While Japan consistently ranks among the top-performing nations in international academic achievement surveys, its teachers work the longest hours globally. Although international research has increasingly centered teacher working conditions in students’ academic success, these studies have not addressed the role of the Japanese legal system in perpetuating long working hours.
Purpose:
This study examines the legal mechanism that has led to Japanese teachers working the longest hours globally and explores why the Japanese government has not effectively addressed this issue.
Research Design:
The study examined a series of court decisions in teacher overtime cases, highlighting the specific causes and challenges of extended working hours to address how courts could help mitigate the problem.
Conclusion:
A national statute exempting teachers from general labor laws is not the sole reason for long working hours; rather, administrative misinterpretation is the primary issue. These lawsuits could trigger changes in subsequent education policy; however, passive court decisions render reform efforts insufficient and ineffective. This study advocates for a “colloquy model,” emphasizing the need for active judicial involvement in education policymaking as a crucial tool for addressing critical educational issues.
All Japan Teachers | Staffs Union. (2024). Shingino matome dewa chōjikan-rōdō ha kaishō shinai [The “policy summary” will never resolve long working hours]. https://www.zenkyo.jp/opinion/10798/
3.
AraiE.MaruyamaK.TanakaM. (2019). Nikkyōso to kyūtokuhō no sēritsu katē [The Japan Teachers’ Union and enacting process of the Special Act]. Kyōshoku kenkyū [Journal of Teaching Research], (10), 86–140.
BasciaN. (2017). Teacher unions and teacher quality. In AkibaM.LeTendreG. K. (Eds.), International handbook of teacher quality and policy (pp. 162–172). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315710068-11
6.
BasciaN.RottmannC. (2011). What’s so important about teachers’ working conditions? The fatal flaw in North American educational reform. Journal of Education Policy, 26(6), 787–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.543156
7.
BoeskensL.NuscheD. (2021). Not enough hours in the day: Policies that shape teachers’ use of time. OECD Education Working Papers (245). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/15990b42-en
8.
BrownG. D. (1994). Binding advisory opinions: A federal courts perspective on the state school finance decisions. Boston College Law Review, 35(3). https://bclawreview.bc.edu/articles/1365
9.
EnatsuT. (2023). Nihon no kōkyōiku wo hōkai sasenai: Saitama chōkin soshō dainiji soshō he [Don’t let Japan’s public education be dismantled: Saitama case to the national second lawsuit]. Kyōiku [Education] (934), 32–37.
10.
HanushekE. A. (Ed.). (2006). Courting failure: How school finance lawsuits exploit judges’ good intentions and harm our children. Education Next Books.
11.
HanushekE. A.LindsethA. A. (2009). Schoolhouses, courthouses, and statehouses: Solving the funding-achievement puzzle in America’s public schools. Princeton University Press.
12.
HiebertJ.StiglerJ. W. (2017). Teaching versus teachers as a lever for change: Comparing a Japanese and a U.S. perspective on improving instruction. Educational Researcher, 46(4), 169–176. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17711899
13.
HojoM. (2021). Association between student-teacher ratio and teachers’ working hours and workload stress: Evidence from a nationwide survey in Japan. BMC Public Health, 21(1), 1635. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11677-w
HorowitzD. L. (1977). The court and social policy. The Brookings Institution.
16.
Japan Labor Lawyers Association. (2024). Shingi no matome de shimesareta hōshin ni hantaisuru kinkyū sēmē [Emergency statement opposing the plan in the “Policy Summary”]. https://roudou-bengodan.com/topics/13072/
17.
Japan Teachers’ Union. (2024). Chūkyōshin shitsu no takai kyōshi no kakuho tokubetubukai shingino matome an ni taisuru shokichō danwa [Executive secretary’s statement on the policy summary of the Central Council for Education’s Special Subcommittee on securing high-quality teachers (Draft)]. https://www.jtu-net.or.jp/statement/discourse/page/2/
18.
JohnsonS. M.KraftM. A.PapayJ. P. (2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 114(10), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811211401004
19.
KezukaK. (2023). Kōritsu gakkō kyōin no zikangai-kinmu to kokka-baishōhōjō no ihōsē handan [Public school teachers’ overtime work and determination of illegality under the state redress act]. Kikan rōdōsha no kenri [Quarterly Labor Rights] (349), 100–110.
20.
KomesarN. K. (1988). A job for the judges: The judiciary and the constitution in a massive and complex society. Michigan Law Review, 86(4), 657–721. https://doi.org/10.2307/1289212
LewisC.TsuchidaI. (1997). Planned educational change in Japan: The case of elementary science instruction. Journal of Education Policy, 12(5), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093970120502
23.
LiangG.AkibaM. (2017). Teachers’ working conditions. In AkibaM.LeTendreG. K. (Eds.), International handbook of teacher quality and policy (pp. 388–402). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315710068-25
24.
MatsushitaM.YamamuraS. (2022). The relationship between long working hours and stress responses in junior high school teachers: A nationwide survey in Japan. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.775522
25.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2006). Kyōshokuin-kyūyo no arikata ni kansuru wākingu gurūpu dai hachi-kaishiryō [The 8th working group document 5 on teacher salary]. https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/kyoin/mental_00008.html
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2014). 2013 nendo kōritsu gakkō kyōshokuin no jinji gyōse jōkyōchōsa ni tsuite [Survey on personnel administration status of public school teacher and staff for 2013]. https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/jinji/1354719.htm
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2022). Kyōshi busoku ni kansuru jittai shōsa oyobi 2021 nendo kōritsu kyōin saiyōsenkō shiken no zicchi jōkyō ni tsuite [The “teacher shortage” fact-finding study and the implementation status of the 2021 public school teacher recruitment selection examination], Kyōiku īnkai geppō [Board of Education Monthly Report] (869), 30–44. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/2022325-mxt_syoto01-000021525_4.pdf
30.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2023). Kōritsu gakkō no kyōshokuin gyōmu no tekisetsuna kanri sonota kyōshokuin no fukumu wo kantokusuru kyōiku-īnkai ga kyōshokuin no kenkō oyobi fukushi no kakuho wo hakarutame ni kōzu beki sochi ni kansuru hōshin ni kakaru Q & A [The Q&A of the regulation on measures to manage the workload of educational personnel in public schools and other measures to be taken by boards of education in order to ensure the health and welfare of educational personnel]. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20231227-mxt_zaimu-000033187_5.pdf
31.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2024a). 2023 nendo kōritsu gakkō kyōshokuin no jinji gyōse jōkyōchōsa ni tsuite [Survey on personnel administration status of public school teacher and staff for 2023]. https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/jinji/1411820_00008.htm
MiyajiS. (1971). Kyōshokuin no tokubetsu kyūyo sochihō kaisetsu [Commentary on the Special Act for Public School Teacher Compensation]. Dai-ichi Hōki.
35.
NishiharaH. (2015). Judicial control over social state activities in Japan and meaning of equality rights. Waseda Bulletin of Comparative Law, 34, 13–24. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2801699
36.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Education policy in Japan: Building bridges towards 2030. Reviews of National Policies for Education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264302402-en
37.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). Making the most of teachers’ time. OECD Education Policy Perspectives. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/d005c027-en
38.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
39.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2024). Education at a glance 2024: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en
40.
RebellM. A. (2007). Professional rigor, public engagement and judicial review: A proposal for enhancing the validity of education adequacy studies. Teachers College Record, 109(6), 1303–1373. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810710900604
41.
RebellM. A. (2009). Courts and kids: Pursuing educational equity through the state courts. The University of Chicago Press.
42.
RebellM. A. (2018). Flunking democracy: Schools, courts, and civic participation. The University of Chicago Press.
43.
RebellM. A. (2019). Fiscal equity and educational adequacy in the United States: The role of the state courts. Japan Education Law Review (48), 7–34.
44.
RussoC. J.DeGroofY. (Eds.). (2009). The employment rights of teachers: Exploring education law worldwide. R&L Education.
45.
TakahashiS. (2022). Sēshoku to rōdō no aida: kyōin no hatarakikata kaikaku eno hōriron [Are they labors or professions?: Legal theory for adequate working conditions of school teachers]. Iwanami Press.
Teaching and Learning International Survey. (2019). TALIS 2018 results (volume I): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/888933933045
