This paper is a study on the full-time union official system in Japan. In Japan, there have been attempts by the government to abolish this practice through amendments to the labor union law after the war, this system still continues today together with and due to the labor union form based on each business. The issue of compensating full time union officials therefore still needs interpretation as it is related to the issues of union autonomy and illegal labor practice.
As for the legal basis for recognizing full time union officials, most scholars have maintained that such a right is inherent to the right to organize under article 28 of the Constitution. Cases, however, invariably held that such a ground could be found in the consent by the employers, the collective agreements, or the existing labor practice.
Further, the additional legal issue concerning the payment of compensation to full time union officials is whether such payments would implicate the union autonomy under the section 2 of the labor union law in connection with the disqualification causes for a union, and whether they constitute support payments or interferences with governance prohibited under section 7 of the same law as unfair labor practice.
First, with respect to the implication on union autonomy, the courts and the scholars are in harmony in that the issue shall be determined in accordance with the substances of the practice, i.e., whether there is substantial autonomy. As for the issue of whether it constitutes support payment, some cases have held that, to the extent that such lump-sum payments do not interfere with the union autonomy and the right to organize, it does not constitute support payment as an illegal labor practice. However, there are also some cases that hold such payments to be illegal support payments, focusing on the format of such payments. Therefore, there is no judicial consensus on this issue. However, attempts to change or abolish existing payment schemes for full time union officials are permitted in accordance with general collective agreement amendment procedure.
In conclusion, what is unique about the full-time union official system in Japan is that there remains an issue of interpretation regarding autonomy and unfair labor practice, as there are no regulations directly on point. This is not to say that it is being strictly interpreted. The issue has been interpreted based on the principle of substance, because the legislative intent behind the provisions defining unions and unfair labor practice is to promote the concerted actions of unions, not to discourage labor activities. Of course, while some cases did hold such payments illegal, they also reflect the reality that such payments can exist in self-governing atmosphere over employers and unions for cases that never reach the court.