Workplace Bullying in Japan

1. 2013 JILPT Seminar on Workplace Bullying and Harassment Tokyo, 27-28 February 2013 Workplace Bullyingin Japan Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training (JILPT) Department of Industrial Relations Researcher (Labour Law) Shino Naito (naito@jil.go.jp)

2. Contents １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullying - Trend of increase-decrease etc. - Prevalence etc. - Consequences ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullying ３．National policies against workplace bullying ４．Intervention and prevention on the part of companies and trade unions ５．Critique and conclusion

3. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullyingIncrease of counseling of bullyingin labourbureaux Others Bullying Resignation Other working conditions Employer’s suggestion to resign Lowering working conditions dismissal FY2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

4. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullying Bullying acts reported in conciliation cases dealt with by Labour Bureaux

5. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullyingCompensation for Workers with Mental Injuries Source: “Status of workers’ compensation paid for brain and heart disorders and mental disorder” FY2009-2011, MLHW

6. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullyingPrevalence - 1 • Experiences of Workplace Bullying • 25.3% experienced in past 3 years (MHLW, 2012) • 21.9% in past 3 years (Jichiro, 2010) • by gender • 26.5% of males and 23.9% of females (MHLW, 2012) • 19.8% of males and 24.5% of females (Jichiro, 2010) • 45.0% of male applicants and 54.6% of female applicants in bullying conciliation cases (JILPT, 2010) • 39.8% of male applicants and 59.9% of female applicants in bullying conciliation cases (JILPT, 2013)

7. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullyingPrevalence - 2 • by age • high in 30-39 and 40-49 age groups (MHLW, 2012; Jichiro, 2010; JILPT, 2010 and 2013) Data: JILPT survey which analysed the contents of 284 bullying conciliation cases handled by six Labour Bureaus in FY2011

8. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullyingPrevalence - 3 • by forms of employment • Higher in permanent workers than non-permanent workers (MHLW, 2012) • But, high in agency workers (Jichiro, 2010; JILPT, 2010) • by occupation High in nursing, childcare, medical care and welfare jobs (Jichiro, 2010) • by industry High in medical and welfare and manufacturing industry (JILPT, 2013)

9. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullyingOrganisational status of bullies and victims • Status of victims Managerial 31.1% and non-managerial 24.8% (MHLW, 2012) • Status of bullies Supervisors 77.7%, seniors 15.7%, permanent workers (to non-permanent workers) 10.6%, colleagues among permanent workers 4.5%, colleagues among non-permanent workers 2.4% (multiple answers)(MHLW, 2012)

10. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullying Categories of bullying Intimidation, defamation, insult, or slander (mental abuse) Forcing the employee to perform certain tasks which are clearly unnecessary for the business of the company, impossible to be performed, or interfere or interrupt with their normal duties (“excessive work demands”) Isolation, ostracization, or neglect (cutting off from human relationships) Excessively inquiring into the private affairs of the employee (invasion of privacy) Ordering an employee to perform menial tasks that are unreasonable in relation to the company’s business or tasks, which are far below the employee’s ability or experience. Also includes not providing any work at all for the employee. (“insufficient work demands”) Assault (physical abuse) others (MHLW, 2012) ( (%)

11. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullying Consequences - 1 • Mental health • risk of psychological stress reaction was 4 to 5 times higher and of onset of PTSD symptoms was 8 times higher in workplace bullying victims, compared to those who were not exposed to bullying (Tsuno et al., 2010) • number of days of sick leave suggest that the more times a victim is bullied, the greater the ill effects on mental health and spiritual quality of life (Hyogo Institute for Traumatic Stress, 2011a)

12. １．Current situation with regard to workplace bullying Consequences - 2 • Work performance • mild correlation between time management, power of concentration, social functions and productivity, and the more the exposure, the lower was the performance in these three work aspects (Hyogo Institute for Traumatic Stress, 2011a) • work performance of the victims was much lower than those who were not exposed to workplace bullying (Hyogo Institute for Traumatic Stress, 2011b)

13. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullying

14. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullyingCharacteristics which are common among workplaces which had consultations on bullying Data: MHLW, 2012 (Company Survey)

15. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullyingWorkplace characteristics (by harassment experience) Data: MHLW, 2012 (Employee Survey)

16. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullyingcommunication in the workplace - 1 “It is easy to communicate to my company that I feel worries, dissatisfaction or problems” Data: MHLW, 2012 (Employee Survey)

17. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullyingcommunication in the workplace - 2 “It is easy to communicate to my boss that I feel worries, dissatisfaction or problems” Data: MHLW, 2012 (Employee Survey)

18. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullyingcommunication in the workplace - 3 “There is smooth communication between colleagues” Data: MHLW, 2012 (Employee Survey)

19. ２．Background and reasons for the occurrence of workplace bullyingcommunication in the workplace - 4 “I have a colleague with whom I can discuss issues other than work” Data: MHLW, 2012 (Employee Survey)

20. 3. National policies against workplace bullying • The first national meeting on workplace bullying started in 2012 • “Round-table Conference on Issues of Workplace Bullying and Harassment” and “Working Group for Round-table Conference” • Working Group published its Report in January 2012, and Round-table Conference published its “Recommendations for Prevention and Resolution of Workplace Bullying (Power Harassment)” in March 2012.

21. 3. National policies against workplace bullyingWorking group’s report - 1 • Definition of Workplace bullying (“Power Harassment”) • The Working Group defines power harassment as “an act by an employee using his superiority, such as position of seniority or relationship with a co-worker which causes such co-worker mental or physical stress or a degradation of the working environment beyond the appropriate scope of the company’s business.” • The term “superiority” at the workplace is not limited to “occupational position;” it includes any interactions between seniors and juniors or between colleagues of equal standing or even from subordinates to superiors, based on the various backgrounds of superiority.

22. 3. National policies against workplace bullyingWorking group’s report - 2 • Categories of bullying (“Power Harassment”) • Assault (physical abuse) • Intimidation, defamation, insult, or slander (mental abuse) • Isolation, ostracization, or neglect (cutting off from human relationships) • Forcing the employee to perform certain tasks which are clearly unnecessary for the business of the company, impossible to be performed, or interfere or interrupt with their normal duties (“excessive work demands”) • Ordering an employee to perform menial tasks that are unreasonable in relation to the company’s business or tasks, which are far below the employee’s ability or experience. Also includes not providing any work at all for the employee. (“insufficient work demands”) • Excessively inquiring into the private affairs of the employee (invasion of privacy)

23. 4. Intervention and prevention on the part of companies and trade unions • Employers implementing intervention and prevention45.4% • Companies with workers more than 1,000 = 76.3% • 300 to 999 workers = 53.9% • 100 to 299 workers = 40.3% • workers less than 99 = 18.2% (MHLW, 2012)

24. 4. Intervention and prevention on the part of companies and trade unionsCharacteristics of the measurestaken by companies and trade unions • Main 3 measures + 2 • set up and operate a consultation desk, hotline and helpline • understand the actual situation by questionnaire surveys • provide awareness raising, training, and education • promote communication and create an open atmosphere at the workplace • hold discussions and share information on bullying between labor and management (JILPT “Interview Survey for Employers and Trade Unions on Measures Against Workplace Bullying”, 2011)

25. 5. Critique and conclusion • Not many employers and trade unions implementing intervention and prevention • Even if they take some measures, their effectiveness are much questioned (ex. very few workers (1.8% in companies’ helpline; 1.4% outside consultation helpline) consult the matters, and 46.7% did nothing after they were bullied (MHLW, 2012) • Especially Japanese trade unions are reluctant to tackle this issues • Measures of intervention and prevention has not yet established • Significance to tackle this issue and knowledge of consequences after bullying has not been shared • Only few research surveys operated = limited understanding the actual situation • Effectiveness of the national policy is limited (ex. Round-table Conference’s “Recommendations”) Thank you very much for your attention and interest !