On October 13, the Supreme Court ruled that the disparity was legal in two cases that challenged whether the disparity in bonuses and retirement benefits between regular and non-regular workers violated Article 20 of the former Labor Contract Act (prohibition of unreasonable working conditions for a fixed period of time).
The court ruled that it was not unreasonable to not provide any bonus or retirement benefits to non-regular workers at all due to differences in the nature of the job and the scope of the change in assignment.
The decisions were made in the Osaka Medical and Pharmaceutical University case and the Metro Commerce case.
In the Osaka Medical College case, the High Court ordered the payment of 60% of the bonus for newly graduated full-time employees, and in the Metro Commerce case, the High Court ordered the payment of 25% of retirement benefits calculated on a full-time employee basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment