When Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's Cabinet was reshuffled last August, "work-style reforms" was put on the forefront of the Abe administration's key policy agenda — with a Cabinet minister put in place for the first time to be specifically in charge of the matter. Needless to say, working is an extremely important matter for the people.
In a news conference at the outset of this year, Abe said the following as he declared his intention to tackle work-style reforms: "The government will introduce a system in which people would be able to freely choose among diverse styles of work by correcting irrational disparities in such conditions as wage hikes, job training and welfare benefits irrespective of employment statuses — either regular or irregular employment. We will introduce an upper limit on work hours to end the practice of long working hours, and secure a work-life balance to create an environment where everyone would find it easier to work." The prime minister then proceeded to name the regular 150-day Diet session that opened on Jan. 22 as "work-style reform" session of the Diet.
To be deliberated in the session is an amendment to the Labor Standards Law. It will be the first major overhaul of the law in its 70-year history. The amendment covers various grounds, but the biggest point is a new provision that seeks to evaluate the value of labor — or wages — in terms of performance. Given the growing proportion of knowledge-intensive labor, there are clear limitations to evaluating the outcome of labor merely in terms of the hours spent. A performance-based evaluation of labor will also have the effect of curbing the long working hours. However, opposition parties and some labor unions label the proposed amendment as "zero overtime wage" legislation by claiming that it will only reduce the workers' pay. As Abe and his ruling coalition enjoy a dominant political foothold, the opposition camp appears to target the proposed legislation as its point of attack in the just-opened Diet session. There are chances that deliberations on the bill get confused as the ruling parties become worried about possible damage to popular support of the Cabinet.