Equal Employment Opportunity Law
In 1975, the United Nations (UN) declared a decade gram of intensive capitalist rationalisation and the
The decade is drawing to a close and very mainstream, little has been achieved in concrete terms. union movement failed to give any backing to working traditional, for women.
women, thereby deepening the alienation of the mass the UN launched a Convention on the Elimination of of working women from the trade unions.
All Forms of Discrimination Against Women with 130 the beginning of the 1980s, the capitalist countries supporting it. Today very tew countries have government of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)
implemented even the limited demand on and the bourgeoisie started a serious programme of any governments have started legislation for women's equality, it has largely been to suit their own requirements or those of the capitalist cause of the weakness of the trade-union movement class. The example of Japan is a good illustration of they were successful in this and are now campaigning for new changes in the various labour codes.
this.
Equal Employment Opportunity Bill, proposed by the government in response to the UN convention is cur-
*** rently under debate in parliament and is, in fact, part
Since the beginning of the 1980s, an autonomous of the campaign to change conditions of labour.
women's movement has again been gathering momen-
Since the beginning of the 1980s, the autonomous
There was a rise of the women's movewomen's movement tum in Japan.
again recently outside the traditional framework of the ment, composed mainly of young women, the general youth radicalisation in the early 1970s but workers' movement.
tendencies within it and the focus at present is the the movement lost its momentum in the mid-1970s campaign against the Equal Employment Opportunity when the Japanese far left was thrown into general disarray.
Saitama Women Against War, the author of the fol-
Throughout the latter half of the 1970s and the lowing article is an independent feminist group in the early 1980s, especially after the deep economic depression of 1975-76, the inferior and discriminatory
This article was first published in Ampo magazine, No 3, Vol 16, 1984.
position of working women was reinforced by a pro-
In 1982 women in Japan successfully obstructed the government's attempt to revise a law to control and regulate a women's right to choose abortion. They
"Women's 1982 Coalition organized the to Stop Reversion of the Eugenic Protection Law,"
stating that "It is not the state but women who make the decision whether to give birth or not. This is the right of women."
Since 1983, Japanese women again have been uniting together, this time to fight against another government attempt to enact an equal employment opportunity law.
On May 20, 1984, more than 2,000 women and trade unionists from different sectors gathered at a rally in Tokyo to their anger at the proposed express
"Equal Employment Opportunity Bill."
What is wrong with the bill? To understand this, one has to see the government's intent behind this bill, and the of working women in situation actual
Japan.
In 1979, the UM Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against women was adopted and agreed to by 130 countries. So far 54 countries, including Japan, have signed the Convention. Thus, the Nakasone government is now forced to ratify the
Convention and to institute a domestic law connected with it by 1985, the final year of the UN Women's Decade.
In-
International Viewpoint 25 February 1985
In 1979, as part of Tokyo area. stead of promoting equality, however, the government is trying to utilize this opportunity to reinforce discrimination against women by deleting protective clauses in the Labor Standard Law. Of course Nakasone has to do something ostensibly in favor of women's rights, and his government has therefore drafted a token "equality" bill.
•Women constitute half the world's population, perform nearly two-thirds of its work hours, recieve one-tenth of the world's income and own less than one-hundredth of the world's property? United Nations Report, 1980.
According to the "Labor Force Survey" conducted by the Prime Minister's Office in 1982, there were 14.18 million female workers, constituting 34.6 per cent of the entire labor force. That is nearly double the 7.38 million of 1960. However, half of the increase over the past ten years has been due to the increase in part-time workers. At present, 2.84 million women are part-time work-
- left reformist and tradeattacks on the public sector. Behas been gaining momentum There are various currents and ers, constituting 20.2 percent of all women employees. Part-time workers have particularly none of the rights or security of regular workers. It may be easy for them to find work, but they are dismissed just as easily. In general, the salaries of women are about half that of men, but part-time workers receive no more than about half of what full-time working women receive. The fact that the number of part-time workers is rapidly increasing despite such poor conditions points to finding any other kind of job. Part-time jobs are certainly not considered desirable for women who want or need to have a dependable, steady job.
In the following survey of the situation of Japanese female workers, it is important to keep in mind that the universally-held concepts in Japanese society about sex role divisions places the double burden of housework and child care exclusively on women.
Japan is unrivaled among the industrially advanced nations in the unwilling ness of its industry to employ female graduates of four-years university. According to a 1981 survey by the Labor Ministry, 70.9 per cent of corporations hire only male university graduates.
The same survey also showed that many companies make special requirements for the women that they hire, such
15
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
JAPAN
as insisting that they live with their parents or extracting pledges to quit their jobs when they marry. In all, 24.3 per cent of the companies surveyed replied that they set different conditions for hiring men and women high school graduates, while 37.8 per cent did so for university graduates.
The Labor Standards Law says nothing about discriminatory conditions applied at the stage of hiring. It is clear from the results of the above survey alone that an effective Equal Employment Opportunity Law would have to outlaw discriminatory procedures at the stage of hiring. Later on, we will offer other examples that make this point even more powerfully. Indeed, we will show that the absence of such provisions in the bill now before the Diet [parliament] makes the proposed law not only weak but almost completely ineffective against sex discrimination.
Until 1978, the gap between men's and women's average wages had been closing. Taking average wages for men as 100, women's wages were 56.2 in that year. However, from 1978 on, this differential has instead been increasing, so that in 1982 women were receiving only 52.6 per cent of what men received.
A 1975 decision by the Akita Regional Court ruled that separate wage scales for men and women were a violation Article 4 of the Labor Standards Law. However, it would be a great mistake to overestimate the efficacy of this ruling Unquestionably, it is a major landmark, but it is important to realize that discrimination is not so easily abolished. All a company need do to perpetuate the system of wage sex discrimination is to have different scales for different job classifications. Many companies do just artificial distinctions between "general" and "clerical" jobs, the classification referring to jobs by men, the latter meaning jobs allotted mainly to women. Another ploy is accepting men as seisha-in (regular employees) while women employees are as shokutaku ("special commission," i.e., hired to do one specifie job and not eligible to broaden their job skills). Another distinction is between
"part-time" workers, which does not necessarily mean that the employees do not put in a full working day. It only means that they receive minimal wages.
Looking at the overall breakdown of jobs held by women, the biggest class is office workers, who amount to 4.71 million (33 per cent). This is followed by skilled industrial or line workers: 3.71 million (26 per cent); specialists, such as teachers, nurses, doctors and engineers: 1.87 and sales personnel: 1.69 million (12 per cent). With the exception of a relative handful of highly qualified specialists, the vast majority of women workers are confined to supportive, secondary work, with low wages and other undesirable workings attached. Denied opportunities to increase their job skills, women are 16
Sohyo activists at peace demonstration (DR) then penalized financially in companies using different pay scales for different jobs. One reason sometimes given by industry for women's low wages is the relative short hours that they work. This is the logic of a business world accustomed to the long hours of "voluntary" overtime of its workers, often for inadequate compensation or even no compensation at all. Claims such as this show that women's struggle against exploitation by industry is really an inseparable part of the struggle of all Japanese Gap between men's and women's wages accelerates
As it now stands, the Labor Standards Law prohibits late night labor for women. It cannot be denied that there is a sprinkling of women taxi drivers or women with jobs in the mass media restriction places them at an unfair disadvantage, and want protective legislation for women abolished. Perhaps even these women might agree it is the prevailing for women that are behind their desire for late night work. But these cases are hardly central to the very serious issue of protective legislation. They are cited most often by the very ones with the least concern for women's for example, Japanese Federation of Economic Organizations), which, failing to quash the very idea of an Equal Employment Opportunity Bill, has done the next best thing by hamstringing the bill offered by the representatives of labor on the drafting
In the area of pay rises, the gap between men's and women's wages widens at an ever accelerating pace number of years on the job. For example, in one trading company, men's pay rises automatically in five stages, while there are only three stages for women. Furthermore, it takes an average of 11 years longer for women to reach the third stage than it does for men.
Women also are discriminated in the area of special allowances, which constitute a part of the salary. According to a well established "social principle, married men are "heads of household." For this reason, they alone are considered eligible for family or housing allowances, etc. Few married women receive
Thanks to a number of judicial decisions, there has been a reduction in the number of companies with rules for disretirement of female employees when they marry, become pregnant or give birth. But even if it has become unfeasible for companies to have rules such as this, there are still many companies resorting to harassment tactics aimed at making life intolerable for women who attempt to remain at their jobs in de-
"company custom." without this kind of overt discrimination, society, which puts burden of child care on women alone and does not provide adequate day care facilities, all too often very effectively discourages women from continuing their jobs after they have children.
The ongoing computerization of office work in recent years and similar microelectronic innovations has also been a powerful factor in promoting early retirement for women. The new technology is being introduced at a faster pace than measures for the protection of employees health. The vast majority of office computer operators are women. Working conditions are often harsh, with the result that women find themselves unable to continue the jobs more than 2-3 years. Companies cheerfully accept their resignations and employ more young women
In 1980, 21.3 per cent of Japan's civil service workers were women. Although the civil service field operates according to a supposed principle of equality of the sexes providing, for example, the same
International Viewpoint 25 February 1985
salaries for all workers in a given job, sex discrimination is just as much reality of life here as in private industry.
We have seen that there are all sorts of ways in which hired women suffer discrimination. Court decisions and the expanding female labor pool notwithstanding, discriminatory practices are actually on the increase. The most exploitative tactic by industry by far in recent years has been the hiring of women as "part-time" workers to do essentially the same work that regular employees do. This practice is now showing a remarkable rate of growth. The "part-time" designation is used as an excuse for giving minimal wages and no benefits or job security of any kind; it does not necessarily signify short working hours. According to a survey conducted by the Prime Minister's Office, around 70 per cent of "part-time" workers put in 6-8 hours a day, and more than half work 6 days a week. For this, the part-time workers only receive an average of 55.3 percent of the wages of female "regular employees." Among companies employing part-time workers, only around 40per percent provide some kind of workers compensation, while around 40-60 per cent give allowances, pay increases or bonuses. Less than 10 per cent give retirement bonuses.
For an equal employment law to be effective, it must prevent discrimination at the stage of hiring. The Equal Employment Opportunity Law that is now in the process of being adopted has no such provision. The inevitable result will be to encourage current hiring practices whereby women are forced to settle for low paying jobs with no job security or employee benefits.
Of course, no law can cover all the ways women may be subjected to discriminatory treatment. However, even the present Labor Standards Law, which only deals with wages in the area of sex discrimination, is often ignored by Japan's industries in its application to male as well as female workers. From this fact, it is clear that sex discrimination is part of a general pattern resulting from the generally weak position of all of Japan's workers. Existing laws are completely inadequate to deal with strongly rooted institutions of sex discrimination. It is lamentable that the Equal Employment Opportunity Law now under consideration does not provide the means necessary for true implementation of the UN Convention against sex discrimination.
It should be noted that Japan's signing of the Convention was a reaction to cer tain pressures, which of course included the various women's movements within Japan. However, far more decisive was an awareness of the criticisms from Europe and the United States of the long working hours with inadequate compensation put in by Japanese workers as a contributing factor to economic friction. (See Table 1) The Japanese government felt that signing the convention would be one way of placating that criticism. Thus, the sinInternational Viewpoint 25 February 1985 cerity of Japan's commitment to equality of the sexes was open to question from the beginning. Now that we have seen the government's proposal for an equal employment opportunity law in response to the provisions of Article 11 of the Convention, its intentions are quite clear. The female workers of Japan are to have equal opportunity in name only. In fact, the proposed law arms industry with ample loopholes to continue their exploitative use of female labor if they so choose.
Table 1 Only workers in Japan work more than 2000 hours a year Hours
2147 2000 1888 1893
1706 1768 1000 -
Source: Ministry of Labour
"Statistics of Labor" (1983)
The process of producing the draft Equal Employment Opportunity Law now before the Diet began with deliberation by the Women's and Minor's Problems Council, an advisory panel to the Labor Minister. This council consists of representatives from three sectors: management, labor and "the public weal'. It soon became clear that management and labor were poles apart in their views. The enormously powerful Japan Federation of Economic Organizations threw all its weight against labor's attempts to create a law with teeth. At the same time, a coalition of women's rights groups staged a series of sit-ins at the Labor Ministry to demand a law. In February, 1984, the Council presented a draft plan to the Labor Ministry.
The bill which emerged from this consists of two parts. Part one is concerned with the revision of the Working Women's Welfare Law and the second part with the revision of the Labor Standards Law. Thus, the first most striking point is that the government has no desire to create any new laws. Instead, it wants to revise for the worse the Working Women's Welfare Law, renaming it the "Law On Equal Opportunities for Men and Women, the Securement of Equal Treatment of Female Workers in Labor and Other Fields and The Promotion of the Welfare of Female Workers" (unofficial translation). In other words, the Japanese Government has made the problem of sex equality into a problem of welfare. In so doing, it is dispensing with a fundamental concept of the Convention, that of ensuring "the right to work as an inalienable right of all human beings" (Article 11, Paragraph A).
The first part of the bill deals with recruitment. It states that with regard to hiring, job assignment and promotions, employers "must endeavor to deal with women on a basis of equality with men." However, the Convention that Japan signed aims for a lot more than an "obligation to endeavor." Article two, Paragraph B of the Convention provides that signing states agree, "to adopt appropriate legislative and other measures, including sanctions where appropriate, prohibiting all discrimination against women." Japan's proposed law provides no penalties for employers who discriminate. Nor does it provide an effective course of appeal to women who have suffered discrimination. To this date, the only path that is open to women seeking to legally challenge discrimination is in the courts. Thanks to a few courageous individuals, some important battles have been won since the 1970s. They were won only after many years, at great financial cost and incalculable personal anguish. These suits were all based on one law, specifically, Article four of the Labor Standards Law, which deals only with wage discrimination. Despite the fact that the Constitution bans sex discrimination in general, there are no other laws besides this one that deal with sex discrimination. This means that there is no effective ban on any of the many other types of job discrimination (e.g., discrimination in hiring, promotion, dismissal, training, etc.) because, according to Japanese legal procedure, the Constitution itself cannot be invoked in suits involving private contracts. The proposed new law with its absurd obligation to endeavor" offers no mechanism with the power to compel compliance and is therefore no help at all.
The draft says that there shall be no discriminatory treatment in the areas of job training, welfare benefits, retirement age, resignation or retirement. However, by its failure to provide against discrimination at the stage of hiring, employers are as free as ever to hire women for specific "women's" jobs, enabling them to deny women's training for other jobs that may be more responsible, better paying, or lead the way to advancement. The painfully won battles in the areas of discriminatory retirement ages and forced resignations still stand. However, this does not mean that these practices have been effectively abolished. Quite the contrary, instances of discrimination in these areas are still to be found. What is needed is a law that would provide for penalties of sufficient weight to discourage employers from discriminating. The draft plan does not do this. With this law, working Japanese women will be no better defended than they ever were. Indeed, they will be in a worse state.
The bill will establish a series of
17
----- photo credits and running heads -----
West Germany Japan France England United States
"Labor Opportunity Arbitration" Committees at the prefectural level as a means for resolving disputes. However, there are two conditions attached to these committees: firstly, they will not handle disputes concerning recruitment practices or conditions attached to hiring what jobs will be placed open to what applicants) and secondly, arbitration can only be carried out when both the complaining party and the employer agree to the arbitration. Thus, all the employer need do is give a refusal, and there will be no arbitration. Neither are the Committees empowered to deal with discrimination at the stage of hiring. This constitutes perhaps the biggest loophole of all for the benefit of the employer. He or she need only create different job classifications (with different wage scales, of course) for men and women at his/her convenience in order to continue the customary pattern of sex discrimination, all within the spirit and letter of this toothless law.
In short, the arbitration committees are perfectly hamstrung at the outset. They are prohibited from dealing with fundamental areas of discrimination to begin with, and they don't have any power of enforcement anyway.
The second part of the proposed law revises a portion of the Labor Standards Law. Specifically, - It abolishes restrictions on labor outside of regular working hours or on holidays for women who work at jobs requiring special skills; - It removes the rule for two hours of overtime a day for industrial jobs. At present, the overtime limit is 12 hours a week and 150 hours a year. This means that overtime can be demanded up to a maximum of 14 hours per day. - Concerning other kinds of jobs, the present limit of 150 hours a year will be changed according to the following wording. "Time to be determined by order, within a range of more than 150 hours and less than 300 hours". If a limit of 300 hours is set, that would provide for just double the amount of overtime now permitted.
This final point raises the possibility that long working hours will be forced on the individual or even that agreeing to customary overtime could be made a condition for hiring. This is an extremely dangerous situation for men as well as for women. Japanese workers are already putting in 300-400 hours a year more than Americans and Europeans. This law aims to widen the gap even more.
The draft permits late night hours (from 10 pm through 5 am) for female workers in: - Supervisory jobs and specialist jobs; - Part-time jobs whose nature requires late night duty; — Other jobs for which approval has been received from the appropriate government agency on the basis of a request from the individual.
Concerning dangerous jobs, the present law is addressed to the "protection of minors and females," but the 18
Families of arrested workers (DR)
changes this to refer "women who are pregnant or women for whom less than one year has passed since giving birth." In other words, the new law would apply only to expectant or recent mothers. At present it is not yet clear what exactly will constitute "dangerous jobs," but from the government's present stance, it can probably be expected that it will continue its relaxation of protection for workers under the Labor Stan-
"The society that we envision will not prescribe work according to sex roles. Men and women will both have the right to work. Each individual will be able to lead a life in which she or he can realize their own potential. This is the meaning of true equality.'
It is quite clear that if the Equal Employment Law and revision of the Labor Standards Law package proposed by the government is adopted, working conditions for women will become much worse than they are now. As long as this "Equal Employment Law" does not prohibit discrimination at the stage of hiring, industry will be free to seek different qualifications in the men and women they hire and hire them for different jobs. The disclaimer that women were hired fer different reasons hardly serves as a reasonable excuse for discrimination. But the draft Equal Employment Law will encourage this kind of discrimination at the very outset.
For manufacturing industries on the three-shift system, incorporation of women into the late-night shifts would be a way of cutting costs, because statistics show that women receive an average wage of only 43 per cent that of men in Japan's manufacturing industries. The law of course will remove restrictions on overtime and late-night work not only in manufacturing, but in all industries. The trend for more and more working hours for women is nothing less than the answer to the prayers of the computer industry, which relies largely on female labor as it continues to gain ever-increasing importance in Japanese society. In this field in particular, it is entirely possible that the future will see long hours of overtime forced on women as is customary with men.
With an equal opportunity law that specifies that employers "shall to avoid discrimination in recruiting, hiring and promoting," there seems little prospect that present day discrimination will be corrected. It is more likely that discrimination will spread, with minimal wages paid for long
At the same time, there is no reason to expect an overnight reversal of the custom of placing the entire responsi bility for housework and child care on women. The result will be highly deleterious to the physical well-being of women who work overtime or late-night hours. Most likely, the ultimate effect will be that women will not be able to continue working Once a woman is forced out of her job, and then later seeks to work again after the children no longer require constant attention, the only route that will be open will be low paying part-time jobs.
As we have seen, the intention of the government with its draft law is a far cry from the effecting of a truly equal society. Rather, it is regarded as a necessary concession to maintain Japan's place among the advanced countries of the
West for the sake of its overall rightist policy. As a means of furthering that policy, the law is intended to reinforce, not abolish, sex role labor division. Thus, the government's policies towards women in recent years are diametrically opposed to the intent of the Convention for the