lead in to the building, one for lawyers and another for the plebeians. That day there was a crowd of people waiting to pass security in the civilian line so we went around the back of the building to the Family Court entrance and made it upstairs on time for the first meeting. I brought two Japanese lawyers and one American lawyer with me. The Japanese lawyers, the president of the Dispatch company, and I entered a modest meeting room with a large, oval executive table surrounded by ten chairs. In the corner was a small desk where the reporter transcribed the events of the meeting.

I still haven’t figured out seating etiquette, so I left it to my lawyers. I sat near the end of the table away from the entrance and my lawyers sat in the middle followed by the President, nearest the entrance. Three men came in from another entrance and sat at the opposite side of the table: An HR representative, a judge, and a Union representative.

At the beginning of the meeting my lawyers requested that my American lawyer also be allowed to attend to help translate, but the president rejected that request and he had to wait outside during the proceedings. I noted that the president did not bring a lawyer, did not change his affidavit from the Mediation, and apparently had not consulted with a lawyer up to this point, either. I doubt that even up to this point he knew what sort of trouble he was facing.

The first order of business was deciding how to communicate. My Japanese is good enough to understand what is going on and contribute, but I was afraid that I may not understand some nuances and answer questions based on my faulty interpretation. The judge agreed that my lawyer should be able to rephrase questions in simple Japanese for me. And so the meeting started.

Within my affidavit, I included the following main items:

• Letters of Reference from my former employer showing that I performed my duties and had the support of my colleagues.
• An email from me stating my demands to the president and his response, promising to work to fulfill those requests.
• A copy of my passport showing my Visa status, the dates I was on business trips, business trip expense forms, and time sheets.
• A copy of the meeting minutes when I was let go from the Dispatch company on December 22, 2006.
• A copy of my bank statement showing that I had not been reimbursed for nearly 400,000Y ($3,500) of my travel expenses. I did not even realize this was missing until I studied my bank records after I was dismissed.

The judge needed to clarify three issues:

1. What conditions/contract I agreed to when I joined the company
2. How my employment ended
3. What happened to the business trip expenses

The judge started by asking me about the nature of my employment. I explained that I was employed as a dispatch worker through the president’s agency, but was working under full-time conditions with the manufacturer.

The judge asked the president to explain his company’s employment structure and to clarify why he was employing me in the way that he was.
–all quotes are paraphrased–
“I employ many foreigners and usually the foreigners prefer to take as much money as they can without worrying about things like insurance and taxes because they will just go back to their home countries in a few years. I’m doing nothing different than other dispatch agencies working with Canon, Mitsubishi, NEC, etc,.. I explained all of this to David during his interview and he said he just wanted the money.”

The judge asked me to explain what we talked about at the first interview.
“First of all, I have future plans in Japan and it wasn’t until after I was hired that I became suspicious about the conditions of my employment. The two previous employers I worked with employed me properly, taking care of my taxes, pension notebook (nenkin techou), and monthly pay slips itemizing deductions. The interview was three years ago and I only remember discussing wages, giving him my pension book and him handing it back to me saying that it was not necessary.” I still don’t know what the little blue pension book is for, but if he said I don’t need it, I was not ready to disagree right before starting a new job.

Then the judge went on to ask the president about how my employment ended.
“[David] told me he would quit if I could not fulfill all of his requests and give him a pay raise. I tried to get those things for him from the manufacturer, but they refused and we were left with no choice but to let him go. I guess it wasn’t as easy as he thought it was to find another job, eh? That’s why we’re here today. Life can’t be so sweet.”

And to me:
“Please refer to the email between us. After our meeting in October I wrote down exactly what we discussed. It says nothing about a payraise and I intentionally was not looking for money. I simply needed to be employed legally to allow me to pursue a career in Japan. Under the work conditions that were forced on me, I was like a transient here. I simply wanted to remedy that situation and used strong words to do it because they had not taken me seriously before then.”

Finally the judge asked the president about missing travel expenses and this was his response.
“Oh, that uh, my accounting executive takes care of that and I am not involved in the payroll system. However, I believe that the travel expenses were used to cover his apartment deposit and several months of rent that were not accounted for.”

The judge came back to me and asked if I understood what the president was talking about?
“Sorry, no idea. I understand the words that are coming out of his mouth but not the meaning.” I was never privy to their creative accounting practices.

During all of this, the HR and Union representatives were just listening and taking notes. They listened actively to me and nodded their heads as I explained myself. While the president was talking, all three of the panel were furrowing their brows and cocking their heads to the side as if to say, ‘this guy is deluded… drunk with power, perhaps?’

After the judge consulted with everybody, the next meeting was set for November 21, 2007. I was given the opportunity to appoint a court translator for around 40,000Y ($350), since the president was vetoing any outside help that I wanted to bring in.

The next meeting would prove more difficult to handle, as the judge probed further into the details to prepare for his decision…

The Law Doesn’t Matter? Taking Your Dispatch Employer To Court Using New Labor (Rodou Shinpan) Three Strike Procedure

Roudou Shimpan (Labour Court) Part 1

A special report by David Klan

[THIS IS THE FIRST PART OF A THREE PART SERIES. LINKS TO THE OTHER PARTS: PART 2, PART 3]

This series of articles will detail my case and the process of this new Labour Court for anybody unlucky or stupid enough to find themselves in a situation similar to my own. Sadly, many employers value cash over human capital and will criminally abuse their workers in order to line their own pockets and preserve corrupt relationships.

Capitalism at it’s finest, you say? Consider the costs involved in training a worker, the network of contacts that the worker develops and the expertise gained while on the job. The dispatch worker’s system was created to give companies a chance to temporarily hire a worker for one year before deciding whether or not to employ that person full-time. Many companies, however, will keep these dispatch workers for several years while exerting pressure on them to act as full-time employees and not enjoy the benefits of full-time employment. This is called gisou ukeioi, or disguised contract work, and it is an illegal business practice.

Several months after I started working as a Bridge System Engineer, I was sent to Holland to work on a large project. Over the course of my employment I would be sent to Holland six more times on various projects and also supporting other projects in Singapore, China, Indonesia, Australia and the United States. It was an exciting time and I loved the attention given to me for being the only native English speaker in a software division employing nearly 150 people. I strived to support my team and was in constant communication with my boss and fellow programmers to make sure that I wasn’t overstepping my bounds or creating unpleasantness. Anytime there were problems I would consult with my boss, offer up the necessary apologies and take corrective action to make sure that the same thing never happened again.

“Ishinoue nimo sannen” This Japanese saying means that you must sit on a rock for three years before you reap the benefits of hard work. I was coming up on that three year mark and starting to feel a sense of entitlement. The full-time workers and dispatch employees around me all had job security and were invested in the company. I did not have a contract with my dispatch agency, no monthly pay slips, no holidays, no insurance, no tax support, nothing. Just an amount that was deposited in my bank account every month.

I petitioned the dispatch company I was working with about these issues that conflicted with the Labour Standards Law. I brought these items up at several times during my employment, but was given typical face-saving gestures like promising to look into the problem and empathizing with my point of view. Finally, I made some serious steps to remedy the situation and was suddenly fired. In December of 2006, I was dismissed with only one week notice (kaikou sareta) from both the manufacturer, and the dispatch agency (hakken gaisha) I was working with. Not even a going away party, just one day I was working and the next day I was gone!

Was this standard treatment for anybody who spoke up? Would they treat a Japanese employee any differently? You bet your sweet ass they would, but I couldn’t take my employer to court for hurting my feelings. I was told by the manufacturer that the faceless HR entity routinely terminated contracts that were ‘having problems’ and to take it up with my dispatch agency. The dispatch agency said that my hard negotiating tactics had destroyed my position and they were no longer willing to employ such a dangerous gaijin.

Dismissing me was fine, if they had a good reason. In that case, they should just issue a proper termination notice (Taishokushomeisho) with the reason for my dismissal. First, the dispatch agency said they did not recognize the existence of the form, and then with pressure from the Labour Standards office they issued a form, but said that I quit voluntarily in order to avoid paying 3 extra weeks of pay. From that point on I was completely determined to see justice done, despite many friends encouraging me to forget about it and move on.

“The Japanese legal system is too complicated.”
“You’ll be in court for years before this is settled.”
“Good luck finding a lawyer to take your case.”
I started at the Labour Standards Office to see exactly what remedies were available to me. Since I had already been dismissed, there was little that they could do. A mediation system within the Labour Standards office called ‘Assen soudan’ will review your case and advise you on how to set up a meeting with the former employer and a Labour Law expert presiding as the judge. Free legal aid is also available in Tokyo, and I took an hour to use this service and get advice on how best to proceed with my complaint.

I found that the sum of my case did not rest on the conditions I was working under or any kind of discrimination, but on the fact that I had been terminated and then forced to say I quit. Luckily, I never said I quit and had email evidence stating that I needed legal employment status and consideration as a full-time worker. Yes, yes, I implied that I could find another job that offered me the things I was asking for, but I was very careful never to give the impression that I intended to quit.

I engaged in the Labour Standards mediation process and presented my case. The dispatch agency also presented their case and a judge reviewed both sides. We were interviewed separately and then at the end encouraged to reach a settlement. The judge informed me that I had a very strong position but the president of the dispatch company had said, “I will not give him a single yen!” So I had no choice but to move on to the next step.

With the help of good people, I managed to find some lawyers who believed in my case and they started working with me as soon as their schedule cleared up. The lawyers gave rock-solid advice and helped me draft a professional and legally relevant affidavit. We submitted it to the newly created Labour court (Roudou Shimpan). At first, we had doubts about sumitting the case to this court because the Roudou Shimpan just started in April 2006 and there is little information about the process and judgements.

The courts were getting swamped by the employment cases because of the number of companies blurring the lines between dispatch, contract, and full-time employees. The Roudou Shimpan was set up to churn out quick decisions for the disproportionate number of Labour related cases. The process should not take more than 3 meetings and 3 months before a decision is reached. They accomplish this by appointing a judge, a Labour Union representative and a Human Resources representative… technically arguing both sides of the issue so the judge can identify the facts and quickly decide. Lawyers are not necessary if you’re arrogant enough to presuppose that you don’t need them.

My lawyers submitted an affidavit to the Roudou Shimpan at the beginning of September and a court date was set for October 30th, 2007. In the next article I will discuss exactly what happened at the Labour Court.