Chapter III-2 Resolution of Disputes

If an employer has had a grievance raised by a worker with a disability with regard to any of the things provided for in Article 35 or Article 36-3, the employer must endeavor to achieve a self-initiated resolution by entrusting the handling of that grievance to a grievance body (meaning the body that is meant to handle the grievances of the workers at the relevant place of business, and that is composed of persons representing the employer and person representing the workers at that place of business) or in other ways.

The provisions of Article 4, Article 5, and Articles 12 through 19 of the Act on Promoting the Resolution of Individual Labor-Related Disputes (Act No. 112 of 2001) do not apply to a dispute arising between a worker with disabilities and the employer over the things provided for in Article 34, Article 35, Article 36-2, and Article 36-3; and the provisions of the following Article through Article 74-8 govern such a dispute.

①Having been asked for assistance in the resolution of a dispute as prescribed in the preceding Article by one or both of the parties to that dispute, the director of the prefectural labor bureau may give the necessary advice, guidance, or recommendations to the parties to the relevant dispute.

②An employer must not dismiss a worker with a disability or otherwise subject that worker to disadvantageous treatment on the grounds that the worker has asked for the assistance referred to in the preceding paragraph.

①On finding that it is necessary to do so in order to resolve a dispute as provided for in Article 74-5 (excluding a dispute over the recruitment or hiring of a worker) when one or both parties to the dispute have filed an application for conciliation, the director of a prefectural labor bureau is to have the dispute coordinating commission set forth in Article 6, paragraph (1) of the Act on Promoting the Resolution of Individual Labour-Related Disputes conduct the conciliation.

②The provisions of paragraph (2) of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis if a worker with a disability files the application referred to in the preceding paragraph.

The provisions of Articles 25 through 32 of the Act on Equal Opportunity and Treatment between Men and Women in Employment (Act No. 113 of 1972) apply mutatis mutandis to the procedures for conciliation referred to in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article. In such a case, the phrase "paragraph (1) of the preceding Article" in Article 25, paragraph (1) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "Article 74-7, paragraph (1) of the Act to Facilitate the Employment of Persons with Disabilities"; the phrase "workers employed at the same workplace as that of the parties concerned" in Article 26 of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "persons having expert knowledge for the medical care of persons with disabilities"; and the phrase "Article 24, paragraph (1)" in Article 31, paragraph (1) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "Article 74-7, paragraph (1) of the Act to Facilitate the Employment of Persons with Disabilities".