Reform of the public service personnel system and basic labor rights

Reform of the public service personnel system was proposed by the Koizumi Administration two years ago, as part of its declared commitment to push for structural reforms in Japan. There is a risk, however, that unless some sort of agreement is reached among government, labor and management, submission of the bill to the current Diet session will be postponed.

Since 1948, when Japan was under US occupation, the basic labor rights of Japanese public service personnel have been restricted as follows.
(1) Public service personnel engaged in clerical work: Have the right to organize, but collective bargaining and strikes are banned.
(2) Industrial civil service staff members such as those engaged in printing, minting coins and notes, and forestry: Have the right to organize and to collective bargaining, but strikes are banned.
(3) Police, Fire Department, Self Defense Force and prison employees: Organizing, collective bargaining, and strikes are banned.

As compensation for these restrictions, the National Personnel Authority
--which is not subject to Cabinet command or orders in individual business operations--have traditionally overseen public service personnel's working conditions and benefits such as wages in the light of trends in the private sector.

The focus of the controversy involving the revised bill is as follows: On the one hand, the government and the ruling party are working to push reforms of the public service personnel system, most notably by introducing a performance-based grading system. Labor unions, on the other hand, state that, if that is the case, then they would strongly demand a revival of basic labor rights that would enable labor and management in the public service sector to voluntarily conduct negotiations and to conclude collective agreements, just like in the private sector.

Without these safeguards, the labor union side would strongly oppose the reforms, because (1) introduction of a performance-based grading system would ultimately weaken the functions of the National Personnel Authority and strengthen the authority of the Cabinet (their employer), and (2) the fact that "grading, which influences promotions, wage hikes and personnel transfers, should be subject to administrative management, not to negotiations" would result in labor unions being given no say whatsoever, leading to a situation in which employees' wages and appointments would be determined entirely to the advantage of the employers.

Shortly before this, in mid-April, the chairman representing the labor side on the ILO Board paid a call on the Japanese government and handed in a written request, urging the government to conscientiously fulfill the recommendations it had received from the ILO in the fall of 2002.

The written request featured the signatures of all of ILO's 33 board of directors on the labor side, who demanded that the Japanese government (1) reconsider their intention of publicly announcing its plan to maintain the existing regulations limiting public service personnel's basic labor rights, and (2) hold full-scale, frank, and meaningful discussions with the relevant labor unions to investigate the six items which the Committee for the Freedom of Association alleges that the existing system violate the principle of freedom of association.

The bill still leaves substantial room for discussion with the union side, whose members are urging the establishment of public service
personnel/labor relations that comply with international standards. Whether or not the bill will be submitted is largely up in the air, especially since the government hopes to avoid any unnecessary confusion in the Diet.