Some readers' responses to Hifumi Okunuki's June 19 Labor Pains column, "In 'right-to-work' Japan, employees should also have the right to rest":
Hifumi Okunuki calls for comments regarding Japanese workers' right to rest. I agree with her criticism that workers' statutory right to paid leave was undermined by the Supreme Court's mistaken 1992 reversal of a High Court decision that supported workers' right to take extended holidays. The Supreme Court instead ruled in favor of firms' right to preserve "normal" operations.
While examples of judicial support for the nearly unimpeded exercise of employer authority are common in Japan, Okunuki's argument — that "the point of paid leave is to free workers from unending toil with a long vacation designed to relax and refresh the body and mind" — does not go far enough. In fact, it shows a regrettable similarity to the court's emphasis on work as the axis around which all else turns. In reality, leisure's importance is far greater than workers' legal right to rest and reproduce their labor power. It is the very basis of civilization.