ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments > All Comments

Display in: French - Spanish

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of the minimum wage. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report with regards to the civil service reform, including the continued role of the National Personnel Authority in formulating recommendations on the remuneration of civil servants. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that workers’ and employers’ representatives in the fisheries sector reached an agreement in 2016 to expand the types of fisheries subject to the minimum wage and that it will continue to consider the setting of minimum wage rates for all types of fisheries in coordination with the workers’ and employers’ organizations concerned.
Articles 3 and 4. Minimum wage system. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s information on the methodology used to ensure that minimum wage rates are higher than the amount of the livelihood assistance. The Government states that minimum wages were above the public assistance level in all 47 prefectures in the financial year 2016. The Committee also notes the Government’s explanation on the differentiated rates at the regional level which are linked to the differences in living expenses, wages and ordinary enterprises’ ability to pay wages depending on the region. Lastly, the Committee notes the Government’s reply on the composition of the minimum wage councils, including the procedure of public notice to request proposals for nominations from workers’ and employers’ organization prior to the appointment of minimum wage councils.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of minimum wages. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that four bills related to civil service reform, including the proposed abolition of the National Personnel Authority (NPA) as a minimum wage fixing body for public employees and the authorization of public employees to conclude collective agreements, were submitted to the Diet in June 2011 but their examination had to be postponed. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of further developments and to provide a detailed account of the legislative amendments once they have been adopted.
In addition, the Committee notes the comments of the Japan Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) which were appended to the Government’s report. According to the JTUC–RENGO, the special minimum wages which are established for four categories of fishers under section 35 of the Minimum Wages Act leave 46 per cent of the total number of fishers uncovered by any form of minimum wage. The JTUC–RENGO deplores that some 30 years after the establishment of the first special minimum wage rates for seafarers, the situation has not changed and a large number of fishers are still unprotected. The Committee requests the Government to transmit any comments it may wish to make in response to the observations of the JTUC–RENGO.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Articles 3 and 4 of the Convention. Minimum wage system. The Committee notes the comments of the National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN), dated 25 September 2011, and the Government’s reply concerning the application of the Convention. According to ZENRONEN, the implementation of the minimum wage legislation raises four issues: (i) low level of minimum wage rates; (ii) unfair method of calculation of the minimum wage; (iii) widening gaps among prefectural minimum wage rates; and (iv) discrimination against ZENROREN representatives in minimum wage councils.
Regarding the first point, ZENROREN considers that, contrary to the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention and section 9 of the Minimum Wages Act, both of which require that the cost of living be taken into account when setting minimum wage rates, the current rates are fixed at levels insufficient to cover the needs of a worker, and even less so the needs of his or her family. What is more, minimum pay rates are often below the amount paid under the social aid programme (or livelihood assistance). For instance, while the minimum monthly wage is fixed at ¥111,183 in Tokyo and ¥85,679 in Kochi, the amounts paid under the social aid programme are ¥141,680 in Tokyo and ¥112,056 in Kochi respectively.
In its reply, the Government indicates that, in fact, minimum pay rates in nine prefectures were found to be below the social aid allowance but measures were taken to raise the minimum wage in six of them while efforts are now being made for the readjustment of the minimum wage in the remaining three prefectures.
With respect to the second point, ZENROREN maintains that the Government uses various methods to misrepresent minimum wage levels as compared to social aid standards. For instance, the Government uses the figure of 178.8 as being the average number of hours of work per month, which is unduly long and clearly exceeds average working hours, including overtime, of full-time workers in all industries.
In its reply, the Government states that the current method of comparing minimum wage levels and social aid benefits as well as the reference number of monthly working hours, have been adopted through sincere discussions by the Central Minimum Wages Council which brings together persons representing the general interest and workers’ and employers’ representatives.
As regards the third point raised in ZENROREN’s comments, it is alleged that the gaps among the minimum wage rates applicable in different prefectures have been widening since the revision of the Minimum Wages Act in 2007, which introduced the consideration of cost of living and general wage level by prefecture. For instance, the minimum pay rate applicable in Tokyo is 23 per cent higher than that of Okinawa. ZENROREN also indicates that it has conducted a survey showing that the cost of living was practically the same in the prefectures of Saitama, Iwate, Shizuoka and Nagasaki, and there was therefore no reason for establishing different minimum pay rates. Moreover, ZENROREN claims that regional minimum wage gaps have a serious impact on employment in rural areas as young workers increasingly migrate to big cities in the search of higher pay. ZENROREN considers that there is no justification for a relatively small country to have 47 different minimum wages and therefore calls for the adoption of a single, generally applicable minimum wage rate.
In its reply, the Government indicates that regional differences exist in the cost of living and the ability of enterprises to pay wages, and therefore it is only natural to determine wage rates according to the actual conditions of the respective regions. The Government adds that the role of the Central Minimum Wages Council is to set a rough estimate of the revised minimum wage rate in order to facilitate discussions and maintain consistency at the prefectural level.
Finally, ZENROREN alleges that it has been systematically excluded from the composition of the central and 47 prefectural minimum wage councils. It indicates that contrary to the appointment of employers’ representatives where members are selected from three main employers’ associations, on the workers’ side, only members supported by the Japan Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) and its affiliates have been appointed so far.
In its reply, the Government merely indicates that workers’ representatives are appointed in accordance with the procedures set out in section 23 of the Minimum Wages Act and section 3 of the Minimum Wages Councils Order.
While noting the Government’s explanations, the Committee would appreciate receiving additional information with regard to: (i) measures taken or envisaged aimed to ensure that minimum pay rates are higher than the amount of the livelihood assistance; (ii) any official report or research study addressing in greater detail the advantages and disadvantages of maintaining a system of separate minimum wage rates by prefecture; and (iii) any consideration given to the possibility of appointing workers’ members to minimum wages councils from different trade union confederations in the interest of amplifying the representativeness of the councils.
In addition, the Committee raises other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. Minimum wage fixing machinery in the public sector and participation of social partners. In reply to the Committee’s previous comment, the Government indicates that 276,000 national public service employees and 2,487,000 local public employees are excluded from the scope of the Minimum Wages Act (No. 137 of 1959), as amended. The Government adds that minimum pay rates applicable to national public officers are established pursuant to the provisions of the Remuneration for National Public Employees in Regular Service Act (No. 95 of 1950) and in accordance with the recommendations of the National Personnel Authority (NPA), an independent body set up to compensate for the absence of collective bargaining in the public sector and which aims at adjusting remuneration in the public sector to wage rates prevailing in the private sector. The Government further indicates that it has submitted a draft law to the Diet in June 2011, proposing the abolition of the NPA and authorizing public service employees to conclude collective agreements. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any further developments in this regard, and to transmit the text of the new legislation once it has been adopted.
Article 4. Adjustment of minimum wage rates. The Committee understands that the Central Minimum Wage Council has recommended an increase in regional hourly minimum wage rates ranging from 1 to 18 Japanese yen (JPY) and that if the proposed increase is endorsed by the prefectural minimum wage councils, the national average minimum wage would be JPY736 per hour (approximately US$9.58). The Committee also understands that several trade unions have pointed out the inadequacy of this increase. In this regard, the Committee notes the comments made by the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) according to which the minimum wages in nine prefectures are below the level of social welfare benefits notwithstanding the Minimum Wages Act, as last amended in 2007, requires consideration to be given to consistency with welfare benefit policies. Moreover, the Committee notes that, according to a survey conducted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2008, Japan had the fourth highest level of poverty in the OECD area. It also observes that the number of working poor, i.e. workers earning less than JPY2 million per year (approximately US$26,050), exceeds 10 million. Recalling that the main aim of the Convention is to ensure that workers enjoy a decent standard of living, the Committee asks the Government to provide its observations concerning the ability of the current minimum pay rates to meet such an objective.
Article 5 and Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee notes the detailed information attached to the Government’s report concerning the minimum wage rates set by region, industry or by collective agreement. It also notes the statistical data communicated by the Government regarding the total number of inspections conducted in the period 2005–10 and the number of violations of the minimum wage legislation reported in the same period. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report according to which, as of 31 March 2011, 3,135 labour inspectors were assigned to 321 labour inspection offices whereas the corresponding figures in March 2006 were 3,752 labour inspectors assigned to 331 labour inspection offices. In this connection, the Committee notes that in its comments, JTUC–RENGO raises the issue of shortage of labour inspectors. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including for instance the approximate number of workers remunerated at the minimum wage rates; statistics on labour inspection results showing the number of visits carried out, violations recorded and sanctions imposed; and copies of official documents or studies on minimum wage policy.
[The Government is also asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Articles 1, 3 and 4 of the Convention. Minimum wage system. The Committee notes the comments of the National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN), which were received on 25 September 2011 and transmitted to the Government on 30 September 2011, concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to transmit any comments it may wish to make in reply to the observations of ZENROREN.
The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.
[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and would appreciate receiving further information on the following points.

Article 1 of the Convention. While noting the Government’s explanations regarding the categories of public sector employees enjoying the coverage of the Minimum Wage Law (Law No. 137 of 1959), the Committee requests the Government to provide additional information concerning the number of national and local public officers who are not subject to the Minimum Wage Law and the method for establishing the minimum pay rates applicable to them.

Article 2, paragraph 1. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that employers failing to apply the applicable minimum wage rates are liable to a fine not exceeding 20,000 yen (approximately US$170). Noting that the Convention provides that persons paying sub-minimum wage rates should be liable to appropriate penal or other sanctions, and also considering that violations of binding rules and regulations dealing with minimum wages must be sanctioned in a manner that is proportional to the seriousness of the violation and sufficiently strict to prevent repetition, the Committee would be grateful if the Government could indicate whether the amount of the fine set out in section 44 of the Minimum Wage Law is considered to be truly dissuasive or whether its possible revision is envisaged.

Article 4. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that section 8 of the Industrial Homework Law (Law No. 60 of 1970), as amended in 2001, provides that minimum homework rates are established by the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare or by the Directors of the Prefectural Labour Bureaus, based on the opinion of the Labour Policy Council or the local labour councils. It also notes that as prescribed by section 3 of Cabinet Order on the Labour Policy Council (Cabinet Order No. 284 of 7 June 2000) and by section 3 of the Cabinet Order on the Local Labour Councils (Cabinet Order No. 320 of 27 September 2001), the labour policy council and the local labour councils both comprise an equal number of government, employers’ and workers’ representatives.

Moreover, the Committee notes that according to the statistical information annexed to the Government’s report, the industry-specific minimum pay rates in certain prefectures have not been revised for between seven to ten years. It would appreciate receiving the Government’s clarification on this point as well as any indication concerning their possible readjustment.

Article 5 and Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the detailed statistical information provided by the Government on the minimum wages set by region, industry, or by collective agreements as well as the minimum wage rates for seafarers. It also notes the information on the administrative structure and staffing of the labour inspection services as well as the statistical data regarding labour inspection results in the period 2000-05. The Committee would appreciate if the Government could continue to send up to date information on these matters, including also copies of official studies and relevant surveys, thus enabling the Committee to better monitor the application of the Convention in practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes due note of the Government’s report and the information supplied in respect of the minimum wage system which involves two types of minimum wages, i.e. local and industry-specific minimum wages, established by prefectural minimum wages councils following the guidelines provided by the Central Minimum Wages Council.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the system whereby the minimum wage rates for outworkers were fixed upon the recommendations of the Central Outwork Council or the prefectural outwork councils has been abolished and that minimum outwork rates are now established based on the opinion of either the Labour Policy Council or local labour councils. The Committee requests the Government to specify the instrument which amended the Industrial Homework Law (Law No. 60 of 16 May 1970) to this effect and to furnish a copy of the relevant text. It would also appreciate receiving additional information on the composition and mandate of the Labour Policy Council in view of the requirements of the Convention for full consultation and direct participation of representative organizations of employers and workers concerned in the establishment, operation and modification of the minimum wage-fixing machinery.

Article 5 and Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the statistical information concerning the number of inspection visits and infringements of article 5 of the Minimum Wages Law (Law No. 137 of 15 April 1959) and article 14 of the Industrial Homework Law reported in the period 1996-2001. It also notes that, as of March 2002, there were 47 regional and 251 industry-specific minimum wages covering a total of 50.8 million workers. The Committee would be glad if the Government would continue to provide in future reports all available information regarding the application of the Convention in practice, including for instance the minimum wages fixed by region or industry, the minimum wages fixed for outworkers by industrial sector or branch of activity, the national average minimum wage by prefecture or industry, the evolution of the average minimum wage as a percentage of the average wage, statistics on the number and different categories of workers covered by minimum wages legislation, extracts from inspection reports, relevant judicial decisions, official surveys and studies on minimum wage issues as well as any other particulars bearing on national law and practice in the field of minimum wage fixing.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the detailed information provided in the Government's report. It requests the Government to continue supplying, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention in conjunction with Article 5 and point V of the report form, general information on the application of the Convention in practice, including: (i) the minimum wage rates in force; (ii) the available data on the number and different categories of workers covered by minimum wage provisions; and (iii) the results of inspections carried out (e.g. the number of violations of minimum wage provisions, the penalties imposed, etc.).

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer