Thinking about the Aftermath of 3.11:
The Challenge for Japanese Labor Sociology
The Japanese Association of Labor Sociology (JALS)

Introduction
Over three years have passed since March 11, 2011, when a gigantic earthquake causeddevastation in the Tohoku region. After the earthquake, it was rightly said that the disaster totallychanged the framework of our recognition, marking an epochal point for a different future.
Nevertheless, various social problems in Japan remain unsolved, and arguably those situated within
the affected region have actually been exacerbated by the disaster. Effectively this means thatJapanese society is faced with the same overall social problems as before the disaster, and thatJapanese sociology still has to address such problems as social and regional inequalities, social
exclusion, and so on. Regarding labor problems, Japanese labor sociology is confronted with atleast three problems that it needs to conduct further research on and suggest means for theirresolution.
First, the earthquake disaster highlighted the pre-existing employment problems in Japan,
particularly in the Tohoku region. Primary industries such as fisheries and marine food processing
were widely destroyed in this region, and many jobs in these industries were lost. Consequently,
unemployment and precarious jobs remain in the affected area, even though over three years havepassed since the gigantic earthquake and resulting huge tsunami.
This situation, however, is not specific to the affected area and there are similarities in otherregions in Japan. In Japan, regular employment is also being replaced with irregular or atypicalemployment resulting in job insecurity. In addition, underemployment can lead to social exclusion
for many workers. Therefore, the situation in the aftermath of 3.11 requires Japanese laborsociology to address the problems of employment and social exclusion more seriously.
Second, the earthquake and tsunami also resulted in the breakdown of the Fukushima Nuclear
Power Plant and serious radiation leakages from the plant. As a result, public opinion and therelated social movement opposed to nuclear power plants bloomed in Japan; a part of the labor
movement also joined this countermovement against nuclear power plants. However, theFederation of Electric Power Related Industry Workers’ Unions of Japan, which is a federation oflabor unions in electric power companies, voiced its approval for the continuation of nuclear power
plants and opposed the government of the former Democratic Party of Japan, which in those days
pursued the abolition of nuclear power plants.
This suggests that enterprise-based unions should balance the profits of enterprises with theinterests of workers. This point has been persistently stressed in Japanese labor sociology.
Therefore, the situation in the aftermath of 3.11 continues to prompt Japanese labor sociology to doresearch on enterprise-based unions and their limitations, as well as on alternative union activities.

265

Third, the earthquake disaster also made explicit the issue of social exclusion for foreign
workers. As is well known, many foreign workers in the affected area, who are mostly technicaltrainees (ginou-jisyusei) mainly from China, swiftly went back to their home countries after thedisaster. This is because these workers were given somewhat erroneous information from theirhome countries regarding radiation and as a result were overwhelmingly terrified of its effects. To
put it another way, this means that these workers did not effectively belong to regional
communities where they lived, and hold no social relationships or social capital with theirneighbors in Japan. Therefore, Japanese labor sociology also has to address the problems of foreign
workers within globalization.
These tasks for Japanese labor sociology are derived from its history and the research interestsof JALS. In order to confirm this point, the history of labor sociology in Japan and the activities of
JALS will be reviewed briefly.

A Brief History of Labor Sociology in Japan
Inception
The inception of Japanese labor sociology dates to the prewar era. Sociology in Japan,
including that of labor, was imported from European countries. Japanese labor sociology was also
influenced by Max WEBER and Emile DURKHEIM, and originally started as the sociology ofoccupations. A representative scholar in this field in the prewar era was ODAKA Kunio (1941). He
studied occupations from the perspective of the ethics of work (Weber) and social solidarity(Durkheim). He formalized three factors of occupation: subsistence, the emergence of personal
characters, and the realization of social solidarity.
Furthermore, he analyzed the hierarchy (kisen) of occupations and indicated that such ahierarchy could not be undermined by the strength of social solidarity. In addition, he considered
whether or not the free choice of occupations could be achieved, and confirmed that inherent
inequalities among workers―derived from their original jobs, education, skills, the conditions of
the labor market, and poverty―could constrain such free choice. This interest in social inequalities
gradually led Odaka to research social stratification and mobility after World War II.

The Postwar Era
In the postwar era the research interests of Japanese sociologists, particularly in rural andlabor sociology, shifted to the modernization of Japanese society and the influence of feudal
institutions on family, local regions, and enterprise were critically examined. For example,
MATSUSHIMA Shizuo (1978) constructed his concept of labor sociology by doing fieldwork onsuch feudal institutions (hoken-isei) as reciprocal organization (tomoko) among miners.
Furthermore, Matsushima actively continued to do fieldwork on various companies andindustries including mines, an electric power plant, the petrochemical industry, and paper
manufacturing. Based on his research results, Matsushima stressed that the consciousness of266

Japanese workers was not only determined by feudal institutions but also rationality and realism inpursuing life security to some degree, and that their consciousness was characterized by a dual
loyalty (nijyu chusei) to their companies and labor unions.
On the other hand, HAZAMA Hiroshi (1964) also did fieldwork with Matsushima and built
his own theoretical model of Japanese-style management. He stressed the persistence of feudal
institutions in Japanese-style management and called this style management familism (keiei
kazokushugi). In short, the major research interests of Japanese labor sociology were “the feudal”
or “the Japanese” in the postwar era.
Advancement
In the 1960s, social sciences relating to labor problems were promoted and various research
topics were addressed. In sociology one of the most popular themes was comparative analysis
between Japanese-style management and management styles in other Western societies. One of thereasons why many comparative analyses were implemented was also derived from researchinterests in the Japanese, which was referred to as “particularity” in Japan.
As is well known, the characteristics of Japanese-style management or industrial relations aredefined as lifetime employment (shushin koyo), a seniority system (nenkosei), and enterprise-based
unions. Because James G. ABEGGLEN (1958) stressed the uniqueness and advantage of thesecharacteristics, many scholars in Japan and other countries became interested in their function in
the management system. For example, Ronald DORE (1973), one of the most famous“Japanologists,” also carried out a comparative analysis of industrial relations systems in the
United Kingdom and Japan. He concluded that industrial relations in the late-starting Japanprevailed over those of the UK and that Japan obtained benefits from her organization-oriented
enterprises. In other words, Japanese industrial relations systems were not backward but, in a sense,
had advanced somewhat from the Japanese.
In the 1970s, while the relatively stagnant economy in Japan had an impact on the loyalties ofworkers to their companies, as a general rule benign industrial relations enabled the Japanese
economy to perform well. In comparison with British workers, INAGAMI Takeshi (1981)
indicated that Japanese workers with large corporations were integrated within their organizations
and aimed to pursue their careers through lifetime employment. Consequently, in the 1980s,
Japanese industrial relations or management systems were praised in academic research and thebusiness world and were regarded as offering superior models. Furthermore, in the process ofglobalization it was even discussed whether or not Japanese-style management or production
systems, which arose and were developed exclusively in Japan, could be transplanted to othersocieties.
However, on the other hand Japanese-style management systems or industrial relations had
been criticized for their low rate of labor compensation, heavy workloads, long working hours,
gender inequalities, and more. For example, a journalist named KAMATA Satoshi (1973) carriedout participant observation in a Toyota factory and vividly reported the harsh reality of work forstaff at Toyota. The Marxist tradition in Japanese labor sociology also had an impact on criticalexaminations of Japanese-style management. Marxist scholars primarily accused Japanese-style267management for its repressive integration of workers.
In this way, in the 1980s, one of the main research themes in Japanese labor sociology wasthat of how to estimate the effectiveness of Japanese-style management. As a result, JALS has also
addressed this theme continually since its establishment.

The Activities of JALS
Establishment
JALS was established in 1988. It started with a membership of around 100 scholars, which
gradually increased to 250. The first President was KAMADA Toshiko, a remarkable scholar onlabor disputes in the steel industry. Before its establishment, the Labor Sociology Workshop had
been held regularly several times per year since 1982. This workshop was run by scholars
interested in labor problems, mainly around the Tokyo area. In many cases, these scholars did
independent research on various questions, but this workshop was an opportunity for them togather and led to the establishment of JALS. A factor which influenced its establishment was thatthe founders of JALS were actually afraid because research in labor sociology was stagnant at thattime.
Since its establishment, JALS has held an annual research meeting and several researchworkshops to promote research activities, particularly to foster young scholars. For each annual
research meeting, JALS plans a factory observation tour for various industries, and gives valuable
and interesting opportunities to many participants. Furthermore, it has also published two annual
journals carrying research articles by its members. These are: The Annual Review of Labor
Sociology and The Journal of Labor Sociology. Regarding fostering young scholars, JALS hascompiled consecutive special issues on fieldwork by proficient scholars in its Annual Review, andhas invited these scholars to talk about their experiences and skills in fieldwork.
Activities and Themes
The activities of JALS for over 20 years have been presented as main themes of the annual
research meetings. JALS has examined several themes since its establishment. These themes havealso been published in The Annual Review of Labor Sociology as special issues. In the following
sections these themes and their social background will be reviewed, through which the activities of
JALS will also be identified.
Enterprise-ruled society and enterprise-based unions
First, as already mentioned, JALS addressed issues related to Japanese-style management.
Japanese labor sociologists have often defined a group of issues related to this management system
as an “enterprise-ruled society (kigyo-shakai).” The concept of an enterprise-ruled society has notnecessarily been clearly defined. However, its concept can be summarized as follows―enterprises
rule the overall social lives of workers in Japan. In short, predicated on enterprise-based unions
connecting benign industrial relations, integrative ideology, and the like, large corporations in
268

Japan can earn profits with much flexibility in controlling their workers.
Furthermore, because Japanese-style management was prevalent and highly appreciated inJapan and other countries in the 1980s, JALS, many members of which are in some way critical ofJapanese-style management and enterprise-ruled society, have often based the annual meetingthemes precisely on enterprise-ruled society. For example, given that workers in enterprise-ruled
society are required to be adequately educated, trained, and disciplined for work as management
demands, it is crucial to examine the issue of education for workers. Therefore, the theme of“enterprise-ruled society and education” was set as the theme of the meeting in 1995.
Enterprise-ruled society was thought to have begun transforming itself as a result of keencompetition in globalization in the 1990s. JALS attempted to examine this transformation in theannual research meetings of 1996 and 2000. In 1996, JALS focused on “dispatched workers”.
Japanese enterprises, faced with keen competition, pursued more flexibility in management andlabor control. As a result, they tended to employ more dispatched workers, who are a type of
irregular workers. This was derived partly from the shift of labor policy in Japan―the government
admitted the enlargement in the scope of dispatched workers from the late 1990s onwards andfinally agreed to an extension from clerical workers to production workers in 2004.
Furthermore, one of the primary managers’ organizations, the Japan Federation of Employers’
Associations (Nikkeiren) (1995) published a critical report stating that types of workers or styles of
employment in Japanese-style management in the “new age” needed to be classified into three
types: workers with skills developed in long-term employment, workers with highly specializedcompetence, and workers in flexible employment. Among these three types of workers, workers inconventional lifetime employment are counted in the first category. The third category is
considered to include irregular workers such as dispatched workers, part-time workers, temporary
workers, and other contingent workers.
As is indicated, this report made an explicit statement that Japanese employers, particularly inlarge corporations, sought functional and numerical flexibility thoroughly in globalization. This
statement was obviously endorsed with neoliberalism. Given that enterprise-based unions, which
are the dominant style of unionism in Japan, only organize employees within specific enterprises,
the membership of these unions will decrease if irregular workers increase. This is a big problem
within union activities.
JALS addressed this question in its annual meeting of 1997. If enterprise-based unions decline
in the long term, new types of unionism will need to be pursued. The theme of new unionism isalso an important topic within JALS. In Japan, for new unionism various movements ofpersonally-affiliated unions, which can be categorized as “social movement unionism,” haverecently been identified: the Managers’ Union, the Young Workers’ Union, the Women’s Union,
unions organizing foreign workers, and so forth. JALS also recognized this type of new unionism
in 1997 and 2012.
Gender and female workers
Second, female workers and gender-related issues have been crucial within JALS’ activities.
In Japan, female workers have consistently formed the majority of irregular workers, since269

part-time jobs have always been carried out mostly by female workers. Furthermore, the fact thatan enterprise-ruled society can generally integrate male workers and force them to work very hardand for long hours can be realized through the domestic work of women, many of whom also workoutside their homes.
While many feminist scholars stressed and denounced the injustice of unpaid domestic work
almost exclusively executed by women, JALS instead attempted to address female workers andgender-related issues in workplaces in an enterprise-ruled society. For example, JALS set the themeof “female workers in an enterprise-ruled society” for its annual meeting in 1994.
In addition, the membership of JALS includes many female scholars who actively do researchon female labor problems―a leading scholar among them is KIMOTO Kimiko. Many of thesescholars have recently become interested in the subject of female workers fostering their children.
Consequently, based on research on social policy supporting these female workers, the appropriate
proportionality of work and life, the participation of male workers in fostering, and other issues,
many related presentations have come to be made in annual meetings.
Young workers and their careers
As mentioned above, flexible employment has swiftly come to prevail in Japan as well as inother countries. Above all, more young workers are involved in such employment. They are known
as freeter, which is a new word coined by combining free or freelance with Arbeiter (German forworker) and defines young contingent workers whose numbers have increased to over two million
in the 2000s. Given that these young workers will not be able to obtain skills and income throughlong-term, stable careers, the existing economic and social systems are likely to malfunction―for
example, the national healthcare and pension systems, which are primarily buttressed throughyoung people’s contributions, are likely to be dismantled if many of those young people can only
earn low incomes and make no contributions.
JALS has addressed various issues around young workers and their careers several times inannual meetings. In 2003, the transformation of the transition from schools to jobs and the shifting
supply pattern of young workers were examined, along with the allocation of young workers inworkplaces. Furthermore, it is often indicated that young workers have a tendency to be indecisive
regarding what kind of career to follow and, as a result, effectively they become freeter. In short,they frequently cannot build a firm identity for work. As a result, subjective factors relating toyoung workers were also examined in the aforementioned meeting.
In addition, given that young workers are faced with difficulties in obtaining jobs because thenumber of regular workers is decreasing together with the prevalence of neoliberal labor policies
through the process of globalization, various initiatives to support young workers in obtaining jobs
are drastically required. In reality, many young people who have graduated from high schools anduniversities have significant trouble in finding decent and sustainable jobs and often cannot findemployment after graduation. In its annual meeting of 2007, JALS examined the support activities
of career departments in universities, employment bureaus (Hello Work), and high schools, andindicated that these activities could not necessarily refer young workers to employers successfully.

270

Globalization and foreign workers
As already mentioned, the increase in flexible employment and precarious jobs―dispatchedworkers, contingent workers, freeters, and so forth―is partly due to globalization and its related
neoliberal labor policies. Only as late as the late 1980s did Japanese society begin to experience theinternationalization of capital and labor or the globalization of the economy. Since then Japanese
corporations have transnationalized themselves drastically for the first time in their history, andmany foreign workers or immigrant workers have entered Japan.
JALS has tackled various issues on globalization in 1992, 1997, and 2005. Regarding foreign
workers, various issues on Japanese Brazilians were examined in 1997. In fact Koreans andChinese have formed the majority of foreigners in the postwar Japan. This is because many
Koreans and Chinese continued to stay in Japan as foreigners (zai-nichi) after the colonial
liberation, since Korea and Taiwan used to be Japanese colonies and many Koreans and Chinese
lived in Japan. However, in the 1980s other foreign workers primarily from Asian countries known
as newcomers, arrived in Japan to work. Originally the Japanese immigration system was so strict
that so-called “simple workers”, who are defined as workers without special skills, could not earnvisas for work, but such immigration policies have drastically shifted.
Consequently, in 1991 foreign workers with Japanese ancestors were admitted to work even as
simple workers. In short, Japanese Brazilians, who are the largest population with Japanese
ancestors in the world, came en masse to work in Japan. Regarding these workers, in the JALS
annual meeting of 1997 various issues such as their jobs, their lives in regional communities, their
sending communities in Brazil, and so on were discussed.
For Japanese transnational corporations, China has become one of the most popular countries
for investment. Furthermore, the East Asian region, including China, has been industrialized forseveral decades. That means that a working class is being formed in this region and that Japanesetransnational corporations will employ these workers. Therefore, the kind of industrial relations
that are constructed in this region are of crucial importance. JALS chose this theme for its annual
meeting of 2005.
In addition, in relation to such questions and to promote global communication amongscholars, Michael BURAWOY―one of the most outstanding labor sociologists and the incumbent
President of the International Sociological Association―was invited to participate in the 2008
JALS workshop.
In the above, four primary themes of JALS have been reviewed by taking a glimpse at annual
research meetings. However, other themes have also been selected for annual meetings. For
example, as a consequence of aging and low fertility in Japanese society the significance and basic
problems of care work were examined in 2009, and the roles and significance of labor and service
in the public sector or “new publicness (atarashii kokyo)” were discussed in 2011.

Concluding Remarks: Beyond 3.11
Given that the aftermath of 3.11 has not seen the end or solution of past problems but their271

persistence and recurrence, JALS has to more thoroughly pursue the same topics that it has coveredfor over two decades. In fact, the affected area in the Tohoku region can be regarded as the epitomeof social and labor problems in Japan.
First, employment problems in the affected area reflect those of Japan overall―regular
employment is shrinking and irregular jobs are becoming prevalent. Among other things, young
workers, who should play central roles in Japan’s future, have difficulties finding sustainable jobs
from which livable incomes can be earned and decent lives are possible. Japanese labor sociology
and JALS must wrestle with these problems earnestly and seek to improve the situation of workers.
Second, the dominant pattern of labor unions in Japan, that is, the enterprise-based union,must also be taken seriously again. It might take social movements, in addition to social policy, toimprove deteriorating situations for workers in Japan. Nevertheless, many Japanese laborsociologists―of whom KAWANISHI Hirosuke is a representative—have stressed that the labor
movement of enterprise-based unions is limited to organizing workers widely and overcoming
enterprise-specific interests.
Irrespective of whether or not nuclear power plants can be approved, there is no doubt that
unions affiliated with electric power companies prioritize the interests of their companies overthose of the public. Japanese labor sociologists must explore new unionism more seriously, which
can overcome the constraints of enterprise-based unions, organize various kinds of irregular
workers, and improve the situations of precarious workers.
Third, globalization also has an impact upon the affected area. As has been reported, many
subsidiaries and suppliers affiliated with transnational corporations are clustered there, and morethan a few foreign workers work there. As the case of the affected area indicates, the fact thattransnational corporations employ workers all over the world and many workers migrate globallyshould be a premise of sociological analysis. Labor sociologists are requested to take globalization
into account if they try to find ways of improving the situation of workers and constructing a more
inclusive society.
(Written by YAMADA Nobuyuki, Komazawa University)
References
Abegglen, James G. 1958. The Japanese Factory: Aspects of Its Social Organization, NY: Free
Press.
Dore, Ronald. 1973. British Factory Japanese Factory: The Origins of National Diversities inIndustrial Relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hazama Hiroshi. 1964. Nihon Romukanri-shi Kenkyu: Keiei Kazokushugi No Keisei To Tenkai(Study on the History of Japanese Labor Management: The Rise and Development ofManagement Familism). Tokyo: Daiyamondosha.
Inagami Takeshi. 1981. Roushikankei No Shakaigaku (The Sociology of Industrial Relations).
Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai.
Japan Federation of Employers’ Association. 1995. Shin-Jidai No ‘Nihonteki Keiei’: Chosen-subeki
Hoko To Sono Gutaisaku (‘Japanese-style Management’ in the New Age: Shifting Direction272

and Its Tangible Methods).
Kamata Satoshi. 1973. Jidosha Zetsubo Kojo: Aru Kisetsuko No Nikki (Works in a Japanese
Automobile Factory: Diary of a Seasonal Worker). Tokyo: Gendaishishuppannkai.
Matsushima Shizuo. 1962. Romukanri No Nihonteki Tokushitsu To Hensen (JapaneseCharacteristics and their Change in Labor Management). Tokyo: Daiyamondosha.
― ― ― ― 1978. Tomoko No Shakaigakuteki Kosatsu: Kozan Rodosha No Itonamu Kyodo
Seikatsutai (A Sociological Consideration on Tomoko: A Living Community of Miners).
Tokyo: Ochanomizu Shobo.
Odaka Kunio. 1941. Shokugyo Shakaigaku (The Sociology of Occupations). Tokyo: Iwanami
Shoten.
Contact Information
President (as of July 2014):
HASHIMOTO Kenji (Waseda University, Graduate School of Human Sciences)
Bureau (as of July 2014):
Nakagawa Laboratory, Takushoku University, 3-4-14 Kohinata, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 112-8585,
JAPAN
E-mail: laborsociology1988@gmail.com
Website: http://www.jals.jp/(only in Japanese)273