Guest editorial: Introduction to special issue “Employee Participation in Japan in Comparative Perspective”

Industrial relations in Japan attracted considerable scholarly and policy attention during the 1980s. This heightened interest stemmed in part from the view that cooperative labor–management relations constituted one of the factors that enabled Japan to successfully weather the two oil shocks of the 1970s. In Japan, a substantial proportion of labor unions are organized on an enterprise basis. Specifically, employees of a given firm – subject to certain conditions – are generally affiliated with a single union irrespective of occupational category. Although the principle of “one union per enterprise” has typically been regarded as the standard arrangement, the coexistence of multiple unions within a single enterprise has also been observed; such configurations, however, have been considered exceptional.Notwithstanding the earlier prominence of Japanese labor–management relations, interest in this area gradually diminished in parallel with the protracted stagnation of the Japanese economy. Over the past three decades, however, a variety of initiatives have been undertaken by labor and management within Japanese enterprises. The present special issue is intended to provide the most up-to-date account of labor–management relations in Japanese firms.A key feature of labor-management relations in Japan is the labor-management consultation system. Labor-management consultation refers to a mechanism in which management and labor representatives engage in peaceful dialogue, and it has become widespread in Japanese companies since the 1970s. Fujimura examines the current state of the labor-management consultation system using the “Labor-Management Communication Survey,” which is published every five years by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The paper emphasizes the economic and organizational value of frontline “on-the-spot” information and discusses a challenge the system currently faces when hierarchical structures can filter or block information (“checking gates”), undermining learning and responsiveness.Empirically, Fujimura highlights unequal functioning by firm size and reports a recognition gap: many employees are unsure whether consultative bodies exist in their workplace, suggesting “institutional presence without internal visibility.” The paper argues that strengthening unions is urgent for maintaining a balanced governance structure—metaphorically, a “second wheel” enabling effective voice and information circulation.Ebisuno investigates contemporary Japanese unions' thinking and action on productivity improvement and how this differs from postwar “Japanese-style industrial relations.” Using a 2021–2022 questionnaire survey of enterprise unions and quantitative analysis (including logistic regression), the paper advances an intriguing novel argument: labor–management relations can be widely perceived as stable and cooperative, yet this may coincide with weakened “constructive confrontation” and reduced discussion of medium-to-long-term productivity drivers (e.g. technology adoption, training investment).Ebisuno also highlights a shift in perceived risks around productivity measures. Under labor shortages, unions express comparatively less fear of unemployment from productivity initiatives and more concern that “productivity improvement” could translate into work intensification/overwork rather than shared gains. This reframes the distributional politics of productivity from job loss to workload and bargaining power over the pace and design of work.Yamasaki reframes Japanese unions as institutions with human resource development (HRD) functions, especially for young workers, from 2011 to 2023. Through a literature-based and inductive approach (reviewing 401 papers published in Japanese and organizing them into 13 thematic categories), the paper argues that unions can serve as a “place” (ba) for learning, voice and support – contributing to capability formation, workplace socialization and potentially productivity in a shrinking-labor-force society.Rather than centering union effectiveness solely on wage bargaining outcomes, Yamasaki emphasizes education and dialogue (including outreach such as university lectures and cooperative initiatives) as mechanisms to help younger workers develop reasoning skills, confidence to speak up and knowledge of labor rights. The paper's contribution is mainly conceptual and synthesizing: it maps and consolidates dispersed discussions on union activities into a structured picture of HRD-related functions and their societal relevance.Iwatsuki analyzes workplace-level labor–management dialogue around AI technology in Japan, based on interviews conducted in 2021–2022 across nine firms (finance and manufacturing). The paper finds that Japanese firms often rely less on formal collective bargaining and more on direct worker consultation – briefings, training and iterative feedback involving frontline employees who use or are affected by AI systems. In the cases examined, workers' input can improve AI performance and facilitate acceptance by reframing AI as “augmentation” rather than replacement.A central implication is that consultation may function as a de facto governance channel for AI deployment even when formal institutions are not activated. However, the paper also flags limitations: consultation can be limited in scope (department-specific), dependent on managerial initiative and notably weak on certain governance topics – especially AI ethics concerns (bias, surveillance, rights) that receive more explicit attention in other national contexts.Shuto examines why employment adjustment in Japan can appear “slow” (i.e. fewer layoffs) while still being highly flexible in practice. Using a qualitative case study of ANA during the early COVID-19 period, the paper argues that the Japanese adjustment margin often shifts from headcount reductions to rapid wage adjustment, intensive labor–management consultation and extensive redeployment (including secondments). This “employment maintenance” approach is framed as a governance choice supported by frequent consultation and a shared commitment to job retention.Methodologically, Shuto complements the econometric literature by focusing on “how” adjustment is negotiated and implemented inside a firm – drawing on extensive consultation records, policy and HR measures (e.g. wage cuts, subsidies, secondments) and comparative reference to US airline practices (rapid layoffs). The paper thereby treats consultation not as a background institution but as a crisis-time operational mechanism enabling repeated renegotiation of pay, tasks and allocation of labor.