Japan high court rejects paternity harassment allegations
Legal Compliance
A Japanese High Court on Thursday rejected an appeal by a former brokerage manager alleging on-the-job harassment and unlawful dismissal after he took parental leave while working at Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley.
The case of Glen Wood, a Canadian who has lived in Japan for more than three decades, has come to symbolize concerns over “paternity harassment,” or “pata hara.” Wood’s is a rare case, for Japan, of a father seeking to take parental leave. Maternity harassment is more common.
Wood began his fight in 2017, alleging he was harassed and forced from his job after taking parental leave when his son was born in 2015.
The company rejected Wood’s request for parental leave. His son was born prematurely and he rushed to see him though the company told him to just keep working, according to the lawsuit.
When Wood returned to work in 2016, he was stripped of some of his responsibilities and excluded from business meetings, according to court testimony. The company dismissed him in 2018.
In a 21-page ruling, the Tokyo High Court rejected the harassment claims. It defended the company’s acts as “inevitable.”
Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley said Thursday’s ruling showed the company’s view had been accepted.
Wood said he would take his case to the Supreme Court, even if that means the legal battle might continue until his son, now 6, is in college.
“Harassment is never an acceptable form of management,” he said at a news conference at the health and labor ministry.
Wood now heads his own company, which provides transport management, corporate governance, environmental solutions and other services.
Japan’s population is shrinking and its birth rate is among the lowest in the world. Despite the outcome of Wood’s case so far, the government has made parental leave a policy priority, allowing absences of up to 12 months. But actual practice hasn’t lived up to the law.
The Tokyo District Court ruled against Wood in 2020, saying it did not find “reasonable grounds” for believing there was harassment. It also criticized Wood for taking his case public instead of quietly resolving the dispute with the company, which has made some changes to its parental leave policies since Wood’s dismissal.
Related listings
-
US judge dismisses Cristiano Ronaldo rape lawsuit in Vegas
Legal Compliance 06/13/2022A Nevada woman has lost her bid in a U.S. court to force international soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo to pay millions of dollars more than the $375,000 in hush money she received after claiming he raped her in Las Vegas in 2009.U.S. District Judge Jen...
-
Slain girl’s grandmother wants caseworkers deemed ‘reckless’
Legal Compliance 04/29/2021The grandmother of a 2-year-old girl who was beaten and starved to death wants to file a wrongful death lawsuit against three caseworkers who oversaw the girl’s care, and has taken her case to the Ohio Supreme Court.During oral arguments Wednes...
-
Supreme Court rejects defendant’s appeal in 2015 slaying
Legal Compliance 04/21/2021The South Dakota Supreme Court has upheld the life prison sentence given to a man who plotted the slaying of his ex-girlfriend, a 22-year-old Rapid City woman. Jonathan Klinetobe pleaded guilty to first-degree manslaughter in a deal with prosecutors ...
Does a car or truck accident count as a work injury?
If an employee is injured in a car crash while on the job, they are eligible to receive workers’ compensation benefits. “On the job” injuries are not limited to accidents and injuries that happen inside the workplace, they may also include injuries suffered away from an employee’s place of work while performing a job-related task, such as making a delivery or traveling to a client meeting.
Regular commutes to and from work don’t usually count. If you get into an accident on your way in on a regular workday, it’s probably not considered a work injury for the purposes of workers’ compensation.
If you drive around as part of your job, an injury on the road or loading/unloading accident is likely a work injury. If you don’t typically drive around for work but are required to drive for the benefit of your employer, that would be a work injury in many cases.
If you are out of town for work, pretty much any driving would count as work related. For traveling employees, any accidents or injuries that happen on a work trip, even while not technically working, can be considered a work injury. The reason is because you wouldn’t be in that town in the first place, had you not been on a work trip.
Workers’ compensation claims for truck drivers, traveling employees and work-related injuries that occur away from the job site can be challenging and complex. At Krol, Bongiorno & Given, we understand that many families depend on the income of an injured worker, and we are proud of our record protecting the injured and disabled. We have handled well over 30,000 claims for injured workers throughout the state of Illinois.