Suchergebnisse

"This paper examines the amended Law for the Stabilization of Employment of Older Persons (LSEOP) that was enforced in 2006. The LSEOP requires enterprises to take one of three job security measures for their employees in line with the upward revision of the pensionable age: a) any increase in the mandatory retirement age that exceeds the current pensionable age; b) the introduction of continuing employment systems; or c) the complete abolition of mandatory retirement systems. The results suggest that a wage reduction after the mandatory retirement age is a key determinant of continued employment in an enterprise. Because the LSEOP does not regulate wage reductions, the effect of the LSEOP is limited. However, the results also imply this would be appropriate for avoiding the distortion of labour demand, particularly the increase of young recruits." (author's abstract)

This article examines inequality and poverty among older people
in Japan. It compares Japan with that of a sample of other OECD countries.
Provisions within the social insurance system that enable old-age
pensioners to work and draw incomes from labor explain some of the
inequality and poverty that is seen in Japan. So, too, do the low rate of
take up of social assistance, the low level of benefits available from the
first tier pension, the uneven coverage of second-tier pensions, the lack
of progressiveness of the income tax system and the fact older people
live in multi-generational households whilst others live alone.

AbstractThrough the lens of Institutional Entrepreneurship, this paper discusses how governments use the levers of power afforded through business and welfare systems to affect change in the organisational management of older workers. It does so using national stakeholder interviews in two contrasting economies: the United Kingdom and Japan. Both governments have taken a 'light-touch' approach to work and retirement. However, the highly institutionalised Japanese system affords the government greater leverage than that of the liberal UK system in changing employer practices at the workplace level.

Through the lens of Institutional Entrepreneurship, this paper discusses howgovernments use the levers of power afforded through business and welfare systems to affect change in the organisational management of older workers. It does so using national stakeholder interviews in two contrasting economies: the United Kingdom and Japan. Both governments have taken a "light-touch" approach to work and retirement. However, the highly institutionalised Japanese system affords the government greater leverage than that of the liberal UK system in changing employer practices at the workplace level.

Through the lens of Institutional Entrepreneurship, this paper discusses how governments use the levers of power afforded through business and welfare systems to affect change in the organisational management of older workers. It does so using national stakeholder interviews in two contrasting economies: the United Kingdom and Japan. Both governments have taken a 'light-touch' approach to work and retirement. However, the highly institutionalised Japanese system affords the government greater leverage than that of the liberal UK system in changing employer practices at the workplace level.

Through the lens of Institutional Entrepreneurship, this paper discusses how governments use the levers of power afforded through business and welfare systems to affect change in the organisational management of older workers. It does so using national stakeholder interviews in two contrasting economies: the United Kingdom and Japan. Both governments have taken a 'light-touch' approach to work and retirement. However, the highly institutionalised Japanese system affords the government greater leverage than that of the liberal UK system in changing employer practices at the workplace level.

Minimum Income Standard (MIS) research involves an innovative methodology that combines consensual decisions made through discussion by members of the public, supported by input from experts. MIS addresses questions about income adequacy, and in particular, what is the income that people need in order to reach a minimum socially acceptable standard of living. The first MIS for Britain was published in the UK in 2008, and in 2010 researchers from Japan and the UK began to collaborate on developing a comparable Minimum Income Standard for Japan. This article discusses the differences and similarities between the UK and Japanese MIS. It looks at the challenges of applying the methodology in a very different setting and compares the results of the research in the UK and in Japan. Although there are notable differences in the lists of goods and services that comprise the budgets, there are also some striking similarities. This research suggests that the MIS methodology offers an approach that can be used in different countries to inform discussions on contemporary living standards and societal norms, and to enable international comparisons to be drawn.