An Unfair Meeting - A Japanese Non-Regular Worker Filed for Labor Tribunal Proceedings - #19

an unfair "two-against-one" meeting
On the day of the meeting, I felt terrible from the moment I woke up and struggled to even get out of bed. I somehow managed to get my family ready and prepare for work, but when the time came to actually leave, I found I couldn't even stand up.
Knowing the meeting would be "me versus two bosses who engaged in workplace harassment," I think my body was screaming in protest.
I could have chosen to stay home, but I decided to take just a half-day off, pull myself together, and head to the workplace for the afternoon meeting. Fortunately, my husband took pity on me and accompanied me there. I felt terrible for causing him  such worry.

"Excuse me, Ms. Leo, but regarding your husband—since he is considered an outsider, I must ask that he refrain from stopping by. Thank you for your understanding."

Director Daubechies spoke with a serious expression, completely ignoring the fact that she and her boss Mr. Gray were attempting to hold an unfair two-on-one meeting. As I tried to leave the office for the conference room, Mr. Gray and Ms. Daubechies blocked my husband from entering in the hallway.
A commotion ensued.

Me: "That’s not fair—calling my husband an 'outsider.'"

Director Daubechies: "Well, we were suddenly told that your husband was coming..."

Husband: "Oh, I see."

Director: "Sir, you are considered an outsider in this context."

Me: "But there is no one here who can listen impartially. This is unfair."

Director: "Please wait just a moment."

My husband: "Oh, well, that’s fine. I’ll listen along with you all. Since it would be unfair otherwise. I don't really understand the details, so I’d like to listen in too."

Executive Director Mr. Gray: "Hello there."

Husband: "Oh, hello. I’m [Name]—her husband. Yes."

Executive: "We’re meeting with Ms. Leo today to have a brief discussion, so I’m afraid I don’t quite understand why her husband is sitting in on this."

Husband: "Oh, well, it amounts to the same thing. It involves me, too. You see, if I only hear about it secondhand, things can get garbled, so I thought I’d join the conversation as well."

Executive: "Um, sorry—ha—I’m afraid I just don’t understand."

Husband: "What is the discussion about?"

Executive: "Well, I am simply going to answer some questions regarding Ms. Leo, your wife's current work and employment situation."

Husband: "Oh, so it’s about employment issues?"

Executive: "Yes."

Husband: "In that case, I'll..."

Executive: "No, this matter has absolutely nothing to do with you, does it, sir?"

Husband: "Ah, right. But I’ll be involved going forward."

Executive "Right. Well, we’ll provide information on that later..."

Husband: "Yes."

Executive: "It’s really just a matter for your wife to discuss..."

Me: "I want such a meeting but. . . (a meeting with a third party)."

Executive: "You have a job, don't you, sir?"

Husband: "Yes, I do."

Executive: "Is something like this... I mean, is this even a normal thing? Usually?"

Husband: "Huh? What do you mean?"

Executive: "Like, having a complete outsider—say, someone coming to the company—sit in on the conversation."

Husband: "Yes."

Executive: "Sitting in together like that."

Husband: "I suppose that happens, doesn't it?"

Executive: "No, I just can't really wrap my head around that."

Husband: "I think there are cases where that happens. You know, it depends on the situation. I wouldn't say it's impossible."

Executive: "Hmm. I see. Well, in that case... even if you do sit in, you won't have any right to speak."

And so, it was decided at the last minute that a family member would join the meeting. We entered the room, and Mr. Gray began his explanation.

Executive: "Well, regarding Ms. Leo—specifically concerning the request submitted to our association for the reasons behind the dismissal upon leaving our organization (about the contracted term which occurred between last 6 months)—well, uh, Deputy Director (Ms. Daubechies) has already explained this was strictly a case of the employment term simply coming to an end. Furthermore, we received a formal document dated the 10th requesting the reasons for the non-renewal of the employment contract..."

"Since we are on the subject, I will hand you the original document," I said, extending it toward him.

Executive: "Oh, I see."

Me: "I have just submitted the request for the reasons regarding the non-renewal of the employment contract."

Executive Director Gray continues:
"Well, uh, well. ..  we may not fully see eye-to-eye on this, but the fact remains that this is simply a matter of concluding the employment—specifically, the contract term—in accordance with the employment notice. It is strictly about the expiration of the employment period. As stated in the employment notice, the employment terminates upon the expiration of the term without the need for further notification. So, fundamentally—as I mentioned back on the 8th? of [this month]? —we aren't actually required to give notice when the term ends. We are informing you, Ms.Leo, now simply because, considering general social norms, we felt it was the right thing to do; ultimately, however, it is just a case of the employment or contract period coming to an end... yes."

"Regarding the t, termination of my employment contract..."

"Mm-hmm."

"I believe a proposal was drafted for this..."

"Mm-hmm." "...but what was the basis for it?"

"It is simply a matter of your employment period coming to an end."

"It’s not as if the accounting work is disappearing..."

"Mm-hmm."

"...and Ms. Carter, she is my colleague and in the same position, is continuing their employment."

"Mm-hmm."

"What accounts for this difference?"

"Well, there is no particular need for me to answer that. Well. . .it is strictly a matter of your employment period ending."

There was a moment of silence. I took some notes. My husband began to speak:
"Oh, sorry—I mean, I won't be making any formal statements, but would it be alright for me to ask for clarification? Like, on what’s just been discussed? Me, personally?"

Executive Director Gray replied,
"Who is asking?"

"I am."

"You don't have the right to speak here. I am speaking with Ms. Leo."

"Then, could I ask my spouse and have my wife say it instead?"

"I don't think that’s something that would normally happen."

"Why not?"

"Well, the fact is, I am speaking with Ms. Leo..."

"Right."

"...so you don't have the right to speak today."

"Look, having come all the way here, I really want to be acknowledged."

"To begin with, this meeting itself isn't fair. What I had originally hoped for wasn't a meeting like this, but rather one where a third party could listen impartially."

"Hmm."

"Ideally, I shouldn't even have to be here. This isn't what I wanted, and it’s unfair."

"Excuse me, but regarding this meeting—well, we received the document dated the 10th of [this month], so this is simply a matter of addressing that."

Silence.

"I mean, strictly speaking, well, uh, this is the sort of thing that could have been handled over the phone..."

Silence.

My husband said,
"It’s about replacing staff, isn't it?"

I also asked,
"It’s about replacing staff, right?"

"...No, it isn't."

"It’s not a replacement?"

"Then what about the listing from the 2nd of [this month]—(the one posted at Hello Work?)"

"So it’s not a replacement, then?"

"Excuse me, I’ve said this repeatedly, sir..."

"Yes?"

"If you’re going to keep talking like this, I’m going to have to ask you to leave."

"You say it’s not a replacement, yet you’re recruiting..."

Afterward, I asked Executive Director Mr. Gray about the views he and she had held up to that point.
"I’d like to ask one more question. Regarding the repeated incidents involving Ms. Daubechies—the Director of this branch—I have frequently..."

"Mm-hmm."

“I've been reporting. I wasn't asking you to take my side—I just wanted to know if you would listen to both perspectives fairly and impartially; I was prepared to accept whatever judgment followed that process. So, did you... did you not really seek my input or engage with me on this matter?"

"Well, I’ve received updates from you via email, you see."

“There was no response or action regarding that.”

"Well, we did discuss this over the phone, didn't we?"

It was about the allocation of administrative duties for the new fiscal year. It had been a phone call where I was spoken to one-sidedly, and Mr. Gray's intimidating tone made me shrink back.

"That only happened because I finally said, 'Please let me hear about it too,' right? If I hadn't said that, I would have just been ignored."

"Is that a matter of administrative duty allocation?"

The conversation between us failed to connect; Executive Director Gray kept deftly sidestepping my questions. Regarding Director Daubechies’s harassment—or conduct that might border on harassment—he offered only responses based on general examples, never once addressing the heart of the matter. Ms. Daubechies spoke up only to interject with supplementary remarks; yet, her voice was unusually calm, and the stern, serious expression she had worn earlier had softened. Perhaps this was the demeanor she typically displayed before Mr. Gray and the prefectural government's International Affairs Division. Nevertheless, this was a formal discussion, and it was necessary to say what needed to be said.

“I felt the situation was particularly bad during the months of X, XX, XXX, and XXXX. While she may be watching her words now—given that I am raising this issue—I cannot simply look at her current attitude and acknowledge that things were the same way in the past.”

A silence dragged on endlessly. Nearly an hour had passed since the meeting began. The ticking of the clock echoed through the conference room, and the voices of people passing in the hallway drifted in.

I could wait—indefinitely. But you－Mr. Gray and Ms. Daubechies－couldn't afford to wait.

Before ten minutes had elapsed, Executive Director  broke the silence.
"May I?"

I said, "May I ask what you are referring to?"

"Well, regarding what we discussed today..."

"I hear what you are saying, but I do not accept it."

"Well... even if you say you don't accept it, the fact remains that your employment and contract periods are coming to an end; that is simply what I am here to convey."

"I hear what you are telling me. However, that does not mean I am convinced or in agreement. That is all I can say."

Silence again. Then, Executive Director Gray said:
"In that case, would you mind returning to your work?"

"Yes, I will return to my work. I will return to my duties, but let me be clear: by leaving this room, I am not signifying my acceptance of the content of the notice just delivered to me. I want to state that again. I will leave the room to go back to work, though."

Silence again.

"Look, we are currently within working hours, so please return to your work."

The meeting ended in a stalemate. There was only half a month left until the date of the non-renewal of employment.

Thank you for reading.

Leo

P.S.
My notes here are the translation of my Japanese notes, which I checked every sentence. Most of characters here are Japanese but their names are written in western style. This is because I wrote them as “A”, “B”, “C”, and so on in the original notes, and actually they do not begin with A, B, C, or the like.
If you are a native English speaker and find some words strange, please let me know anytime.
Thank you.

Reference:
Regarding Exhibit Ko-30 (audio recording data) submitted with the petition for labor tribunal proceedings: I transcribed every audible sound from the recording, which I realize may have made the text difficult to read. I considered extracting only the key parts to improve readability, but I felt that doing so would amount to editing the material and might compromise its credibility; hence the format presented here.

Case of a Meeting Attended by the Alleged Power Harassment Perpetrator

On February 6, 2024, a male manager in his 50’s at a Fukushima Prefecture government agency conducted a meeting to hear the facts regarding a power harassment complaint, requiring both the accuser and the alleged perpetrator to be present; he then unilaterally concluded that no harassment had occurred. It was announced that he received a disciplinary reprimand for this inappropriate handling of the situation. (Source: Asahi Shimbun article dated February 7, 2025.)

Holding a meeting with the alleged perpetrator present was considered problematic even by the standards of the time.