{"id":53777,"date":"2025-02-16T08:00:17","date_gmt":"2025-02-15T23:00:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/norimen.net\/wordpress\/?p=53777"},"modified":"2025-02-20T05:34:24","modified_gmt":"2025-02-19T20:34:24","slug":"two-illegal-acts-outsourcing-and-covering-up-accidents-saving-the-craftsmen","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/norimen.net\/en\/%e4%b8%b8%e6%8a%95%e3%81%92%e3%81%a8%e4%ba%8b%e6%95%85%e9%9a%a0%e3%81%97%e3%81%ae2%e3%81%a4%e3%81%ae%e9%81%95%e6%b3%95%e8%a1%8c%e7%82%ba%e3%80%82%e8%81%b7%e4%ba%ba%e3%82%92%e6%95%91%e3%81%86%e3%81%9f\/","title":{"rendered":"Two Illegal Acts: Outsourcing and Covering Up Accidents. The \u201dFirst-of-Its-Kind Workaround\u201d Used by the Labor Standards Inspection Office to Save Craftsmen (From \u201cThe God of Construction\u201d)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"The<\/p>\n

Illegal Practice No. 1: Concealing the Outsourcing of Work to Subcontractors<\/h2>\n

The series of events that led to Mr. D (57), a formwork carpenter, finding himself in a dire situation began when A Construction, a mid-sized construction firm, was awarded a contract by the Housing and Urban Development Corporation.<\/p>\n

After receiving the order, Construction Company A contracted General Contractor B\u2014a major firm\u2014to provide comprehensive construction management services. Since General Contractor B is larger than Construction Company A, this arrangement was not classified as a subcontract but rather as \u201cSubcontractor<\/strong>\"That's what they used to call it.\"<\/p>\n

After that, it appears that Construction Company A was no longer involved in this project. They had left it entirely in the hands of General Contractor B, a larger firm than their own. This constituted \u201clump-sum subcontracting\u201d\u2014prohibited under Article 22 of the Construction Industry Act\u2014commonly known as \u201coutsourcing the entire project.\u201d This was the first violation of the law.<\/p>\n

Illegal Act No. 2: Concealing an Accident<\/h2>\n

An accident occurred at this public housing construction site. Mr. D, a formwork carpenter employed by C Industries\u2014a subcontractor of General Contractor B\u2014suffered a serious injury to his right leg.<\/p>\n

Then a second illegal act occurred. The site manager of General Contractor B and Subcontractor C Industries conspired to prevent Formwork Carpenter D from using workers\u2019 compensation insurance, instead having him receive treatment through the National Health Insurance program he was enrolled in. Their motive appears to have been the belief that, if an investigation were conducted, it would be discovered that A Construction was not involved in the site and had simply outsourced the entire project.<\/p>\n

General Contractor B and C Industries paid formwork carpenter D a total of approximately 1 million yen, ostensibly to cover medical expenses and other costs. However, his time off work subsequently lasted for five months.<\/p>\n

His leave of absence had lasted five months, and since he was not receiving the temporary disability benefits that would normally be paid out under workers\u2019 compensation insurance, he would not be able to transition to a disability pension if things continued this way. Mr. D\u2019s anxiety grew. He had no idea how much longer his leave of absence would last.<\/p>\n

Mr. D could no longer stand it, so he consulted the X Labor Standards Inspection Office in Tokyo. As a result, the cover-up of the accident was uncovered.<\/p>\n

\"The<\/p>\n

The key elements of the case so far are as follows.<\/p>\n