Sexual Harassment in the Workplace and Equal Employment Legislation

• NCJ Number: 161906
• Journal: St. John's Law Review Volume: 69 Issue: 1-2 Dated: (Winter-Spring 1995) Pages: 37-60
• Author(s): H Hayashi
• Date Published: 1996
• Length: 24 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The first part of this article introduces the structure of Japan's Equal Employment Opportunity Law (EEOL) and evaluates its effectiveness in reducing employment discrimination against women, while the second and third parts explore the relationship between sexual discrimination and sexual harassment by discussing a judicial decision affecting sexual harassment in the workplace.

Abstract

The EEOL was enacted in 1985 in connection with Japan's ratification of the United Nations Convention Concerning the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. The EEOL prohibits employers from discriminating against female workers in providing education, training, and employee benefits. In addition, the EEOL prohibits employers from imposing mandatory retirement at marriage, childbirth, or upon reaching a certain age and requires employers to treat male and female employees equally when recruiting, hiring, and dispensing job assignments and promotions. The EEOL does not create a private cause of action but does provide dispute resolution mechanisms. After 10 years of EEOL enforcement, however, many female workers have realized limited remedies. Additionally, there has been increased awareness of sexual harassment as a form of sexual discrimination in Japan. The Fukuoka District Court decision involving sexual harassment demonstrates that an employer and upper management officers must take the necessary measures required to maintain a nonhostile work environment and prevent violations of an employee's personal rights. Employers who neglect to do so may be held liable for nonperformance of their contractual duties under Article 415 of the Civil Code. Further, when an employee's personal rights are violated and the employee is prevented from performing his or her task, the company and the officers in charge are responsible for restoring a nonhostile work environment. 161 footnotes