Timeline of the Case

Mary Hanson Dougherty, one of the parties to the case, came to Japan from the United States in June 1981. Ms. Doughterty had been working as an Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) of English at Tokyo Metropolitan Ashika High School as well as at other schools, as a “Special Part-time Employee.” ALTs specialize in English education, though without the responsibilities of homeroom teachers. However, in April 2020, the Local Public Service Law was amended and the new "Fiscal Year Appointment" system was introduced. Ms. Dougherty’s classification was unilaterally switched to that of a "Fiscal Year Appointee”. Her yearly contract was renewed twice under this new system. In March 2023, she was notified that her appointment would not be renewed.

Anthony Dolan, also one of the parties to the case, came to Japan from the United States in September 1995. He was hired as a "Special Part-time Employee" in April 2015, and had been working as an ALT at a metropolitan high school since then. However, like Ms. Doughtery, his classification was switched to that of a "Fiscal Year Appointee" on one year terms starting in April 2020 when the new system was introduced. He was also notified around March 2023 that he would not be reappointed for the following fiscal year.

▲Ms. Mary Hanson Dougherty (Left) and Mr. Anthony Dolan (Right)

The Plaintiffs Take Action

Ms. Dougherty and Mr. Dolan had been members of a labor union seeking better treatment for ALTs and an end to nationality based discrimination going back to their days as “Special Part-time employees.” When the two ALTs were "Special Part-time Employees," the ALT Chapter of their union had been able to request collective bargaining with their employer, the Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education, in the event of the termination of employment.

Collective bargaining means that workers, who as individuals are in a weaker position than their employers, can negotiate as a group (a labor union). Collective bargaining prevents workers from being forced to accept the unfavorable conditions that obtain when they negotiate as individuals. This is one of the basic labor rights guaranteed in Article 28 of the constitution, and the exercise of this right is spelled out in Japan’s Trade Union Law and other laws. It is a long-established right, enshrined in international treaties such as the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention which came into force in 1949. All member states of the OECD recognize the right to collective bargaining.

However, in July 2020, when the ALT chapter requested collective bargaining with Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education, demanding measures to protect against Covid-19 and an end to fixed-term employment, the board refused to meet. The board claimed that Trade Union Law does not apply to "Fiscal Year Appointees." The ALT Branch filed an Unfair Labor Practices petition with Tokyo Metropolitan Labor Relations Commission, but the petition was rejected on July 19, 2022.

As stated above, Ms. Doughtery and Mr. Dolan were not reappointed after March 2023. They feel that this was retaliation for their request to negotiate with the Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education for improved treatment. They feel helpless in the absence of any means of negotiation.

Without collective bargaining, workers are left with only two choices: accept the conditions and rules offered by their employer (in this case the Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education and the schools) as they are, or refuse to accept them and lose their employment. In order for ALTs such as Ms. Doughtery and Mr. Dolan to be able to negotiate their working conditions on an equal footing with their employer, they must have the protections of Trade Union Law.

Part-time civil servants who had already been subjected to unstable and low-paid employment to begin with have been forced into an even more unstable position by the introduction of the “Fiscal Year Appointment” system. We decided to file the lawsuit as an appeal to society to remedy this situation.

▲The day of filing the lawsuit.

Stripped of the Right to Collective Bargaining

Prior to the amendments to the Local Civil Service Act and the Local Autonomy Act which came into force on April 1, 2020, part-time employees working in local government such as ALTs (Assistant Language Teachers), librarians, consumer consultants, women's consultants, and school lunch center staff, were classified as “Special Part-time Employees.”  They were exempted from the provisions of Local Civil Service Act.  As a result these "Special Part-time employees" were able to exercise their rights of solidarity, collective bargaining, and collective action as workers just as private-sector workers can. They were also able to use the National Labor Relations Board system.

However, with the implementation of the "Fiscal Year Appointment" system, many non-regular civil servants who had previously been considered “Special Part-time Employees” were unilaterally converted to general “Fiscal Year Appointees.” They are no longer able to exercise their previously guaranteed right to collective bargaining.

Prior to the implementation of the "Fiscal Year Appointment” system, unions such as the ALT Chapter of Tozen Union had been engaged in collective bargaining with the Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education regarding issues such as the termination of union members. They had achieved some success in reversing terminations.

Labor unions are guaranteed the right to negotiate collective bargaining agreements, agreements which take precedence over the official work rules or labor contracts. This guarantee is stipulated in Article 28 of the constitution. Without the right to collective bargaining, even if workers are dissatisfied with the working conditions set by their employers, they have no choice but to negotiate as individuals and follow the rules set by their employers.

The Precarious Status of Part-time civil servants

In previous cases where restrictions in the application of basic labor rights to full-time permanent public employees had been called into question, the Supreme Court has cited the existence of the National Personnel Authority’s recommendation system for ensuring working conditions as a justification for these restrictions. This system, however, does not function effectively. Irregular civil servants are paid extremely low wages compared to full-time civil servants. Further, because the Labor Contract Law that applies to private-sector workers does not apply to civil servants, there is no right to conversion to permanent employment under the so-called 5 year-rule. The precarious position of these workers is a serious social problem.

Under such circumstances, the right to collective bargaining is the best weapon that could be deployed to improve working conditions and stable employment for part-time public employees. The amendments to the law unilaterally depriveing them of this right is highly problematic.

What we hope to achieve in this lawsuit

Before the implementation of the "Fiscal Year Appointment" system, Special Part-time employees were granted the same right to collective bargaining as private sector workers. After they were reclassified as fiscal year employees, however, they have been deprived of the means to improve their working conditions through collective bargaining. This case is not only an issue for the plaintiff union members, but for all 620,000 "Fiscal Year Appointees.”

Although the "Fiscal Year Appointment” system was established with the stated purpose of improving the working conditions of part-time civil servants, in reality there have been few reports of improved working conditions. This system deprives part-time civil servants of their basic labor rights and pushes them further into precarious positions.

We hope to bring attention to the situation of non-regular civil servants, secure their basic labor rights and improve their working conditions through this lawsuit.

Use of funds

1. Necessary expenses for filing lawsuits (stamps, postage stamps, etc.) 100,000 yen
2. Expenses for written opinions 300,000 yen
3. Expenses for holding meetings, etc. 100,000 yen
4. Attorney's fees: 500,000 yen and up

Message from Shoichi Ibusuki, lead attorney

This is an unforgivable violation of the basic labor rights guaranteed by Article 28 of the Constitution. It is unforgivable that the government will not bargain collectively with Fiscal Year Appointees when they are terminated from employment. I decided to take up the case because it is an important case concerning the basic labor rights of public employees, which has been an issue since the end of World War II.

I will work hard on this lawsuit to protect the basic labor rights of Fiscal Year Appointees nationwide.

Lawyers in Charge

Shoichi Ibusuki, Daini Tokyo Bar Association, Akatsuki Law Office
Shozo Yamada, Tokyo Bar Association, Akatsuki Law Office
Shizu Yamamoto, Tokyo Bar Association, Sumito Law Office
Keiko Kato, Tokyo Bar Association, Masuda Law Office
Akiko Tanimura, Daini Tokyo Bar Association, Nishi-Tokyo Kyodo Law Office
Chika Miyagi, Tokyo Bar Association, Kitasenju Public Law Office

“I am originally a labor union activist, I still act as an activist with a lawyer's badge.” (Ibusuki)

“I have been a university professor and an attorney at law for about 20 years. I will always work on bridging theory and trial practice from the viewpoint of the Constitution of Japan.” (Yamada).

“I am a Machiben from downtown, and I came across this case while working on the issue of government-manufactured working poor.” (Yamamoto)

“I am actively involved in labor cases involving foreign nationals. I will make every effort to ensure that the basic labor rights of the plaintiffs are protected. ”(Kato)

“I am interested in poverty issues and joined the lawsuit with an eye toward improving the status of non-regular public employees.” (Tanimura)

“I am interested in the labor issues of school teachers and the rights of foreign nationals. I will do my best to improve the status of those who are in a similar position in this case where issues in both fields intersect.” (Miyagi)

Appeal for donations

This lawsuit involves legally complex issues.  As a result, we expect to incur significant costs for litigation activities, including the solicitation of expert opinions. In addition to this lawsuit to reverse the National Labor Relations Commission's decision, we also plan to file a lawsuit seeking compensation from the state for the government’s negligence in allowing the “Fiscal Year Appointment” system to deprive part-time employees of their right to collective bargaining. Through this lawsuit, we appeal to society for the regularization of part-time civil servants and the improvement of their working conditions.  We would appreciate your support in this endeavor.