『Japan Labor Issues』3･4月号

JILPTの英文誌『Japan Labor Issues』の3･4月号が発行されました。こちらは一足先に電子版オンリーになっております。

https://www.jil.go.jp/english/jli/documents/2022/037-00.pdf

Trends
The Impact of COVID-19 on Employment and Labor MHLW's White Paper on the Labor Economy 2021 
Research
Remote Work and Job Satisfaction that Depends on Personality Traits: Evidence from Japan TAKAMI Tomohiro
Judgments and Orders
Claim for Unpaid Overtime by a Public School Teacher The Saitama Prefecture Case HAMAGUCHI Keiichiro
Special Feature on Research Papers (II)
The Future of the Japanese Long-Term Employment Society: The Consequences of Post-Industrialization and Increase of Unmarried Workers IKEDA Shingou, TAGAMI Kota, SAKAI Kazufumi (JILPT)
Why Do Firms Concentrate in Tokyo? An Economic Geography Perspective MIZUNO Masahiko (Osaka Prefecture University)
Trends in Task Distribution in Japan, 1990-2015: Evidence from the Occupational Information Network of Japan and the Population Census Data KOMATSU Kyoko (JILPT)MUGIYAMA Ryota (Gakushuin University) 

判例解説は、わたくしが埼玉県事件（公立学校教師の残業代請求事件）を取り上げております。

III. Commentary
 While this case has also attracted public attention, it must be said that the judgment itself is extremely poor. Firstly, the part in which Y’s claims regarding the unique character of teachers’ work are directly accepted does not stand up to logical analysis. It is certainly true that teachers’ work is unique in comparison with the work of typical workers, in the sense that teachers may receive relatively little directions and orders and be allowed scope for independent decisions. Given such unique aspects, it can be suggested that the approach of establishing a special exemption for regulating teachers’ working hours is to some extent rational. However, the unique characteristics of teachers’ work that are referred to are the unique aspects of teachers as an occupation, which are entirely consistent across all types of schools, whether they be national, public, or private schools. At present, it is only public school teachers who are exempt from the application of Article 37 of the LSA and to whom the EPSA is applied. In the case of both national school teachers and private school teachers, the provisions of the LSA are applied in full. Is this to suggest that such teachers’ work does not involve the scope for independence and individual discretion that public school teachers are allowed? 

Ⅲ　解説
　本件は社会的にも注目された事案であるが、判決自体としては極めて出来の悪いものと言わざるを得ない。まず、Y側の主張をそのまま受け入れている教員の職務の特殊性の部分は論理的に破綻している。教員の職務に指揮命令性の希薄さ、自律的判断の可能性など、一般労働者の職務と比べて特殊性があることは確かである。その特殊性にかんがみて、教員の労働時間規制について特例を設けること自体には一定の合理性があると考えられる。しかしながら、そこで言われている教員の特殊性は、国立学校でも公立学校でも、私立学校でも全く変わりのない職種としての教員の特殊性である。現時点において、労基法37条が適用除外され、給特法が適用されているのは公立学校の教員のみであり、国立学校教員も私立学校教員も労基法の規定がフルに適用されている。彼らには公立学校教員が有する裁量性や自律性がないのであろうか?