Tokyo court rules IBM’s dismissal of 5 employees was unjustified

"extremely regrettable" they didn't get away with it.

What's so painful with 30 days' notice? Give them gardening leave if needs be.

Unmentioned is that these 5 people did nothing at all at work, nothing. And they weren't simply locked out of their offices and sent home. They were all offered retraining and counseling to improve their performance. When they still refused to work, they were fired. I wish the story hadn't left out that part. The actual process took months, not one day.

When new management came to Japan and took over IBM, they set out to replace the seniority-based system with a performance-based one, and to get IBM Japan running on par with other international offices. Of all the offices, IBM Japan was the worst-performing.

But once again, this is Japan, where it is nearly impossible to fire full-time workers, as shown by the court's decision. These five workers will now return to their desks and do absolutely nothing, as they did before. Worse yet, they will be promoted on schedule. And even worse, because these five will continue collecting their salaries, it will reduce the amount new hires are paid, and it will encourage IBM to stop hiring full time workers, and work with part timers, temps, or outsource more operations.

Another nail in the coffin for Japan's economy.

they weren't simply locked out of their offices and sent home.

The judge seems to disagree with you:

the judge said that “despite certain signs of decline in their job performance, the employees were dismissed without being given a proper opportunity to improve their work operation

So pray tell, how do you know details the judge doesn't?

This article seems to be lacking a mind-blowing number of details and seems to be incredibly one-sided biased towards the employees. It doesn't even describe the circumstances around the poor performance claims by the company. Can we get some more info on this?

sangetsu03

How do you know so much about this case? Do you work for IBM management? If you don't, then I don't see how you can say these five employees did nothing at work.

According to Japan’s Labor Standards Law, employers must give 30 days’ notice before dismissal. Any employee who is fired is entitled to at least 30 days’ salary.

Many high-tech companies "lock out" terminated employees from the moment of their termination in order to prevent theft of intellectual property. At my previous company, those terminated would be summoned to the personnel office to be notified, escorted back to their desk to collect their belongings, and then seen off to the parking lot. Of course, they were paid at least two months severance to comply with the law, but rather than give them notice before dismissal, they spent their last month "working" not actually working - and not allowed in the office.

The five said that they were suddenly informed by the company that they need to leave due to “poor performance” and were not given time to even properly say goodbye to their colleagues

Were not given time to say good bye......oh the horror!!

Sounds like IBM was clearing out some deadwood........something many companies have LOTS of!

Sounds to me like these employees were warned about performance issues, did nothing & then were surprised when let go. In certain positions employee's are shown the door & then paid legal amount they are due, often with sales related types of work for example.

As Sangetsu says retaining dead wood makes companies WEAK & takes pay from those who deserve more its a MASSIVE problem on these isles.

When I was young had similar happen to me, I had lost the drive & it showed, I was warned & told I would be evaluated at 2 times over the next few months, if I wasn't making enough progress I would be let go..... Pretty common & reasonable, I hated the company I worked at BUT I sucked it up & stepped up my search for a new job, I wasn't fired & left the company on my own 6-8months later, which was fair I would say.

Japans problem is its labour markets is severely dysfunctional & for anyone looking for a new job or recovering from losing a job it can be a bit of a death sentence, labour markets here are in dire need of a total re-think, but then the WHOLE country is in dire need of a J-style RESTORATION..........unlikely though

if you google it, you will see this IBM lockout firing being ONLY reported by the IBM union, which leads me to believe that sangetsu is correct. sorry, but the union is only good at protecting dead wood (this is coming from a former union leader for an eikaiwa).

and the fact that his "article" mentions their inability to say goodbye to their colleagues as a knock against IBM is quite pathetic.

"these 5 people did nothing at all at work"

Got any links, etc. that show that to be the case?

"How do you know so much about this case? Do you work for IBM management?"

I see you're unfamiliar with Sangetsu03 and his, um, "entertaining" posts.

So pray tell, how do you know details the judge doesn't?

Actually, I do know people who work at IBM Japan; a couple directors, one board member, and a few of the regular staff, I did consulting work for the company. When the new president arrived from Germany, we were all interested in how he was going to turn around the Japan operation, and I knew of the problems with these five workers even before they were terminated. There were others who were also not performing, but improved after going through additional training, and they were not fired.

These particular five were well known within the company even before the change of leadership, and not in a positive way. They were still "working" when I last did business there, and at the time it was already known that firing them would be difficult, but the company decided to do it anyway.

Anyone who has worked at one of the larger Japanese companies knows men like these, and also knows that they cannot be fired, and that it is futile to try, as IBM has learned.

The real problem in Japan is that finding another job later in life is almost impossible. Most companies are only interested in fresh graduates because they don't want to upset the social hierarchy which is determined by age rather than experience or performance.

The strict laws on firing people are just a response to this cutural phenomenon, not the root cause of the problem. In other countries, these workers would have quit immediately after the job started to get boring or the workplace became toxic. Japanese workers have to cling on and suffer through it because they have no other options.

extremely regrettable

hahaha idiot HR departments didn't even know the local rules.

**sangetsu03 hearsay is no good facts we want facts not what my mates say

sangetsu03 hearsay is no good facts we want facts not what my mates say

The article above is worse than hearsay, it borders on propaganda; "the evil Foreign Corporation which abused hardworking Japanese salarymen was punished by the courts for it's foul misdeeds".

I was there when Martin Jetter was brought in as the new president, and it was he who brought in the structural changes which led to these unfortunates losing their jobs. This new policy was obviously controversial, welcomed by the younger staff, who saw it as a chance to progress more quickly up the ranks in the company, and, conversely, hated by the older staff, who thought their jobs would be jeopardized.

Under the new system, the performance of employees was measured, and those who were not performing to minimum standards were to undergo a training program to get them up to speed. These men mentioned in the article were required to attend this training. Those who failed the training, or did not improve were invited to take it again. A great many workers attended the training, and their performance improved. The men mentioned in the article did not improve their performance, despite being warned of the consequences. They were fired, and of course, they sued to get their jobs back. And this being Japan, where it take 12 hours to do 6 hours of real work, and three people to do the job of one person, they won their case.

In getting around the problems with performance in the Japanese business culture, many of IBM Japan's services have since been moved to Singapore and Bangkok. These 5 men in the article may have gotten their jobs back, but they were partially responsible for many more Japanese losing their jobs to Singaporeans and Thais.

Bravo Japan!

Maybe IBM management was just being merciful. A Japanese company might have emptied the broom closet and put them in there, behind an empty desk, hoping they would get bored twiddling thumbs and eventually leave on their own accord.

More pressing news: IBM still exists.

It doesn't even describe the circumstances around the poor performance claims by the company. Can we get some more info on this?

Probably not. How would you like your past performance appraisals released to national news organizations? There's a certain expectation of confidentiality when it comes to performance reviews.

sangetsu03, You have offered an interesting perspective on this case. My reading of the judgment from the short article above doesn't say they will be reinstated but that they will be compensated. Do you have a link somewhere that shows they will get their jobs back rather than just being compensated?

And meanwhile in Japan 10s of thousands of companies routinely abuse their staff, ignore labour laws, and if the deadwood doesn't leave on their own & gets really annoying there are the desks by the windows, zero tasks given, transfers etc & then eventually the employee "quits" the company

All really nasty stuff. And yeah this blurb making a foreign company look "bad" classy stuff!! Look many companies j or non-j treat people poorly they ALL need to be taken to task. AND people who cant do their jobs should be able to be warned & if things don't improve are let go, the current situation makes it BAD for ALL concerned!!

This is a big reason why companies don't want to hire other than college & high school grads as its simply too risky

dcog9065MAR. 29, 2016 - 01:32PM JST

This article seems to be lacking a mind-blowing number of details and seems to be incredibly one-sided biased towards the employees. It doesn't even describe the circumstances around the poor performance claims by the company. Can we get some more info on this?

In Japan, "poor performance" cannot be a good ground for dismissal. So, the argument about poor performance is irrelevant.

They have to find a breach of labor contract to dismiss an employee, and even in such cases, the breach must be very grave.

They have to find a breach of labor contract to dismiss an employee, and even in such cases, the breach must be very grave.

To be fired they have to do something to bring shame to the company, like grope a woman on the train, kill someone in a traffic accident, or file for bankruptcy (no employer in Japan will touch a bankrupt person). You can do almost anything you want at work, or simply do nothing at all, and not worry about losing your job.

This is the main reason that lifetime employment is becoming harder to find among Japanese companies.

In Japan, "poor performance" cannot be a good ground for dismissal. and that is why Japanese companies find it so hard to compete with lean efficient overseas companies. If you not performing helping the company make money then your just a liability, which means more efficient workers are needed to cover for the inefficient ones. One reason why J companies are so over staffed. More and more of Japans workforce will be converted to casual / part timers until laws make it easier to fire full time workers that dont perform. Im sure there are many eager casual / part timers that are to take there place

Standard procedure in most US companies regarding a poor performer is to document the poor performance, document that the employee was counseled about their poor performance and a list of MEASURABLE goals agreed upon by the employer and employee gets established to show the performance has improved along with a set time frame by which the goals have been met. If the goals haven't been met by the set time frame, THEN the process for termination begins.

This appears to be what the Japanese court is saying needs to be done by IBM before they can terminate someone's employment for performance issues. Yes, it's a long process, but how long has the employee already been there before the lack of performance becomes an issue?

Yes, it's a long process, but how long has the employee already been there before the lack of performance becomes an issue?

Do you know why so many Japanese salarymen work such long hours? It is because the level of productivity per worker is so low that it takes much more time to get work done. And when you have workers who are especially unproductive, their workload must be carried by others, meaning that it takes even more time to get work done.

My wife works for a Japanese arm of an American company, and several years ago the Japanese MD was fired (executives don't receive the same protections regular workers enjoy). A new MD from London was brought in, and the first thing noticed was that all of the staff members were working until 11pm every night. The new MD looked at the quantity of work, and the time required to complete it, and told all staff that they would have to leave the office by 7pm every day, but still do the same amount of work.

The staff were horrified, thinking that they were being forced to do the impossible. Two even resigned. But, not surprisingly, they found that they were able to complete their work by 7pm. My wife was amazed, and also quite happy to be home 20 more hours per week.

@ Sangetsu

Thanks for shearing that story, brought a grin to my face.