Enforcing anti-discrimination laws seems like the best way to help workplace equality, but setting numerical targets for management roles probably works against that goal. If a company's roster of women or other discriminated-against groups in management is improving sufficiently, it can more easily fend off anti-discrimination claims that emerge from the 90 percent or more of employees who either don't seek or aren't qualified for management roles.
I entirely agree with you. Toughening penalties and enforcing the law are essential, along with other measures such as ensuring access to childcare. The operation of the two-track system deserves more investigation. As I understand it (but I have seen no research on this), applicants to a firm apply to one of the tracks, but if hired, may be assigned to a different track. (A few years ago I saw a letter to the newspaper where a woman complained of being assigned to ippanshoku after applying to sogoshoku.) It seems to me that the government could do several things about this. First, they could require employers to report publicly the number of male and female applicants to each track, and the number of male and female applicants actually hired for each track. Second, if they are actually serious about having 30% of women managers, then they could stipulate by law that firms over a certain size that have a specific managerial track recruit at least 30% (preferably higher) of entrants to that track from their female applicants. Another major issue is the expectation that managers work extremely long hours, which probably puts many women who want children off a management track. Two things could be done about that. First, raise the statutory level of overtime pay, and enforce reporting of overtime better, to provide incentives to reduce work hours. Second, make some serious studies of work practices in places like Germany, which manage to have relatively short working hours and high economic performance, in order to learn how to do better.
There are perhaps 5,000,000 firms in Japan but only about 3200 labor standards inspectors. They are already battling huge caseloads. They might be ordered to enforce EPEW and non-discrimination statutes, but they already struggle to enforce all but the most egregious violations of health and safety laws. Violations of work hours and overtime pay rules, even when investigated, result only, as Katz notes, in administrative guidance. Even when enforced, the law is toothless and bias against gender equality remains strong among men because realizing it won't benefit them.
Of course Kishida isn't serious. This is pre-election talk. He's fluffing his feathers before the G7 meeting so as to get approval from other G7 leaders that will translate into a beneficial couple of seconds of video on the news. He's also coasting off sympathy for the rather inept assassination attempt of a couple of weeks ago. Word among opposition politicians is he's thinking of dissolution after the G7, and an election as early as July 09.
Getting more females sucked deeper into the workaholic Japanese business environment will not do anything for their birth rates.
I'd be curious to see what correlation exists between female workforce participation and birth rates in Japan.
The Japanese have a different POV on priorities
Edit: I've lived in Japan and worked in Japanese industry for Japanese companies for 7 years. Totally fluent in Japanese. Doesn't make me Japanese, but I know how they think. Generally speaking...
Enforcing anti-discrimination laws seems like the best way to help workplace equality, but setting numerical targets for management roles probably works against that goal. If a company's roster of women or other discriminated-against groups in management is improving sufficiently, it can more easily fend off anti-discrimination claims that emerge from the 90 percent or more of employees who either don't seek or aren't qualified for management roles.
I entirely agree with you. Toughening penalties and enforcing the law are essential, along with other measures such as ensuring access to childcare. The operation of the two-track system deserves more investigation. As I understand it (but I have seen no research on this), applicants to a firm apply to one of the tracks, but if hired, may be assigned to a different track. (A few years ago I saw a letter to the newspaper where a woman complained of being assigned to ippanshoku after applying to sogoshoku.) It seems to me that the government could do several things about this. First, they could require employers to report publicly the number of male and female applicants to each track, and the number of male and female applicants actually hired for each track. Second, if they are actually serious about having 30% of women managers, then they could stipulate by law that firms over a certain size that have a specific managerial track recruit at least 30% (preferably higher) of entrants to that track from their female applicants. Another major issue is the expectation that managers work extremely long hours, which probably puts many women who want children off a management track. Two things could be done about that. First, raise the statutory level of overtime pay, and enforce reporting of overtime better, to provide incentives to reduce work hours. Second, make some serious studies of work practices in places like Germany, which manage to have relatively short working hours and high economic performance, in order to learn how to do better.
There are perhaps 5,000,000 firms in Japan but only about 3200 labor standards inspectors. They are already battling huge caseloads. They might be ordered to enforce EPEW and non-discrimination statutes, but they already struggle to enforce all but the most egregious violations of health and safety laws. Violations of work hours and overtime pay rules, even when investigated, result only, as Katz notes, in administrative guidance. Even when enforced, the law is toothless and bias against gender equality remains strong among men because realizing it won't benefit them.
Of course Kishida isn't serious. This is pre-election talk. He's fluffing his feathers before the G7 meeting so as to get approval from other G7 leaders that will translate into a beneficial couple of seconds of video on the news. He's also coasting off sympathy for the rather inept assassination attempt of a couple of weeks ago. Word among opposition politicians is he's thinking of dissolution after the G7, and an election as early as July 09.
Getting more females sucked deeper into the workaholic Japanese business environment will not do anything for their birth rates.
I'd be curious to see what correlation exists between female workforce participation and birth rates in Japan.
The Japanese have a different POV on priorities
Edit: I've lived in Japan and worked in Japanese industry for Japanese companies for 7 years. Totally fluent in Japanese. Doesn't make me Japanese, but I know how they think. Generally speaking...