November 3, 2011
Overcome discrimination and oppression (Part 4)
December 25, 1995 was the day that brought about a complete settlement of the struggle against ideological discrimination by Tokyo Electric Power Co. lasting for 19 years and two months. TEPCO made an apology and promised not to do the same again. The epochal settlement required TEPCO to fix wage gaps for the discriminated workers and promote them to managerial positions and pay settlement money.
Pro-NPP groups criticized
The series of victories at five district courts, beginning from Maebashi (Gunma Pref.) in 1993 to Yokohama (Kanagawa Pref.) in 1994, contributed a great deal to the settlement. The Kofu District Court (Yamanashi Pref.) ruled that discrimination for the reason of someone being a communist party member is in principle illegal, convicting TEPCO’s anti-communist labor management and ideological discrimination against the plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs and their supporters had criticized the company’s policy of promoting nuclear power plants in disregard of safety, which is linked to TEPCO discriminating its workers.
These plaintiffs and supporters also organized a symposium on the safety of NPPs at Minami-Soma City (Fukushima Pref.) in February 1982. When the participants visited the Fukushima Daiichi NPP for an on-the-spot inquiry, riot police were waiting for them and right-wing groups were shouting at the symposium. However, the symposium, with an overflow audience of 150, was a great success and was covered by various newspapers.
In 1990, they carried out an action protesting against resumption of operations of a circulation pump of the No. 3 reactor at the Fukushima Daini NPP following the pump breakdown accident in January 1989.
Suzuki Shoji, 72, one of the plaintiffs in Tokyo, said, “We have been calling on TEPCO to act responsibly as a public utility, not simply seeking profits first. The 3.11 nuclear accident shows that TEPCO’s reflection was superficial.”
Responsibility of management
Hara Nobuo, who once had belonged to a Kanagawa Plaintiff group, said, “We hear that TEPCO employees are doing their utmost under the unstable circumstances of declining wages and daunting tasks. The TEPCO management should not shift the blame for the accident onto workers, who had been forced not to speak up on issues concerning safety.”
Suzuki said, “Only by completely overcoming the ongoing nuclear crisis, fully compensating the victims, and making a turn away from nuclear power generation can TEPCO gain the public trust and begin to act responsibly as a public utility. Public opinion and workers at their places of work hold the key to accomplishing this.”
(To be continued)
December 25, 1995 was the day that brought about a complete settlement of the struggle against ideological discrimination by Tokyo Electric Power Co. lasting for 19 years and two months. TEPCO made an apology and promised not to do the same again. The epochal settlement required TEPCO to fix wage gaps for the discriminated workers and promote them to managerial positions and pay settlement money.
Pro-NPP groups criticized
The series of victories at five district courts, beginning from Maebashi (Gunma Pref.) in 1993 to Yokohama (Kanagawa Pref.) in 1994, contributed a great deal to the settlement. The Kofu District Court (Yamanashi Pref.) ruled that discrimination for the reason of someone being a communist party member is in principle illegal, convicting TEPCO’s anti-communist labor management and ideological discrimination against the plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs and their supporters had criticized the company’s policy of promoting nuclear power plants in disregard of safety, which is linked to TEPCO discriminating its workers.
These plaintiffs and supporters also organized a symposium on the safety of NPPs at Minami-Soma City (Fukushima Pref.) in February 1982. When the participants visited the Fukushima Daiichi NPP for an on-the-spot inquiry, riot police were waiting for them and right-wing groups were shouting at the symposium. However, the symposium, with an overflow audience of 150, was a great success and was covered by various newspapers.
In 1990, they carried out an action protesting against resumption of operations of a circulation pump of the No. 3 reactor at the Fukushima Daini NPP following the pump breakdown accident in January 1989.
Suzuki Shoji, 72, one of the plaintiffs in Tokyo, said, “We have been calling on TEPCO to act responsibly as a public utility, not simply seeking profits first. The 3.11 nuclear accident shows that TEPCO’s reflection was superficial.”
Responsibility of management
Hara Nobuo, who once had belonged to a Kanagawa Plaintiff group, said, “We hear that TEPCO employees are doing their utmost under the unstable circumstances of declining wages and daunting tasks. The TEPCO management should not shift the blame for the accident onto workers, who had been forced not to speak up on issues concerning safety.”
Suzuki said, “Only by completely overcoming the ongoing nuclear crisis, fully compensating the victims, and making a turn away from nuclear power generation can TEPCO gain the public trust and begin to act responsibly as a public utility. Public opinion and workers at their places of work hold the key to accomplishing this.”
(To be continued)
