Informe provisional - Informe núm. 354, Junio 2009

Caso núm. 2183 (Japón) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 15-MAR-02 - Activo

Allegations: The complainants allege that the upcoming reform of the public service legislation, developed without proper consultation of workers’ organizations, further aggravates the existing public service legislation and maintains the restrictions on the basic trade union rights of public employees, without adequate compensation

1. 951. The Committee examined these cases at its November 2002, June 2003, March 2006 and June 2008 meetings, where it presented interim reports, approved by the Governing Body at its 285th, 287th, 295th and 302nd Sessions [see 329th Report, paras 567–652; 331st Report, paras 516–558; 340th Report, paras 925–999; and 350th Report,
   • paras 1167–1221].
2. 952. The Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) (Case No. 2177) submitted additional information in communications dated 7 January 2009 and 24 April 2009. The National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN) (Case No. 2183) submitted additional information in a communication dated 9 March 2009.
3. 953. The Government submitted its observations in communications dated 19 December 2008, 20 April and 20 May 2009.
4. 954. Japan has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). It has not ratified the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 955. At its June 2008 meeting, the Committee made the following recommendations:
   • (a) While noting the progress achieved since the last examination of this case and welcoming the institutionalized discussions that have taken place between the parties, the Committee expects that the Bill finally adopted by the Diet will be followed by adequate steps for the promotion of a mechanism for full social dialogue aimed at effectively, and without delay, addressing the measures necessary for the implementation of the freedom of association principles embodied in Conventions Nos 87 and 98, ratified by Japan, in particular as regards:
   • (i) granting basic labour rights to public servants;
   • (ii) granting the right to organize to firefighters and prison staff;
   • (iii) ensuring that public employees not engaged in the administration of the State have the right to bargain collectively and to conclude collective agreements, and that those employees whose bargaining rights can be legitimately restricted enjoy adequate compensatory procedures;
   • (iv) ensuring that those public employees who are not exercising authority in the name of the State can enjoy the right to strike, in conformity with freedom of association principles, and that union members and officials who exercise legitimately this right are not subject to heavy civil or criminal penalties;
   • (v) the scope of bargaining matters in the public service.
     • The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments on all the above issues and to transmit the conclusions of the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council on Comprehensive Reform of the Civil Service System and any relevant Bills referred to the Diet.
   • (b) The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so desires.

B. Additional information from the complainants

1. 956. In a communication dated 7 January 2009, JTUC–RENGO and its Public Sector Liaison Council (RENGO–PSLC) state that the Civil Service Reform Law was enacted on 13 June 2008 with the amendment agreed upon by the ruling and opposition parties. The complainant explains that article 12 of the Reform Law provides that “The Government of Japan should show the people the whole picture of the reform, including the benefits and costs of expanding the scope of public employees with the right to conclude collective agreements, and with the understanding of the people, take measures for establishing a transparent and autonomous labour–management relations system”. A supplementary article 2 provides that “The Government of Japan examines what the labour rights of local public service employees should be, in a manner consistent with the measure for the labour–management relations system of the national public service as stipulated in article 12”.
2. 957. JTUC–RENGO states that the Headquarters for Promoting Civil Service Reform was established under the Cabinet according to the provisions of the Reform Law, in order to promote civil service reform in a comprehensive and intensive manner. The Labour–Employer Relation Systems Review Committee, created under the Headquarters, is endowed with a task of researching and examining the measures to be taken by the Government of Japan in order to realize an autonomous labour–management relations system for civil service employees. The complainant adds that it took over four months to establish the Review Committee after the Reform Law was enacted, which it took as an intentional slow down of the efforts, on the part of the Government, to grant the basic labour rights to civil service employees. The Review Committee was convened on 22 October and 3 December and is scheduled to conclude by the end of 2009 but has not yet conducted a study on how to design a concrete system on the premise that basic labour rights be granted to civil service employees. Therefore, the JTUC–RENGO states that it is uncertain whether or not the Review Committee will be able to draw a conclusion consistent with ILO Recommendations.
3. 958. The complainant added that the Government also established an Advisory Panel under the Headquarters, in order to examine important issues concerning measures to promote civil service reform, with its membership consisting of 11 experts (including the President of JTUC–RENGO, Mr Tsuyoshi Takagi). The Panel studies “the agenda for unifying different channels of personnel management of senior officials and establishing the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs”, but the complainant states that after hasty and one-sided deliberations led by the secretariat, a report was produced on 14 November without sufficient exchange of opinions. JTUC–RENGO states that this report proposes to transfer the authorities of the National Personnel Authority, an independent body functioning as a mechanism to compensate for the denial of the basic labour rights in the public service, to the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs, which is a Government organ, ignoring JTUC–RENGO’s view that strengthening the employer’s authorities must be on the premise of granting the full basic labour rights to public employees.
4. 959. The complainant states that the Government convened a second meeting of the Headquarters on 2 December and confirmed that review work be commenced pursuant to the report of the Advisory Panel. In concrete terms, the Government proposed “(1) to prepare a draft bill to create the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs by March 2009 and (2) for the Government as the employer to present to the National Personnel Authority the direction for reviewing the existing salary system and to request the NPA to make recommendations consistent with its findings”. In JTUC–RENGO’s opinion, it is unacceptable for the employer (the Government) to unilaterally reappraise the salary system, without granting civil service employees full basic labour rights; if the Government is to go ahead with review work, it should fully negotiate and consult with JTUC–RENGO and proceed on the basis of an agreement reached by both parties. The complainant considers that the Government’s approach is contrary to the repeated recommendations made by the Committee on Freedom of Association and states that the situation is very critical as the Government has stepped up its work for reviewing the salary system and drafting the relevant bill by March 2009. The complainant states that the Government should fully negotiate and consult with JTUC–RENGO if it is to go ahead with review work.
5. 960. In its communication dated 9 March 2009, ZENROREN states that the Basic Law on the Reform in National Public Personnel System was established on 13 June 2008 and aims to create a Cabinet Personnel Bureau which will increase the Cabinet’s control of public servants and generalize personnel management based on merit. The complainant considers article 12 to be very vague and to implicitly indicate that giving public servants the right to conclude labour agreements would lead to increases in personnel costs which in turn might restrict the Government. The complainant adds that the law fails to mention anything about granting firefighting personnel the rights to organize and strike.
6. 961. ZENROREN reports on the establishment by the Government of the Headquarters and the Committee and Advisory Panel created pursuant to it. The complainant finds the composition of these new bodies to be “particularly problematic”. ZENROREN states that there is no representative of public employees’ unions on the Advisory Panel; only one national trade union confederation (JTUC–RENGO) is represented and ZENROREN is excluded. In relation to the Review Committee, ZENROREN’s nominees were not accepted, and the complainant notes that while it should have 14 members, it currently has 12 members.
7. 962. The complainant indicates that, as at the date of its communication, there have been three meetings of the Headquarters, seven meetings of the Advisory Panel and three meetings of the Review Committee. The National Personnel Authority “expressed its strong objection” to the progress schedule for reform of the civil service that was adopted by the Headquarters on 3 February 2009. In its communication dated 24 April 2009, JTUC–RENGO states that the Government set this schedule unilaterally without any regard for its demands. This progress schedule is claimed to set out: (1) the direction in which measures and deliberations for the reform are led; (2) a timeframe for the conclusion of the deliberations and for the introduction of related bills to the Diet; and (3) timing of the implementation of the reform itself. The complainant states that it also: (1) creates the Cabinet Bureau for the across-the-board management of public personnel and reduces the functions of the National Personnel Authority; (2) revises the hiring and pay system with the aim of establishing a personnel management system based on merit and ability evaluation; and (3) extends the retirement age for public employees and revises their pay schemes. Although measures involving changes in working conditions are being discussed, the content of the progress schedule was officially announced to ZENROREN and its affiliates as late as 26 January. The complainant adds that due partly to the biased composition of the Panel and related bodies, ZENROREN and its affiliates continue to have limited opportunities to express their views regarding the reform in the national public personnel system.
8. 963. JTUC–RENGO and ZENROREN note that the progress schedule sets out that the deliberations on the future industrial relations system will be concluded by the end of 2009, related bills will be introduced to the Diet in 2010 and laws enforced in 2012. Nevertheless, the complainants state that it has not been made clear in what direction the deliberations about reform will be led. For example, while aiming to reduce the functions of the National Personnel Authority and transfer to the Cabinet Bureau the administrative work of managing the number of posts assigned to each grade, which is a very important factor for wage determination, the progress schedule is conservative about the reform to be implemented, merely stating “a reform towards an autonomous industrial relation system is an important and indispensable task”. The complainants argue that the Government thus maintains its negative stance as to granting the basic labour rights to public servants. ZENROREN believes that the current process of implementing the reform makes it more difficult to discuss the recovery of the right to conclude labour agreements, as recommended by the Committee on Freedom of Association.
9. 964. ZENROREN attaches to its communication an excerpt concerning the “Creation of the Cabinet Personnel and Administrative Control Bureau” from the progress schedule. This document details the functions of the Cabinet Bureau, enumerating the functions to be transferred to it from other administrative bodies under the control of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the National Personnel Authority, the Cabinet General Affairs Room of the Government, the Ministry of Finance and the Public–Private Human Resource Exchange Centre. These functions include the planning of the national public personnel system, administrative matters, setting and revising the staffing levels of each hierarchical grade, personnel administration, policy for total personnel cost, planning and general coordination, and guidelines for the management of the Public–Private Human Resource Exchange Centre. The Cabinet Bureau is within the Cabinet and is led by its Director.
10. 965. In its communication dated 24 April 2009, JTUC–RENGO also refers to the amendment bill adopted at a cabinet meeting on 31 March 2009. This bill was submitted to the Diet the following day and takes the restriction on basic labour rights as a premise. It transfers the right to set the number of officials and the right to set working conditions from the National Personnel Authority, where it is currently assigned as a compensatory mechanism, to the Cabinet Bureau. According to JTUC–RENGO, the Government has failed to answer the unions’ questions and has not incorporated their opinions in this regard. The complainant further states that a working group was established within the Review Committee, to work out a system for granting the right to conclude collective agreements. JTUC–RENGO indicates that it is not clear whether its conclusion will be in line with the ILO recommendations and that it is calling for careful public attention on this point. Despite the fact that, according to the amendment bill, the Cabinet Bureau with strong authority will be inaugurated in April 2010, it is clear that an autonomous labour–management relations system, incorporating the right to conclude collective agreements, will not be specified in sufficient detail by that time.

C. The Government’s reply

1. 966. In its communications of 19 December 2008, 20 April and 20 May 2009, the Government provides the Committee with additional information concerning the Civil Service Reform Law and the establishment of the Headquarters for Promoting Civil Service Reform, the Labour–Employer Relation System Review (or Examining) Committee and Advisory Panel (or Conference). It also provides information on the establishment of the progress schedule for civil service reform, the Amendment Bill of the National Public Service Employee Law, and the examination of basic labour rights.
2. 967. In relation to the Civil Service Reform Law and the establishment of the headquarters, the Government indicates that the Bill was submitted to the Diet on 4 April 2008 and adopted on 13 June 2008 with an amendment agreed upon by both the ruling and opposition parties. The Government reports on articles 12 and 2, as discussed above, and indicates that the headquarters was established in July 2008 pursuant to article 13 in order to promote civil service reform comprehensively and intensively. It states that the headquarters’ first meeting was held on 15 July 2008 and its second on 2 December 2008.
3. 968. The progress schedule of civil service reform was decided at its meeting on 3 February 2009. The Government explains that the progress schedule states that to take measures for a transparent autonomous employee–employer relations system: (1) the Review Committee should achieve a conclusion on the specific institutional design concerning the expansion of the range of public service employees having the right to conclude collective agreements in 2009; (2) the Government should submit the necessary bill to the Diet in 2010; and (3) after the necessary preparation period, the bill should be brought into effect by 2012. The Government states that in the process of establishing the progress schedule and the Amendment Bill it held several meetings with JTUC–RENGO and RENGO–PLSC, at various levels, formally and informally, between November 2008 and the end of March 2009. The Government had also continued discussions with ZENROREN and the National Public Service Employees’ Unions (KOKKOROREN). Additionally, the Employee–Employer Relations System Examining Committee, which conducts examinations of basic labour rights, continues to meet approximately every month and held its eighth meeting on 28 April 2009 to reach a conclusion before December 2009. The schedule was decided upon at the seventh meeting, on 30 March 2009, with the agreement of Committee members including those from the labour side. The Government indicates that the working group established under the committee for the organization of concrete issues is promoting vigorous examination, having held meetings four times since its first meeting on 10 April 2009, and takes the labour side’s opinion into consideration.
4. 969. The Government explains that this progress schedule accelerates the original schedule as much as possible to implement the whole reform in four years rather than the originally scheduled five years. To do so, it provides that the Government of Japan should make every effort to take legislative efforts within two years, rather than the originally scheduled three years. Legislative measures to establish the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs should be done within one year, as provided in the original schedule. The Government accordingly submitted an amendment bill for the National Public Service Employee Law on 31 March 2009, that established central control of personnel affairs, a national strategy staff, and the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs, which will have relevant functions transferred to it from existing government organizations so as to ensure central control and accountability of national public service employees. The Government indicates that the bill is planned on the basis of current limitations of basic labour rights of national public service employees, which will be examined within the working group of the Review Committee discussed below.
5. 970. In relation to the Review Committee and the Advisory Panel, the Government states that it enacted a Cabinet Order for a Headquarters for Promoting Civil Service Reform on 9 July 2008. The Committee and Panel were established under the Headquarters based on that Order (article 1, section 1).
6. 971. The Government explains that the Review Committee consists of 12 individuals and attaches in an appendix a list setting out the names and affiliations of the Committee’s members, indicating that the Committee is composed of six academic and other experts (two journalists and four university professors), three employer representatives, and three workers’ representatives (Fumio Kaneta, the General Secretary of All-Japan Prefectoral and Municipal Workers Union; Seiichi Fukuda, the President of Japan Public Sector Union; and Koji Amamoto, Assistant General Secretary of the Japanese Trade Union Confederation).
7. 972. The Government indicates that the Review Committee researches and examines the measures the Government should take, based on articles 12 and 2 of the Law. It states that the Review Committee’s first meeting was on 22 October, since when it has held a further six meetings, and that its meetings are, in principle, open. On 3 December, the Minister of Civil Service Reform, Mr Amari, requested the Committee “to move forward the original schedule” so as to propose legislative measures within the 2009 fiscal year. In response, the Review Committee affirmed that it would make a final proposal on legislative measures no later than the end of 2009. On 30 March 2009, the Minister requested the Committee to reach its conclusions as soon as possible in 2009 through vigorous examination. A working group to organize the concrete issues on the institutionalization of the expansion of the right to conclude collective agreements from a technical point of view was established, composed of six university professors. The working group held its first meeting on 10 April 2009 and will hold three meetings every month from April to August; to date it has held two meetings.
8. 973. The Government explains that the Advisory Panel is composed of 11 intellectuals, including scholars and persons connected with trade unions, and is charged to examine important issues concerning measures to promote civil service reform based on the Reform Law. The Panel held its first meeting on 5 September 2008 and met a further two times, with eight working group sessions, between then and 14 November 2008, when it issued a report after its fourth meeting. That report includes recommendations regarding the basic roles and functions of a Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs, which would be concerned with the unified personnel management of executives and responsible for the personnel management of all public service employees, and regarding the functions to be transferred from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications and the National Personnel Authority to the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs, etc.
9. 974. In addition, the Government advises that the Minister of Civil Service Reform laid out his policy directions on the reform plan at the second meeting of the Headquarters, agreed upon in the meeting on 2 December 2008: (a) to begin negotiations among the relevant Government organizations about the functions to be transferred to the Cabinet Bureau along the lines of the report of the Advisory Panel; and (b) to determine the “Progress Schedule” by the end of January 2009, laying out the whole schedule for civil service reform based on the Civil Service Reform Law, including the acceleration of examination about basic labour rights, etc.
10. 975. The Government included further appendices, setting out excerpts from the Reform Law and the Cabinet Order establishing the Review Committee and the Advisory Panel; the composition of the Review Committee; and the composition of the working group on basic labour rights.
11. 976. The Government concludes that it has done its utmost to make the discussion meaningful and achieve fruitful civil service reform, bearing in mind the necessary exchanges of views and coordination.

D. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 977. The Committee recalls that these cases, initially filed in March 2002, concern the current reform of the public service in Japan.
2. 978. The Committee takes note, from the complainants’ and Government’s communications, that a Bill Stipulating Civil Service Reform was submitted to the Diet on 4 April 2008 and that the Civil Service Reform Law was adopted on 13 June 2008 with an amendment agreed upon by both the ruling and opposition parties. The Committee notes that article 12 of this Law purports to set out the basic labour rights of civil servants in Japan, stating that the Government of Japan “should show the people the whole picture of the reform, including the costs and benefits in such a case where the range of public service employees who have the right to conclude collective agreements is expanded and, with the understanding of the people, take measures for a transparent and autonomous labour–employer relations system”. The basic labour rights of Local Public Service Employees are protected by article 2, which states that the Government “examines what the labour rights of local public service employees should be, in a manner consistent with the measures for the labour–employer relations”.
3. 979. The Committee further notes from the communications submitted to it by the complainants and the Government that a Headquarters for Promoting Civil Service Reform was established by the Government pursuant to article 13 of the Reform Law “to promote civil service reform comprehensively and intensively under the Cabinet”. Under this, a further two bodies were established at Headquarters pursuant to a Cabinet Order on 9 July 2008. The Advisory Panel (or Conference) examines important issues concerning measures to promote civil service reform based on the Civil Service Reform Law; the Employee–Employer Relation System Review (or Examining) Committee researches and examines the measures for the Government to take. The Committee notes that JTUC–RENGO perceives the four months that it took to establish these two bodies as evidence of an intentional slowdown.
4. 980. The Committee notes that, according to the list provided by the Government, the Review Committee includes employer and trade union representatives, including trade unions from the public sector, and academics; according to ZENROREN, its nominations were not accepted and that it currently has 12, rather than 14, members. The Advisory Panel is apparently composed of 11 intellectuals and the President of JTUC–RENGO. The Committee notes ZENROREN’s statement that no representative of the public employees’ unions is included. Additionally, it notes that ZENROREN considers the composition of these bodies to be “particularly problematic”.
5. 981. The Committee notes from the complainants’ and Government’s communications that various meetings of these bodies have been held. The Headquarters has met three times, on 15 July 2008, 2 December 2008 and 3 February 2009. The Review Committee first met on 22 October 2008 and since then has met six further times. The Committee notes that the Advisory Panel appears to have met numerous times: according to ZENROREN, as at the end of February 2009, it had held seven meetings and, according to the Government, as at the date of its first communication, it had held four full meetings and eight working group sessions.
6. 982. The Committee notes that the Advisory Panel issued a report following its meeting on 14 November 2008, in which it recommended moving certain functions of other governmental bodies to a Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs. The Committee notes the comments of JTUC–RENGO that this report followed what it considers to have been hasty and one-sided deliberations led by the secretariat and that it was without sufficient exchange of opinions. In particular, JTUC–RENGO considers that the transferral of the responsibilities of the National Personnel Authority, an independent body functioning as a mechanism to compensate for the denial of basic labour rights, to the Cabinet Bureau, which is a Government organ, ignores JTUC–RENGO’s view that strengthening the employer’s authorities must be on the premise of granting the full basic labour rights to public employees.
7. 983. The Committee notes the information provided by JTUC–RENGO that the Headquarters confirmed, at its 2 December 2008 meeting, that review work would be commenced along the line of the Advisory Panel’s report. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that, at the same meeting, the Headquarters agreed upon the policy directions laid out by the Minister of Civil Service Reform: (a) to begin negotiations among the relevant Government organizations about the functions to be transferred to the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs along the lines of the report of the Advisory Panel (or Conference); and (b) to determine the “Progress Schedule” by the end of January 2009, laying out the whole schedule for civil service reform based on the Civil Service Reform Law, including the acceleration of examination about basic labour rights, etc. The Committee notes that, in relation to the Review Committee, the Government has explained that, at its second meeting on 3 December 2008, the Minister of Civil Service Reform requested it to move forward its original schedule so as to complete a proposal for legislative changes by the end of 2009 and that on 30 March 2009, he requested the Committee to reach its conclusions as soon as possible in 2009.
8. 984. The Committee further notes the information from the complainants and the Government that a “progress schedule” was decided by the Headquarters at a meeting on 3 February 2009. The Committee notes that the Government explains that the progress schedule states that to take measures for a transparent autonomous employee–employer relations system: (1) the Review Committee should achieve a conclusion on the specific institutional design concerning the expansion of the range of public service employees having the right to conclude collective agreements in 2009; (2) the Government should submit the necessary bill to the Diet in 2010; and (3) after the necessary preparation period, the bill should be brought into effect by 2012. It notes that ZENROREN considers that this progress schedule illustrates a negative stance as to granting the basic labour rights to public servants on the part of the Government and that the biased composition of the Panel and other bodies contributed to ZENROREN and its affiliates having considerably limited opportunities to express their views regarding the reforms in the public service. It further notes that JTUC–RENGO considers that the progress schedule to have been set unilaterally, and that while it provides details in relation to an accelerated amendment to the National Public Service Employee Law, it provided no clear direction on the granting of the right to conclude collective agreements.
9. 985. The Committee further notes, from the information provided by JTUC–RENGO and the Government, that a bill amending the National Public Service Employee Law was adopted at a cabinet meeting on 31 March 2009, and submitted to the Diet on the same day. This bill centralizes control of personnel affairs in the Cabinet, establishing a National Strategy Staff and the Cabinet Bureau of Personnel Affairs by transferring the relevant functions of other government organizations to it. The Committee notes that this includes the transfer of the power to set working conditions away from the National Personnel Authority, which the complainants considered had provided a compensatory mechanism for the denial of basic labour rights in the civil service.
10. 986. The Committee notes that both the complainants and the Government indicate that the amendment bill was based upon the current limitations on public service employees’ basic labour rights, and that the Government indicates that the question of basic labour rights is also subject to the acceleration of time limits in the progress schedule. A working group under the Review Committee composed of six academic experts was established to organize the concrete issues on the institutionalization of the expansion of the right to conclude collective agreements by public service employees, and had its first meeting on 10 April 2009. It will hold three meetings each month between April and August 2009. The Committee notes that the complainant indicates that while the Cabinet Bureau will be inaugurated in April 2009, and that certain of its significant powers would have been transferred from the National Personnel Authority reducing the compensatory guarantees to workers in the civil service, there will not be a conclusion on the issue of an autonomous labour–management relations system incorporating the right to conclude collective agreements by that time.
11. 987. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the composition of the Review Committee and its working group on basic labour rights and the excerpts from the Civil Service Reform Law and Cabinet Order for the Headquarters. While welcoming both the institutionalized tripartite discussions that have taken place in the context of the Review Committee and the establishment of the independent Advisory Panel, the Committee reminds the Government that it is important that consultations take place in good faith, confidence and mutual respect, and that the parties have sufficient time to express their views and discuss them in full with a view to reaching a suitable compromise [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, para. 1071].
12. 988. In this regard, the Committee notes with concern JTUC–RENGO’s allegation that certain legislative proposals have apparently already been unilaterally set forth for the reappraisal of the salary system of the public service before having resolved the question of public service basic rights and providing for appropriate compensatory guarantees. The complainant considers that any review of the salary system should not only be premised upon the granting of full basic labour rights to the public service, but that it should be based upon full negotiation and consultation. ZENROREN raises similar concerns. The Committee expects that the Government will undertake full and frank consultation with all relevant workers’ organizations concerned with a view to determining mutually acceptable conditions with regard to the procedure for the reappraisal of the public service salary system and bearing in mind the need for ensuring compensatory mechanisms.
13. 989. In this context, the Committee strongly reiterates its previous recommendations that the Government continues to take steps to ensure the promotion of full social dialogue aimed at effectively, and without delay, addressing the measures necessary for the implementation of the freedom of association principles embodied in Conventions Nos 87 and 98, ratified by Japan, in particular as regards: (i) granting basic labour rights to public servants; (ii) granting the right to organize to firefighters and prison staff; (iii) ensuring that public employees not engaged in the administration of the State have the right to bargain collectively and to conclude collective agreements, and that those employees whose bargaining rights can be legitimately restricted enjoy adequate compensatory procedures; (iv) ensuring that those public employees who are not exercising authority in the name of the State can enjoy the right to strike, in conformity with freedom of association principles, and that union members and officials who exercise legitimately this right are not subject to heavy civil or criminal penalties; (v) the scope of bargaining matters in the public service.
14. 990. Noting ZENROREN’s allegations that the composition of the Review Committee and the Advisory Panel are biased as its nominees were not accepted, and recalling its conclusions in a previous case concerning the representation of ZENROREN in national bodies, the Committee recalls the necessity of affording fair treatment to all representative organizations, with a view to restoring the confidence of all workers in the fairness of the composition of councils that exercise extremely important functions from a labour relations perspective. The Committee therefore expects that the Government will take these principles into consideration when considering additional members to the Review Committee to ensure that all relevant social partners are represented. It requests to be kept informed in this regard.
15. 991. The Committee once again reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so desires.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 992. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) Noting with concern the allegation that certain proposals have apparently been unilaterally set forth for the reappraisal of the salary system of the public service before having resolved the question of public service basic rights and providing for appropriate compensatory guarantees, the Committee expects that the Government will undertake full and frank consultation with all relevant workers’ organizations concerned with a view to determining mutually acceptable conditions with regard to the procedure for the reappraisal of the public service salary system and bearing in mind the need for ensuring compensatory mechanisms.
   • (b) While welcoming both the institutionalized tripartite discussions that have taken place in the context of the Review Committee and the establishment of the independent Advisory Panel, the Committee strongly reiterates its previous recommendation to the Government to continue to take steps to ensure the promotion of full social dialogue aimed at effectively and without delay addressing the measures necessary for the implementation of the freedom of association principles embodied in Conventions Nos 87 and 98, ratified by Japan, in particular as regards:
   • (i) granting basic labour rights to public servants;
   • (ii) granting the right to organize to firefighters and prison staff;
   • (iii) ensuring that public employees not engaged in the administration of the State have the right to bargain collectively and to conclude collective agreements, and that those employees whose bargaining rights can be legitimately restricted enjoy adequate compensatory procedures;
   • (iv) ensuring that those public employees who are not exercising authority in the name of the State can enjoy the right to strike, in conformity with freedom of association principles, and that union members and officials who exercise legitimately this right are not subject to heavy civil or criminal penalties;
   • (v) the scope of bargaining matters in the public service.
     • The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments on all the above issues.
   • (c) The Committee expects that the Government will take into consideration the necessity of affording fair treatment to all representative organizations, with a view to restoring the confidence of all workers in the fairness of the composition of councils that exercise extremely important functions from a labour relations perspective when considering the additional members to the Review Committee. It requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard.
   • (d) The Committee once again reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, if it so desires.
   • (e) The Committee draws the attention of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to the legislative aspects of this case.