Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

tofugu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 238 posts

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#81

Post by erinnh »

dopfk09320k wrote: post #43
jandrewrogers wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I don’t have any experience in Japan, I have no idea what the nuances are like there. I have a lot of experience in Europe, which echoed some of the themes raised.

Do you have examples ? I have never heard European people being sued for quitting either. The opposite of at-will employment is not that you can't quit. Just that employers can't suddenly fire you without repercussions.

It is possible to be sued for damages in Germany if you quit and don't come back to work during your notice period.

Its not very likely and hard to prove damages by the employer, but possible.

Nothing really stopping you from simply half-assing your job during your notice period, though.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#82

Post by specproc »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #32
croes wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t call losing your source of income and maybe your health insurance no practical repercussions. I don’t know in which countries you worked but I didn’t have any problems getting out of a contract.

America has very low unemployment and median household incomes are among the highest in the world. You get to continue your existing health insurance 18 months after you quit if you wish, you just have to pay for it. Most people can and if you can’t then the government pays for it. While getting terminated is disruptive, it isn’t the end of the world for the typical American. The relative ease with which most people…

The flipside is that you have no job security. In Europe, we've been moving towards more American style "flexible employment" for years, and it's highly controversial.

As an aging guy, I'm also staring down the barrel of cross-party consensus on replicating the predatory US healthcare model in my country. I see what things look like in the States, and no thanks.

> While getting terminated is disruptive, it isn’t the end of the world for the typical American.

Whenever conversations like this come up, I feel the need to remind folks that most folks don't work in tech for colossal salaries. Around a quarter of Americans have less than USD 1,000 saved, most under 5,000.[0] No runway is the norm, I'd put that well above "disruptive" for "most Americans".

[^0] https://www.forbes.com/advisor/banking/savings/average-ameri...

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#83

Post by Tade0 »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #66
Iulioh wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your opinion is influenced by probability being a well off professional in a field where you can easily find another job, maybe phisical location is not even that important. Just an hypothesis. I prefer the "chains on both sides" approach for the society.

Some of my dearest friends are on the lower end of working class and don’t make a lot of money. They worry about many things but finding another job is not among them. We talk about it. I am financially well off now but I’ve also lived decades of abject poverty, I am not unfamiliar with what that entails. At every point in time, finding a job wasn’t an issue. It might have not been a great job, but it was a job that…

That's a general feature of minimum-wage jobs, not just in the US. The reason is twofold:

-Huge staff rotation (a lot of it people getting fired).

-There being little consequences if a role isn't filled.

Regarding that second point: what happens if there's one cashier, delivery driver or store stocker fewer? Not much, except for delays, unless they're the very last one.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#84

Post by fakedang »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #11
infotainment wrote: post #2

> "I can't quit the job. If I say I'm going to quit, I'll be threatened that I will have to pay damages for quitting." Interestingly, this is actually possible under Japanese law/legal precedent. If an employee, for example, decides to put in notice and then half-ass their job until their departure date, a company could actually sue the employee and win. Other Japan-labor-law fun fact: if you are a contract worker, i…

The majority of developed countries have subtle versions of this. I was naive about this before I worked outside the US and saw the practical impact. The chains go both ways and have real downsides. Having seen the perverse incentives this creates and the various ways in which it can be abused, I have come to the conclusion that the American “at-will” employment model is actually a good thing and benefits workers. No…

At will employment coupled with a universal healthcare system would have been the best system for America, but as we know, that's an impossibility now.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#85

Post by adrianN »

erinnh wrote: post #81
dopfk09320k wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have examples ? I have never heard European people being sued for quitting either. The opposite of at-will employment is not that you can't quit. Just that employers can't suddenly fire you without repercussions.

It is possible to be sued for damages in Germany if you quit and don't come back to work during your notice period. Its not very likely and hard to prove damages by the employer, but possible. Nothing really stopping you from simply half-assing your job during your notice period, though.

It is my understanding that you haven’t quit until your notice period is over, you just have given notice. As such it is not surprising to me that you still have to do the job or face some consequences; you signed a contract after all. You would sue your employer too if they fired you and then immediately stopped paying you.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#86

Post by specproc »

kirkules wrote: post #76
specproc wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can spell it out, if it helps. In a country with exorbitant healthcare costs, it means that leaving your job means that you (and often your family) don't get healthcare.

I'm thinking you misinterpreted the comment you responded to? I read it as saying that you don't necessarily have to have employment linked healthcare just because you have at-will employment. The "inexplicably" being a commentary on the wisdom/sanity/compassion of linking healthcare to employment, rather than a claim that the parent comment had made an inexplicable leap of logic

I very much read it as I responded, and re-reading, still interpret it as such.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#87

Post by rendall »

Daz1 wrote: post #57

this is mostly fantastical nonsense. I go home at 6pm everyday. go outside at 6pm and you will see businesspeople everywhere also on the commute home. also it is nearly impossible to fire anyone in Japan for anything

You might be right that black companies do not exist and that the article is fantastical nonsense. But you seem to be making the argument it does not happen to me nor anyone I see therefore they do not exist. Isn't that not really a logical argument against their existence, but argument by personal incredulity? By definition, you would be unlikely to see or know these workers.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#88

Post by papaver-somnamb »

On the point of Japanese companies shedding staff .. There is a friendly, win-win way to move skilled staff out of your company, but my impression is it's not widely known nor often occur.

When a company finds that a particular staff member "isn't a good fit for the company" they will add this person to an informal list that is traded through back-channels with other companies. At some future time such personnel might be directly approached by headhunters on behalf of inquiring companies. Of course the current employer overlooks the poaching activity, they want the member gone. The only clue the office gets is one day out of the blue that member shows up to work wearing full interview attire, and might soon after announce that they are moving on.

For the managerial tier and above, they frequently socialize and will have a sense of when it is time to move on, in accordance with societal expectations. Given that the managerial profession comprises a relatively smaller group in Japan, they can expect to land their next gig soon enough.

As for the rest, I've heard of plenty of tactics used to induce (eventual) voluntary departure, "black" or otherwise. I don't advocate for them myself, but the culture, market, and law is what it is..

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#89

Post by hackit2 »

lmm wrote: post #64
hackit2 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a half assed job A judge would automatically throw out the case if this was the argument for suing an employee. The reasoning being, if you continued to pay the employee during the term of their employment, and you knew that the employee was not performing based on some KPI or some yard stick, you would issue warning to the employee to improve their performance, or you would fire the employee on the spot. Continuin…

> The reasoning being, if you continued to pay the employee during the term of their employment, and you knew that the employee was not performing based on some KPI or some yard stick, you would issue warning to the employee to improve their performance, or you would fire the employee on the spot. Continuing keep an underperforming employee is giving tactic consent that their work is reasonably acceptable because if…

Each party has their own valid argument that is why they're seeking the court to make a ruling. How-ever coercive threats of legal action is also in of itself constitute a encroachment of someone free will and statutory right which everything being equal could be ground for further legal recourse by the other party. You could also go into nit picking details around consent and duress during employment, which can get complicated really quickly.

Re: How Japanese black companies oppress workers (2014)

#90

Post by bryanrasmussen »

papaver-somnamb wrote: post #88

On the point of Japanese companies shedding staff .. There is a friendly, win-win way to move skilled staff out of your company, but my impression is it's not widely known nor often occur. When a company finds that a particular staff member "isn't a good fit for the company" they will add this person to an informal list that is traded through back-channels with other companies. At some future time such personnel migh…

so - the implication is that they are good fits for these other companies? How does this work? How do you know that Bob is not a good fit for your company but a good fit for Apple? I would suppose then different metrics are used than just quality and quantity of work as that would imply being no good wherever you went?
Post reply on HN