Victory at Fuji Bakery leads to org drive

Apr 4, 2010

In August of 2009 she injured her left hand at work. The injury resulted in the inability to move her hand adequately, thereby resulting in difficulty with her work. She was informed that she was no longer required to report to work, and then summarily dismissed. When we asked her whether she had been covered by “rosai” insurance (workers’ accident compensation insurance), she replied, “I went to the hospital on my own health insurance. They cut my wages if I took days off, so I went back to work though I still had pain.” It was an attempt to hide an accident at work, and a dismissal caused by the resultant injury. This is a blatant violation of Labour Standards Law. Ms. S joined the General Union and the union went on to contact Bomtec, the company dispatching her to Fuji Pan, for negotiation. The union was able to get the company to apply “rosai” insurance retroactively, thus enabling Ms. S to restart the treatment. Compensation for days off from work was arranged to secure her income for this time. The union also demanded that withdrawal of the unfair dismissal and reinstatement to her original position. The company responded by claiming that they did not dismiss her, but rather ordered a transfer. They further claimed that it was because she refused the transfer that she was not able to work, a claim which the union found unacceptable. We were not making progress by exchanging documents, so the General Union demanded collective bargaining. In January 2010 we had a collective bargaining session with Bomtec at the union office. At the meeting it came out that the contract between Bomtec and the Fuji Pan subsidiary was what is known as a “fake out-sourcing contract,” and that the workers are not enrolled in social insurance. We confronted the company over the violation of the labour laws. In the end the senior manager of Bomtec who was representing the company at the meeting agreed to withdraw the dismissal of Ms. S. On signing the agreement, the company was reluctant to agree to the payment of the settlement money. When we told him “if you don’t accept the union’s demands, we will have to fight on and take legal measures over the non-enrolment to social insurance”, the senior manager again agreed to pay. Ms. S has now recovered from the injury, and returned to work in late February. The settlement money was paid by Bomtec at about the same time. She was very pleased to have won her job back, and by the settlement. Now she is working hard to organize her Japanese-Brazilian coworkers. 2009年11月、フィリピン人組合員の紹介で、一人のフィリピン人女性(以下、「Sさん」という)が組合事務所に相談に訪れた。Sさんはフジパンの子会社の工場に派遣されて働く日系フィリピン人労働者であった。2009年8月にSさんは左手を仕事中に怪我した為、思うように手が動かせず何度が職場で失敗をしたところ、最後に「あなたはもう来なくていい。」とクビを切られた。「労災保険は使ったのか。」とSさんに尋ねると、「健康保険で病院に行った。仕事を休むと給料が減らされるので、痛みがあったが仕事に戻った。」とのこと。労災隠しと労災を理由とする解雇であり、悪質な労基法違反である。Sさんは組合に加入し、早速彼女を派遣していた会社ボンテックと交渉することにした。 後付で労災保険を使い怪我の治療を再開し、併せて休業補償も得てSさんの当座の収入を確保した。そして、組合はボンテックに対し、「不当解雇撤回・原職復帰」の要求書を送ったが、ボンテックは、「解雇はしていない。転勤を伝えたが、本人が転勤を拒否するから、就労出来ない状態が続いている。」とのふざけた回答を返してきた。書面のやり取りだけでは事態が進展しないので、組合はボンテックに団体交渉を申し入れた。 2010年1月、組合事務所でボンテックとの団体交渉が行なわれた。団交の席上、ボンテックとフジパン子会社の関係がいわゆる「偽装請負」であること、労働者を社会保険に加入させていないことが発覚した。委員長や私が会社の法違反を追及したところ、団交出席者のボンテックの専務は「Sさんに対する解雇の撤回」を認めた。その後、合意書締結の段階で、ボンテックは「解決金の支払い」に難色を示したが、私が「組合の要求をのまないなら、社会保険未加入に対して法的措置を講じる。」と告げると、ボンテックの専務はこれまた「解決金の支払い」も認めた。 怪我の治療が終わったのでSさんは2010年2月下旬より職場復帰し、同時期にボンテックは解決金を支払った。解決金を獲得し、解雇も撤回させるとの結果に、Sさんは大変喜び、今は職場で共に働く日系ブラジル人労働者の組織化に精力的に取り組んでいる。