Page 293 - วารสารกฎหมาย ศาลอุทธรณ์คดีชํานัญพิเศษ

ฉบับพิเศษ ประจำ�ปี 2564

long-term contracts. When a fixed-term contract has been repeatedly renewed,
the employer’s refusal to renew the contract for another term is considered as dismissal,

because the employee had reasonable expectation that the contract would be extended,
so that the employer must have a just cause for refusing to renew the contract. 27

It is very difficult to dismiss an employee before expiry of the contract period,
unless the employer has a compelling reason to do so. Even the choice not to renew

a fixed-term contract at the time it expires can, in some situations, require an employer
to have objectively reasonable grounds for the non-renewal that do not offend generally

accepted social norms. For example, a non-renewal may be difficult for a contract with
substantially similar terms to a permanent employment, or if the fixed-term employee
reasonably expects their employment to continue because the employer had repeatedly

renewed their contracts in the past. Nevertheless, compared to regular employees,
the non-regular employees are more vulnerable in times of crises and are the first
in line to lose their jobs.

VI. Conclusion

The Japanese economy faces serious challenges. Economic recession, rising
unemployment, aging population, and now pandemics are only some of the problems

that may affect its future. The challenges Japan is facing are universal, but he manner
in which these challenges are dealt with differs from nation to nation. The impression
is that the general feeling in Japan is not really about fighting against COVID-19,

but rather as adjusting to the new conditions imposed by pandemics by making attempts
to reshape the working environment.

COVID-19 has forced businesses to reduce their economic activity, particularly
in the service industry. The consequence is the labor demand is also shrinking.

The crises caused by the pandemics has created problems for both employers and
employees. Employers were forced to adopt more flexible arrangements to adjust to

27 The Supreme Court 22 July 1974 (Toshiba Yanagicho Factory) Minshu Vol. 28, No. 5, (1974) 927; see
also, the Supreme Court 4 December 1986 (Hirata v. Hitachi Medico Co.) Rodo-hanrei No. 486 (1986) 6.

291