July 2, 2008
The Matsuyama District Court on July 1 ordered Maeda Road Construction Co., Ltd, a major roads paving company, to pay 31.25 million yen in damages to the family of an employee who killed himself after suffering repeated “power harassment” by his boss.
The lawsuit was filed by Iwasaki Yoko, the wife of 43-year-old office manager Iwasaki Hiroshi. She insisted that her husband committed suicide because his boss at Maeda’s Toyo office in Ehime Prefecture continuously scolded him with threatening words.
The court recognized that Iwasaki was in a no-way-out situation because his boss abused him so harshly that he suffered from depression, threatening him by saying, “If you quit your task, you will never be allowed to feel at ease.”
The ruling said that the company failed to fulfill its obligation to keep the workplace safe and that it was illegal for Iwasaki’s boss to behave in a manner that goes beyond the limits of common sense.
The ruling, however, reduced the amount of compensation claim of 140 million yen on the grounds that her husband was to blame for 60 percent.
Criticizing the ruling, plaintiff’s lawyer Mizuno Mikio stated, “How thoughtless it is for the court to rule this without taking into account the fact that he had been cornered by extra workloads to determine that the worker had 60 percent liability.”
Expressing her intent to appeal, the plaintiff said, “Although the court accepts my claim, the 60 percent reduction is unacceptable. The company should admit its fault.”
The lawsuit was filed by Iwasaki Yoko, the wife of 43-year-old office manager Iwasaki Hiroshi. She insisted that her husband committed suicide because his boss at Maeda’s Toyo office in Ehime Prefecture continuously scolded him with threatening words.
The court recognized that Iwasaki was in a no-way-out situation because his boss abused him so harshly that he suffered from depression, threatening him by saying, “If you quit your task, you will never be allowed to feel at ease.”
The ruling said that the company failed to fulfill its obligation to keep the workplace safe and that it was illegal for Iwasaki’s boss to behave in a manner that goes beyond the limits of common sense.
The ruling, however, reduced the amount of compensation claim of 140 million yen on the grounds that her husband was to blame for 60 percent.
Criticizing the ruling, plaintiff’s lawyer Mizuno Mikio stated, “How thoughtless it is for the court to rule this without taking into account the fact that he had been cornered by extra workloads to determine that the worker had 60 percent liability.”
Expressing her intent to appeal, the plaintiff said, “Although the court accepts my claim, the 60 percent reduction is unacceptable. The company should admit its fault.”
