Today was M's (of A&M not L&M) last day at the company, she is a contract worker and her contract is not being renewed. There are currently a lot of news articles about how the economic conditions have resulted in layoffs of many Japanese contract workers so I assumed that this was the same situation faced by M. She an A briefly explained that this situation was different. Because M had been a contract worker for three years if she were to stay at the company they would be required to hire her as a permanent employee. Skeptical, I did some research. On Google books I found International labor and employment law By Philip M. Berkowitz, Thomas Müller-Bonanni, which states:
"Under a recent amendment to the LSL, the maximum employment period for contract employees is three years, with limited exceptions such as contracts tied to specific projects of involving certain types of professionals. If an employment contract provided for an employment period of three years but the employee continues to work without both parties' explicit extension or renewal of the contract after the three-year period expires, the contract is deemed to be extended for an indefinite period.
Further, Japanese courts often give contract employees whose contracts are explicitly and regularly renewed protection similar to that or regular employees with respect to the discontinuance of the extension/renewal of the definite-term employment contract. In other words, it becomes very difficult for an employer not to extend/renew the definite-term employment contract of those employees to whom the employer has, by way of statements of documents to them of treatment of other employees, given a reasonable expectation of continued employment until the mandatory retirement age."
It sounds like a rule that was meant to help contract employees, but may in fact be hurting them. M will certainly be missed.
No comments:
Post a Comment