Japan high court rejects paternity harassment allegations

Supreme Court News

A Japanese High Court on Thursday rejected an appeal by a former brokerage manager alleging on-the-job harassment and unlawful dismissal after he took parental leave while working at Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley.

The case of Glen Wood, a Canadian who has lived in Japan for more than three decades, has come to symbolize concerns over “paternity harassment,” or “pata hara.” Wood’s is a rare case, for Japan, of a father seeking to take parental leave. Maternity harassment is more common.

Wood began his fight in 2017, alleging he was harassed and forced from his job after taking parental leave when his son was born in 2015.

The company rejected Wood’s request for parental leave. His son was born prematurely and he rushed to see him though the company told him to just keep working, according to the lawsuit.

When Wood returned to work in 2016, he was stripped of some of his responsibilities and excluded from business meetings, according to court testimony. The company dismissed him in 2018.

In a 21-page ruling, the Tokyo High Court rejected the harassment claims. It defended the company’s acts as “inevitable.”

Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley said Thursday’s ruling showed the company’s view had been accepted.

Wood said he would take his case to the Supreme Court, even if that means the legal battle might continue until his son, now 6, is in college.

“Harassment is never an acceptable form of management,” he said at a news conference at the health and labor ministry.

Wood now heads his own company, which provides transport management, corporate governance, environmental solutions and other services.

Japan’s population is shrinking and its birth rate is among the lowest in the world. Despite the outcome of Wood’s case so far, the government has made parental leave a policy priority, allowing absences of up to 12 months. But actual practice hasn’t lived up to the law.

The Tokyo District Court ruled against Wood in 2020, saying it did not find “reasonable grounds” for believing there was harassment. It also criticized Wood for taking his case public instead of quietly resolving the dispute with the company, which has made some changes to its parental leave policies since Wood’s dismissal.

Related listings

  • New York court rejects congressional maps drawn by Democrats

    New York court rejects congressional maps drawn by Democrats

    Supreme Court News 04/29/2022

    New York’s highest court on Wednesday rejected new congressional maps that had widely been seen as favoring Democrats, largely agreeing with Republican voters who argued the district boundaries were unconstitutionally gerrymandered.The decision...

  • Iowa’s high court stops lawsuit over farm runoff pollution

    Iowa’s high court stops lawsuit over farm runoff pollution

    Supreme Court News 06/18/2021

    A sharply divided Iowa Supreme Court on Friday stopped a lawsuit aimed at reducing the flow of fertilizer and hog farm waste into the state’s river and streams, finding that limiting pollution from farms was a political matter and not one for t...

  • Court nixes South Carolina’s lifelong sex offender registry

    Court nixes South Carolina’s lifelong sex offender registry

    Supreme Court News 06/09/2021

    South Carolina’s Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a state law requiring sex offenders to register for life, without prior judicial review, is unconstitutional. In a unanimous ruling, justices wrote that “requirement that sex offender...

USCIS to Begin Accepting Applications under the International Entrepreneur Rule

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today it is taking steps to implement the International Entrepreneur Rule (IER), in accordance with a recent court decision. Although the IER was published during the previous administration with an effective date of July 17, 2017, it did not take effect because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a final rule on July 11, 2017, delaying the IER’s effective date until March 14, 2018. This delay rule was meant to give USCIS time to review the IER and, if necessary, to issue a rule proposing to remove the IER program regulations.

However, a Dec. 1, 2017, ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in National Venture Capital Association v. Duke vacated USCIS’ final rule to delay the effective date. The Dec. 1, 2017, court decision is a result of litigation filed in district court on Sept. 19, 2017, which challenged the delay rule.