http://www.generalunion.org/alt/news/741

Interac has been found guilty of unfair labour practices by the Osaka Prefectural Labour Commission in July 2010 for refusing to hold collective bargaining with the General Union (full story here).

Osaka prefectural ordinances prevent companies found in violation of Trade Union Law from bidding on public projects. The General Union, along with allied unions from Osaka Union Network and Osaka Zenrokyo have submitted demands to the Governor of Osaka Prefecture, Toru Hashimoto, that Prefectural ordinances be enforced.

As a result, Osaka Prefecture has now informed all divisions of the prefectural government, including the Osaka Prefectural Board of Education, that they may no longer enter into contracts with Interac. Furthermore, Osaka Prefecture has summoned Interac to explain the situation, placing further pressure on the company to obey the Trade Union Law and negotiate.

The union’s victory at the Labour Commission and its subsequent economic impact on Interac will go along way in making sure that not only Interac, but other employers trying to evade their legal obligations, negotiate with the union in the future.

5 Jul 2010
Health Checks – They’re mandatory!
Interac ordered to obey the law

Industrial Health & Safety Act
For many westerners, the idea of a state mandated health check smacks of a nanny state, and we are often reluctant to submit to the tests. While not all companies obey this law, the fact remains it is compulsory for all employees to have an annual health check under article 66 of the act.

We often receive enquiries about how to escape taking the annual check-up. The major reason given is privacy concerns. In the 1990s these concerns had merit. One well known case is that of a company employee who was diagnosed as being HIV positive as a result of the check-up. Rather than inform the employee, the testing company chose to disclose the information to the employer. The company then chose to terminate the employee under false pretenses while still hiding his HIV status.

Changing attitudes and the introduction of privacy laws in 2005 saw most of these issues resolved.

School Health & Safety Act
Looking at labor law stipulations in the light of the education law, state mandated health checks appear much more reasonable.

Concerned with the health of children and that of the general population, the education law states that all school employees must be checked for tuberculosis by x-ray. Pre-war Japan had a high prevalence of tuberculosis. Post-war times saw the numbers in decline but as in many countries it is on the increase again. In 1998 the rate of infection in Japan was more than 5 times that of the USA. The government reports that there are now more than 40,000 new cases of TB per year in Japan and that it claims about 2,700 lives. There are also increases in the number of children and university age students being infected.

Interac and other ALT companies
It is difficult to give a precise figure, but the number of ALTs in Japan is in the thousands. If we then include other teachers of at-risk students, the number may well increase to over 10,000. The majority are not tested for tuberculosis, thereby placing the health of both students and other teachers at risk.

As part of the General Union’s campaign to make Boards of Education and dispatch companies follow Education and Employment laws, Interac was recently found to be violating the law by not providing ALTs in Tokai city with health checks. As a result Interac was ordered to institute testing and it appears Interac is now rolling out a program for all ALTS to be tested but we are taking a wait and see approach to guage their commitment. Anecdotally, we know that in the past Interac had asked ALTs at some Boards of Education to take the tests but the company often failed to ensure the tests were actually taken.

ALTs should be hired directly
Health checks are another reason that we cannot place the education of Japan’s youth in the hands of private companies such as Interac. They cannot be relied upon to ensure the safety of students or workers. If all ALTs were directly hired their annual health checks would take place at the same time as their Japanese coworkers.

If you are concerned with your health and that of your students, contact us to find out more.

Solidarity,
Erich

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20100417p2a00m0na019000c.html

KASHIWA, Chiba — Public schools here have been unable to start their native speaker-taught English classes this school year after the city’s board of education was accused of violating labor laws with foreign language teachers.

According to the Kashiwa Municipal Board of Education, it has been instructed by the local labor office to change its labor relationship with foreign assistant language teachers (ALTs) in the city’s elementary and junior high schools after it engaged in illegal employment practices.

The local education board entrusted part of its English curriculum for primary and secondary school students to a Tokyo-based staffing agency between 2007 and 2009, and a total of 23 foreign teachers belonging to the agency worked as ALTs at 61 local public elementary and junior high schools during this period. Their contracts expired at the end of last month.

A local labor union supporting foreign language teachers complained to the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry’s Chiba labor office that the teachers were forced to work as temporary workers under the guise of subcontractors, while demanding the municipality extend their contract periods.

In response to the complaint, the labor office launched an investigation and confirmed that each school placed the foreign teachers under its direct supervision even though they worked under consigning contracts. The labor office then concluded that the education board forced the teachers to work as temporary workers under the guise of subcontractors, a practice that constitutes a violation of the Worker Dispatching Act.

Under the current law, companies and other business operators must offer a direct contract to their temporary workers after they have completed the first three years of work. Moreover, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare’s labor guidelines require a minimum three-month interval before the two parties enter into another temporary contract.

The city’s board of education had planned to terminate its English class teacher outsourcing contract and employ temporary English teachers directly starting this April. However, as the labor office judged that the education board had already forced its contracted foreign teachers to work as normal temporary staff, it became impossible for the city to renew the contracts right away, in accordance with the ministry guidelines prohibiting consecutive temporary contracts of over three years.

The local education board has announced that it will comply with the labor office’s order and will resume relevant English classes after the three-month waiting period expirees in July.

In August last year, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology instructed local boards of education nationwide to switch consigning contracts for ALTs to either direct or temporary employment. A subsequent survey by the ministry has revealed that 670 municipalities still maintained their outsourcing arrangements for native English class teachers, of which 439 responded they were not planning to change their current practices.

The ministry’s International Education Division has requested each education board consult with their local labor office and make corrections as needed.

(Mainichi Japan) April 17, 2010
Original Japanese article here:

http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news/20100417k0000m040089000c.html

Throughout Japan Boards of Education have been moving away from the JET program in favour of outsourcing ALT jobs to dispatch companies. In Fukuoka it has come to the point that most BOEs subcontract out their work.

This page is aimed to shed some light on the current systems that operate to the detriment of ALTs – who are practically all non-Japanese (NJ).


- Why do BOEs outsource ALT teaching jobs.
- The difference between direct employ, sub-contract and dispatch contracts.
- What is illegal about a sub-contract ALT working at a public school.
- The tender bid process.
- How much money do dispatch companies make from ALTs?
- Dispatch company ALT and health insurance.
- How dispatch companies and BOEs get rid of ALTs they don’t like.
- Ministry of Education tells BOEs to directly employ ALTs – BOEs ignore
directive.
- Labour Standards Office issue reprimand, BOE has head in the sand.
- How the sub-contracting system damages other teachers in the industry.
- Why the Fukuoka General Union is fighting for direct employment.
- Reference materials
- You Tube news reports on the ALT sub-contracting issue (Helps explain the
situation to Japanese teachers)

Why do BOEs outsource ALT teaching jobs.
Up until a few years ago most local governments procured their Assistant
Language Teachers (ALTs) through the JET program. However, with local government
budgets tightening, they began looking for ways to cut expenditure. The
cost of keeping a JET was about 6 million yen per year, so when they were
approached by dispatch companies which offered to do it for less they jumped
on the bandwagon. But not only did they save money, they outsourced the
management of the ALTs, getting the dispatch company to take on the troublesome
chore of getting the ALT accommodation, assimilating them into Japanese
society and taking care of any trouble that arises. Like a cancer the number
of non-JET ALTs at public schools increased to a point where they make
up the bulk of ALTs in Fukuoka (and other) Prefectures. To outsource the
ALT teaching jobs, they have determined that it is a "service"
(業務 gyomu).

- The difference between direct employ, sub-contract and dispatch contracts.
The Board of Education (BOE), which is in charge of placing ALTs at their schools outsources the work to the dispatch companies like Interac, OWLS and KBS. However the type of contract that they make with the Dispatch company is at the core of the problem.

DIRECT EMPLOYMENT
This is what all JET ALTs and some non-JETs get. They are directly employed
by the BOE (City/town). Conditions are usually much better than the outsourced
worker. ALT and Union can negotiate directly with BOE.

SUB-CONTRACT
Practically all BOEs SUB-CONTRACT the work out and therefore make a SUB-CONTRACTING
CONTRACT (English sounds a bit clumsy, but it is the closest translation
of the Japanese 委託業務契約 itaku gyomu keiyaku). Then, the dispatch company
employs ALTs to work at the BOE (school). In this case the BOE has no control
over the ALT, only the dispatch company has the authority to tell the ALT
what to do/teach/where to go etc. Schools cannot issue references as they
are not the employer. ALT cannot negotiate with school or BOE regarding
conditions. BOE does not have to negotiate with Union or ALT over conditions
even though they definitely have a moral obligation to. （click here for
explanatory graphic)

DISPATCH CONTRACT
A dispatch contract (派遣契約　haken keiyaku) is a special type of contract
meant for dispatch companies to send workers out to work for companies.
The dispatch company makes a DISPATCH contract with the BOE, and then the
dispatch contract employs the ALT with a DISPATCH CONTRACT. In this case
the BOE does have the authority to tell the ALT what to do/teach and where
to go. The big advantage of a dispatch contract is that if the dispatchee
(ALT) has worked at the company (BOE/school) for a certain period of time
(1-3 years) the ALT has the right to demand full time （正規 seiki） employment
and the company (BOE) must grant the full time direct contract of employment.
The ALT or Union can negotiate with the BOE. (It is noteworthy that Interac
make a point of this when promoting sub-contracted ALTs)（click here for
explanatory graphic)
**JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE WORKING FOR A DISPATCH COMPANY AND ARE DISPATCHED TO A SCHOOL DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE ON A DISPATCH CONTRACT!!**

What is illegal about a sub-contracted ALT?

An ALT, by definition, is an assistant. They assist the Japanese Teacher of English (JTE), so the JTE must tell the ALT what to do. However a sub-contracted ALT cannot receive ANY direction or evaluation from the JET before, during or after the class. If a JTE, or anyone at the school tells the ALT what to teach, how to teach or evaluates the ALT, it is illegal under the dispatch law (派遣法).
However, let’s suppose that the JTE does nothing, doesn’t tell the ALT what to do and gives them a free hand to do what they want. This would breach the Education Law as the teacher must have a (Japanese) teacher’s licence to teach a class.
The Ministry of Education has issued a clear directive stating that an ALT must plan lessons with the JET, and evaluate each other. In the same directive it stated that a sub-contracted ALT cannot be evaluated by, or plan lessons with a JTE. Either way the system breaches the law, but the BOE, and especially the dispatch company ignore this.

The tender bid process
Despite the subcontracting of ALT work breaching the law, and the MOE directing BOEs to hire ALTs directly and not to sub-contract, they still do. ALTs are mostly procured by tender bid process.

I might add that ALTs (gaijin) are the only teachers ever to be “procured” by tender.

It is a “tender by proposal” （企画入札）therefore the proposals are submitted and the company with the best proposal wins the tender. Criteria for adjudging the best proposal is here. As you can see there is very little regarding teaching in the classroom, with more weight being placed on administrative ability of the dispatch company.

In the case of Fukuoka Prefecture BOE (2010 school year) the tender was gazetted on the Prefecture web site on Feb 5, 2010 for 30 ALTs to work at 40 Prefectural High Schools from April 12 to July 20 (the 2009 contract was for a full year, however this time it is for a mere 3 months). The ALTs are to work from 8am to 5:15pm for a total of 7 hours (despite it being 9hours 15 minutes they want you to be there, your work is only 7 hours!)

The timeline for the tender bid is as follows:

The criteria for evaluation of the proposals concentrate on a) the number of ALTs registered with the dispatch company and b) the ability of the dispatch company to manage the ALTs. There is very little criteria relating to classroom work. There is even an item relating to work with the community – something that the school should definitely not subcontract out.

Click here for the proposal evaluation criteria and the Prefecture’s point
score/weightings. (Japanese-2009)
Click here for an English translation.

This process means that the current 30 ALTs working at Prefectural High Schools will not know if they will have a job after March until March 18, and even then it will not be for a year, but only 3 months and 1 week.

In 2009, 4 companies submitted proposals, with the successful company (OWLS) submitting a quote and eventually signing a contract for 122,183,250 yen.

As of December 2009, 8 ALTs, or 26% had quit.

Here is another (hard to believe) fact relating to the quote. The successful dispatch company is notified and then submits a quote by fax to the BOE. If that quote is above the upper limit of designated by the Prefecture for the ALTs, the dispatch company is notified and asked to submit another quote. If the dispatch company decided that the upper limit is too low (and not worth bidding for) the second best proposal gets a chance to bid.

In reality, the winning bidder can submit as many quotes as they like until they reach the upper limit the Prefecture has set.

For the BOE and dispatch company it is a convenient system. For the ALT and the education system it is an unstable, unfair system that has no future.

Phantom positions vacant ads for ALTs

As you can see in the Fukuoka Prefecture BOE tender, the successful bidder will not be notified until March 18. However, the dispatch company must have a number of ALTs on their books (registered with the company) for the tender bid proposal. Therefore, the dispatch companies advertise on Gaijinpot and Fukuoka Now etc. for ALT jobs ? that they don’t yet have. Phantom jobs! In the case of the 4 dispatch companies, only OWLS teachers got jobs. All the people who registered with KBS, Interac and American Chatterbox for the ALT positions, well bad luck.

And if OWLS do not win the bid, then all their ALTs will lose their jobs too.

The dispatch companies do not mention that they don’t yet have the jobs they are advertising for. False Advertising!?

How much is an ALT worth?

Each BOE sets their own upper limit for each bid, so each city/town will spend a different amount per ALT. To get an idea of how much the BOE pays for each ALT per year/month it is just a matter of dividing the total amount by the number of ALTs.

Another ridiculous side of the sub-contracting system is that these contracts are subject to 5% consumption tax. In other words, 5% of the ALTs salary goes in tax, then on top of that they pay income tax. This system unfairly double taxes the ALT. (Direct hire is not subject to consumption tax).

Below is a table showing how much BOEs in Fukuoka are paying for ALTs.

The Fukuoka 2009 Prefecture ALT contract includes 5,818,250 yen in consumption tax and 100,000 yen in stamp duty.
This works out to 197,275 yen per ALT going in tax, that would not be applicable
if the ALTs were direct hire.

Kitakyushu City sub-contracts work out by the class, rather than by the ALT, therefore a contract will be for a certain number of classes. Therefore, to work out how much OWLS was paid for a certain contract I divided the number of classes taught (as per reports submitted by OWLS to the Kitakyushu BOE) by the total amount of the contract.

(This is one of numerous Kitakyushu BOE contracts)

Dispatch company ALT and health insurance.

This is a very complex issue, but the bottom line is that dispatch companies
do everything they can to avoid enrolling their ALTs in public health and
pension, known as Shakai Hoken (SH). Despite what they tell the ALTs about
the cost, them main drive behind their unwillingness is that the dispatch
company MUST pay 50% of the SH cost. This usually works out to about 25,000
to 30,000 yen per month (depending on income). It is on parity with the
National Health Insurance (Kokumin Kenko Hoken [KKH]) but is more expensive
than private (travel) insurance. (The FGU advises members not to join private
insurance if at all possible as foreigners in Japan are obliged to join
either SH or KKH).
One way that unscrupulous dispatch companies avoid enrolment is by making employment contracts less than 30 hours per week. This is to try and create an “out” by calling on a government advisory that states that to be eligible for SH an employee must work APPROXIMATELY three quarters of a regular full time employee. Seeing the normal working week is 40 hours, anything under 30 hours is less than three quarters. Therefore, by making contracts 29.5 hours work per week, the company claims that the ALT is under the threshold. It should be noted that the FGU believes that even teaching 29.5 hours per week ALTs are eligible as the advisory states that it is APPROXIMATELY three quarters （概ね3/4）.

By avoiding enrolling ALTs in SH a dispatch company saves 25,000 yen per
month per ALT. A company like Interac which has 5000 ALTs would save 1.5
billion yen per year.

And just because you are enrolled in private health insurance, it doesn’t mean that you are absolved from enrolling in SH or KKH. One ALT, who was enrolled in private health insurance was hit with a bill form 2 years back payment for KKH. When he didn’t pay it he had money seized from his bank account. Then, after cleaning out his bank account, the city then went on to seize his salary.

The city will let the dispatch company weasel out of enrolling ALTs in SH, but they will hit you with big bills for not enrolling in KKH.

In addition, to weasel out of SH dispatch companies limit working time to less than 6 hours per day (5.9), but they demand that ALTs be at the school from 8:30 to 5:00. This means that there are a couple of hours that the ALT must be at the school, but do not get paid, because they are not working. If they sit around web surfing, other teachers will say they are slacking off.

click here for Fukuoka Pref HS ALT contract and specified hours.

The Japanese teaching staff are not aware of this situation.

By the dispatch company avoiding SH, it enables them to provide cheaper labour to the BOE. Therefore, the BOE benefits from the dispatch company ignoring working conditions. This must stop.
How dispatch companies and BOEs get rid of ALTs they don’t like.

How to get rid of a sub-contracted ALT

To get rid of a JET is a long involved process, as the BOE, being the employer, has responsibility for hiring the ALT in the first place. Under the sub-contracting system, a simple phone call can result in an ALT getting kicked out.

Despite the BOE, school and JTE being prohibited from evaluating an ALT, they do, and if they do not like one, a simple phone call from the BOE to the dispatch company will result in an ALT losing his job. This actually happened with an OWLS ALT in Yanagawa. The BOE told OWLS that “if he kept on at the school they would not be able to reach the required level”, so OWLS told him that he had no work and tried to get him to quit. (He didn’t quit, he came to the FGU). OWLS tried not to pay him, but the FGU forced OWLS to pay out the rest of his contract.

In another case, a school demanded a female ALT, to replace the male ALT that was allotted to them. Their reason was that they “had planned the curriculum on the premise of a female teacher coming to the school”. This was a co-ed public school in Kitakyushu.

To keep in the good books with the BOE, the dispatch company will walk all over ALTs.

- Ministry of Education tells BOEs to directly employ ALTs – BOEs ignore directive.

In 2005 the Ministry of Education (MOE) issued a directive (MOE directive16-121,
17 Feb 2005) stating that sub-contracting ALTs may contravene the dispatch
laws and that they “should endeavour to directly hire excellent ALTs”.

After most BOEs ignored this directive, and the General Unions met with
MOE officials in July 2009 another directive was issued directing BOEs
to hire ALTs directly. (21初国教第65号　平成21年8月28日). (Click here for
extract) (see end page for complete document)

Despite these two clear directives, BOEs continue to sub-contract out ALT jobs.

Dispatch companies also word employment contracts so that the ALT is prohibited
from seeking direct employment from BOE, and threatens penalties if the
ALT does. Also, they get (con) BOEs into the sub-contract to include a
clause stating that they won’t attempt to employ the ALT directly.

What does this mean? That if either the BOE or the ALT approach each other
the dispatch company can (try to) sue for breach of contract. In other
words, if the BOE or ALT follow the MOEs directive they may be in breach
of contract.

The dispatch companies are walking all over the MOE instructions.

Labour Standards Office issue reprimand, BOE has head in the sand.

In December 2009, OWLS was issued with an official reprimand from the Labour Standards Office (労働基準監督署　是正勧告書) for illegally deducting a penalty from an ALT who quit mid-contract.

OWLS has a policy of making ALTs sign an “Agreement” when they sign their contract. It states that if the ALT resigns mid-contract
OWLS can deduct a penalty of 114,000 yen from the salary. This practice
is illegal and clearly breaches article 16 of the Labour Standards Law
(prohibiting penalties for non-performance of contract of employment).
OWLS were forced to pay back the money.

Nevertheless, no OWLS teachers, all of which signed the “Agreement”, were told by OWLS that they had breached labour law.

What is worse, is that the BOE has no way of knowing that OWLS has been breaking labour law, another incentive from them to carry on with the practice.

How the sub-contracting system damages other teachers in the industry.

Dispatch companies are continuing to reduce working conditions for ALTs. Some ALTs are only employed for the school term (April to mid July, Sept to Dec Jan to Mar) and are left unemployed during the school holidays.

Turning teaching English into a “service” (gyomu 業務) dehumanizes the occupation. Dispatch companies increase their influence and lower the bar for all occupations. It has been reported that some universities are starting to outsource classes to dispatch companies.

Also, the fact that FOREIGNERS are the only teachers subject to this practice. When this was pointed out to a BOE representative, the reply was “But we subcontract the security work out also”. Equating ALTs with security guards that drive around at night and check schools just goes to show the mentality.

Japanese teachers should be concerned because if the trend continues, it could happen to art, music, and home science teaching as well ? it could be turned into a “service”.

Why the Fukuoka General Union is fighting for direct employment.

Since dispatch companies have been replacing ALTs from the JET program, working conditions have deteriorated. Pay has dropped, stability has been eroded, and the revolving door of non-JET ALTs shows that the system is in a mess.
Local government BOEs have a moral responsibility to look after their employees. However, by outsourcing the ALT “service” they can let the dispatch company do their dirty work and claim impunity.

BOEs need to abide by the law, take responsibility for ALTs employment and provide a better education for students in their care.

ALTs are not only at schools to teach English, they are there to nurture international understanding and promote international exchange. This is the opposite to what BOEs that outsource are doing.

Provide stable jobs for ALTs. Demand direct employment.

REFERENCE MATERIALS (in Japanese)

Document 1 Notice from MOE (28 Aug 2009) to BOEs nationwide on subcontracting ALTs
Document 2 Reply from Ministry of Health Welfare and Labour (MHLW) to MOE (28 Aug 2009) on subcontracting ALTs (reply to document 3)
Document 3 MOE Letter to MHLW enquiring about the legality of subcontracted ALTs (21 Aug 2009)
Document 4 Attachment to document 3 defining the role of an ALT in a team teaching role.

Fukuoka Prefecture BOE tender bid information for 2010 ALT "service" contract
Onojo City Tender Bid results (KBS and OWLS with OWLS winning) for ALT "service" 2009-2012 school years.

You Tube (In Japanese)
These TV news reports provide a good summary of the "scam" and how it adversely affects foreign workers.

NHK Report on Sub-contracted ALTs Part 1


NHK Report on subcontracted ALTs Part 2

Synopsis:
1) Mr Collison is an excellent teacher and has the reviews to prove it.
2) Mr Collison’s wife has a miscarriage.
3) Mr Collison has to take some time off of work to deal with funeral arrangements
4) Mr Collison is fired, Interac claims it is for “performance issues and missing work” (the performance claims are disproven by his excellent reviews).
5) Interac attempts to force Mr Collison to sign resignation papers, going so far as to tell him that he could not leave the office until he signed them (this is horribly illegal).

I really wish that Mr Collison had contacted us when this happened because I can garantee you that this kind of thing will NOT happen to any union member. A strong union can prevent this kind of thing from happening to its members, and can right these kinds of labor issues even after they have begun to go sour, all it takes is the initiative to contact us and the willingness to fight. This is not a criticism of Mr Collison, I certainly cannot imagine the pain he and his family have had to deal with, I just wish we would have had the oppurtunity to try and help. Workers in Japan are all garanteed to have time off for bereavement, and it seems that Interac is unaware of this fact.

A link to the original post:

http://www.debito.org/?p=2993

Instead, you should enroll into Shakai Hoken, because Interac will be forced to pay their half. You are all eligible for this. The only reason Interac tells you otherwise is because they don’t want to pay their portion of the money.

You can do this on your own, or you can join the Interac union and we can force them to pay up together in solidarity. The Tokyo Nambu Foreign Workers Caucus has a lot of experience in forcing companies to enroll their employees into Shakai Hoken so we can get you enrolled with much less effort on you part.

Solidarity,
Erich
Nambu FWC ALT Branch
Interac Union Nambu FWC

http://interacunion.org

interacunion@gmail.com

An open letter to the management of Interac (as well as Maxceed and Selnate)

November 5th, 2009

To whom it may concern (including Kevin Salthouse and Denis Cusack),

My name is Erich, and I am an executive of the ALT branch of Tokyo Nambu’s Foreign Workers Caucus. I worked for Interac  from September of 2005 until February 2008, under the Osaka branch.

I am writing to clear up some misconceptions about health insurance in Japan that were evident in a couple of PDFs that were circulated from management at the beginning of October 2009.

The two PDFs in question are the “FAQ – Insurance System in Japan” and the one titled “Social Insurance Letter” dated October 1st, 2009. In these PDFs, you tell your ALTs that they are not eligible for Shakai Hoken if they work less than 29.5 hours.

This is not true.

You also tell them that the only alternative is to sign up for Kokumin Kenko Hoken and that they may have to pay up to two years of back enrollment.

The problem is that, since they are eligible for Shakai Hoken, it is the company that will have to pay the back enrollment (up to two years) into Shakai Hoken, after which the employee can be billed for their half of enrollment fees.

Let me give you some background information on how I know this.

If you take a look at our page:

http://interacunion.org/2009/08/31/stop-illegal-dispatching-in-tokyokanto/

You will see that there is a Nihon Terebi news report from earlier this year. I was interviewed here about my time with Interac and your use of illegal contracts with the BoE where I worked in Osaka. I was also at the meeting of Union Leaders and Government officials that was mentioned at the start of the broadcast. Part of the reason we called the meeting with these officials is to force them to give clarification, on record, on various features of Japanese insurance and labor laws.

One of the things we asked them point blank:

A) Does Shakai Hoken enrollment require one to be working more than 29.5 hours a week?

The answer was no. The 3/4 of full time rule (if 40 hours a week is considered full time, then 30 hours a week is 3/4ths of that) is an internal administrative guideline that they use to determine who to crack down on (the same way that a police officer might not pull over some one for going 5 kph over the speed limit but will definitely pull someone over for going 10 kph over the speed limit). The 3/4 rule, or 29.5 hours a week rule, is not even in the Shakai Hoken law.

B) We asked them clarify what the minimum work requirement is for Shakai Hoken enrollment.

Their response was that, there is no minimum work requirement of hours per week. Additionally, they also stated that they would never turn down any company that wanted to enroll their employees no matter how much the employees were making (which means in effect that Interac can not use “government requirements” as an excuse for not enrolling their ALTs in Shakai Hoken).

The 29.5 hour mark per week is a misconception, and has nothing to do with eligibility. It never HAS had anything to do with eligibility. So says the Japanese government.

In reality, only sole proprietorships (個人事業) with less than five members can decide not to enroll their employees into Shakai Hoken.  The last time I was in an Interac office, I counted more than five employees, and your website claims that you are a 株式会社 (a kabushikigaisha or Limited Liability Corporation) so you are not a sole proprietorship. You have no excuse for not enrolling your ALTs, and with the new visa requirements, it looks like the Social Insurance office isn’t going to look the other way any longer.

Now, Interac has been around for over thirty-five years and they are rooted in every part of the country. I simply do not believe that every single manager, MC, and office worker, much less the owners of the business, are all too uniformly stupid to be ignorant of these facts. I have only been in Japan for for five years now, and I learned most of this three years ago. I can only assume that this leaves purposeful deception on the part of Interac to mislead it’s ALTs away from the insurance coverage that they have a legal right to (which would cost the company money) and drive them into a corporate partnership that they have with Interglobal/Global Health Insurance (I have heard it referred to as both names by Interac).

As evidence of such a deception, I would offer the “Health Insurance Disclaimer” that I was forced to sign upon the beginning of my employment with Interac. The disclaimer forces the ALT to agree that they “understand that it is my responsibility to finance my own personal health care requirements”, even though,  according to Japanese law, you are responsible for half of every ALT’s insurance. Are you still forcing your teachers to sign this disclaimer? I certainly hope so because it will make great evidence in the Social Insurance office or a court of law.

I do not make these accusations lightly, but I just do not see how a company with a nationwide presence can be so completely wrong on this issue. If you can offer any other reasons that Interac as a whole is so uninformed on this issue, then I am very interested in hearing them.

What this leads to is a situation where someone is going to have to back enroll into the system. If the ALTs back enroll into Kokumin Kenko Hoken, then they will have to pay the back enrollment fees (up to two years worth of monthly dues). If, however, the ALTs are back enrolled into Shakai Hoken, then Interac will pay the back enrollment fees (up to two years) and they can attempt to get half of the back-enrollment money back from their ALTs later (perhaps you could work with Interglobal to get a refund for your ALTs since they were supposed to be on Shakai Hoken from the beginning anyway).

I personally pledge to you and to every Interac ALT that wants help challenging your statements found in these aforementioned PDFs that I will help them to the best of my ability. Trade law prohibits unions from representing those who are not official members, but I will personally help organize the legal team necessary for litigation against you should you refuse to pay for the back enrollment that any of our members face.  I will encourage as many ALTs that I can to join their local union to force you into collective bargaining, and I will also encourage ALTs that are not interested in joining the union that they should apply for Shakai Hoken on their own. Anyone making an individual claim (a kakunin seikyu) will probably face a fimiliar pattern; they will be initially denied because of the internal 3/4 or 29.5 rule, but they will win their case on appeal as long as they have evidence of their employment (paystubs, bankbook records, contracts, recordings of conversations with management, etc).

I am also translating these PDFs that you sent out into Japanese in order to give it to the Social Insurance Agency; I think they may find it very interesting. Actually, if you happen to have a Japanese version already written that would really save me some time; feel free to send a copy to interacunion@gmail.com.

My advice to you is this:

1) Own up to your mistakes

2) Start back enrolling everyone into Shakai Hoken in order to avoid litigation from union members and non-union members alike.

Interac has saved a lot of money over the years by not enrolling people in Shakai Hoken, and has probably made money by steering people into Interglobal/Global Health. I think now it is time for you to put those savings to work by back enrolling your hard working ALTs into the system that they should have been in all along. Don’t try to force them to face back enrollment into Kokumin Kenko Hoken alone when they have a legal right to be enrolled on Shakai Hoken.

I look forward to your reponse.

In solidarity with our union brothers and sisters throughout the country,

Erich

Tokyo Nambu ALT Branch

Interac Union Nambu FWC

http://interacunion.org

interacunion@gmail.com

Tokyo Nambu FWC

http://nambufwc.org/

03-3434-0669

Social Insurance Agency

English: http://www.sia.go.jp/e/index.html

They told her that in light of her condition, it would be too much trouble for them to find a replacement in the middle of the school term, and had decided to go with someone else who was less…. pregnant.

Needless to say, this was quite upsetting. Everyone with a family knows that having a baby is expensive, and the money lost in this case was going to put a major dent in the savings of the mother to be. Combine this with the stress placed upon her by the entire insulting ordeal, and it is easy to draw the conclusion that Martina faced a risk to the health of herself and her child.

I was in the process of moving from Osaka to Tokyo, and was elected to take care of the case since I would be transferring my membership to the Tokyo FWC.  I was pleasantly surprised that I only had to send one email to rectify the situation:

Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 02:24:05 +0900 (JST)

From: “Erich”

Subject: Inquiry concerning Interac Employment

To: northan@interac.co.jp

Hello Joel Norton,

I have a question regarding Martina XXXXXXXX.
Who exactly was it that gave the order to not renew her
contract due to her pregnancy?

I ask this because as a union member, I study quite a bit
of labor law and this is horribly, blatantly illegal (not
to mention morally heinous).

The Tokyo (Nambu) branch of the Interac union will
probably be the branch that takes this case to the Labor
Bureau, but I thought I would ask who gave the order
specifically so that the union members will know who
specifically to name when bringing the case before the
bureau. I was thinking that we should just turn over your
name, but then I realized that you probably have a
supervisor that may have given you the order.

Thanks in advance for your expedient cooperation.
Erich

A declared member of the General Union Interac Branch
(you can call the Osaka Interac office to confirm my
membership in the General Union if you feel the need to do
so.)

PS – here is an excerpt of the law that has been broken here:

For the exact laws that say it is illegal to fire someone
for being pregnant you need this PDF, check pages starting

with page 18:

“Phase III” of the Japanese Equal Employment Opportunity Act

http://www.jil.go.jp/english/documents/JLR15_nakakubo.pdf

(EDITOR’S NOTE – This link is no longer active, so I have uploaded the PDF that was available here. – Erich: Pregnancy Law )

(1) Forced Retirement by Reason of Marriage, Pregnancy or
Childbirth, and Dismissal for Marriage
“Paragraph 1 of Article 9 prohibits employers from
stipulating “marriage, pregnancy or childbirth” as a reason for
retirement of female workers, and Paragraph 2 of the same
article states that employers shall not dismiss female
workers for marriage. These provisions were contained in
the former EEOA, although dismissal for marriage was
prohibited together with dismissals by reason of
pregnancy, childbirth or maternity leaves taken before and
after childbirth. These are dealt with separately in
Paragraph 3 of Article 9, as shown below. ”
“(3) Dismissal during Pregnancy or in the First Year after
Childbirth Moreover, Paragraph 4 of Article 9 was added as an
entirely new provision, which says that dismissal of
female workers who are pregnant or in the first year after
childbirth shall be “void.” At first glance this provision appears rather
drastic, but the following proviso states that this shall
not apply in the event that employers prove that the
dismissal is not for reasons prescribed in Paragraph 3 of
Article 9. Hence, this is in essence a change in the
burden of proof. Nonetheless, it will be of great
significance in the real workplace that the dismissal is
presumed to be void, since employers have to refrain from
dismissing female workers in the absence of a fully
persuasive reason for termination.

Article 9 (Prohibition, etc. of Disadvantageous Treatment
by Reason of Marriage, Pregnancy, Childbirth, etc.)
(1) Employers shall not stipulate marriage, pregnancy or
childbirth as a reason for retirement of women workers.
(2) Employers shall not dismiss women workers for
marriage.
(3) Employers shall not dismiss or give disadvantageous
treatment to women workers by reason of pregnancy,
childbirth, or for requesting absence from work as
prescribed in Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Labor
Standards Act (Act No. 49 of 1947), or having taken
absence from work as prescribed in the same Article,
paragraph 1 or 2, of the same act, or by other reasons
relating to pregnancy, childbirth as provided by Ordinance
of the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare.
(4) Dismissal of women workers who are pregnant or in the
first year after childbirth shall be void. However, this
shall not apply in the event that the employer proves that
the dismissal in question was not for reasons prescribed
in the preceding paragraph.”

Within a few days of receiving this email, they had called Martina into the office to negotiate. They gave her a settlement of double the amount she would have made had she worked until she had planned to quit. They weren’t exactly kind to her in their negotiations, but they did at least do what they should have in lieu of hiring her back if they had already hired her replacement.

It really is a shame that Interac had to be threatened with legal action to do the right thing, but at least they did the right thing in the end. I hate to imagine what would have happened had there been no union to question the decision making of the management.

I contacted Martina in March of this year, and she told me that she might be going to start working for Interac again this year. When I contacted her a few weeks ago to ask how she was doing… She told me this:

“Mr. Will Smith had promised to hire me back a few months before the start of the school year, but beginning of April I got a call from him telling me that they didn’t need me to teach at Interac. They had no explanation for it.”

Disappointing, but not surprising.
Seek help, learn your rights, and fight back the way that Martina did.
Don’t let yourself be a victim.

In solidarity,
Erich