Power Harassment in Japan: Definition, Six Types and What Employers Must Do (Updated for October 2026)

Japanese law and the government guidelines define workplace power harassment as conduct that (1) is based on a superior relationship, (2) goes beyond what is necessary and appropriate for the business, and (3) harms the worker's working environment. Employers must take measures such as setting up a system to receive and properly respond to complaints, and this has applied to small and medium-sized enterprises since 1 April 2022. With the amendments that took effect on 1 October 2026, the provision moved from Article 30-2 to Article 31 of the Act on Comprehensive Promotion of Labor Policies. When a complaint is made, the employer should hear both the complainant and the alleged harasser, keep records, and, if the facts are confirmed, take measures for the victim and in respect of the harasser.

• An employee tells HR that their manager shouts at them in front of colleagues every day.
• A manager gives strict guidance to an under-performing employee and is accused of power harassment.
• A former employee's lawyer sends a letter claiming damages from the company for harassment during employment.
• You have set up a complaints desk, but there is no procedure for what happens after a complaint.

The law requires employers to take the necessary measures so that their workers' working environment is not harmed by conduct in the workplace that is based on a superior relationship and goes beyond what is necessary and appropriate for the business (Act on Comprehensive Promotion of Labor Policies, Art. 31(1)). The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) guidelines (MHLW Notice No. 5 of 2020) treat conduct that meets all three elements as power harassment, and state that appropriate work instructions and guidance given objectively within what is necessary and appropriate for the business are not power harassment.

The guidelines describe this as conduct in a relationship where the person on the receiving end is highly likely to be unable to resist or refuse. Conduct by a superior towards a subordinate is typical, but it is not limited to that. It also covers conduct by a colleague or subordinate whose knowledge or experience is needed for the work to proceed, and collective conduct by colleagues or subordinates that is difficult to resist or refuse.

The guidelines say this means conduct that, in light of generally accepted social norms, is clearly not necessary for the business or is inappropriate in manner. The assessment takes into account the purpose of the conduct, the background and circumstances, the type of business, the manner, frequency and continuity of the conduct, the worker's attributes and condition, and the relationship with the person concerned. Where the worker's own behaviour is at issue, the relationship between the seriousness of that behaviour and the manner of the guidance is an important factor.

The guidelines say this means the conduct caused physical or mental distress to an extent that the worker suffers problems that cannot be overlooked in doing their work. The test is how an average worker would feel: whether workers in general, receiving the same conduct in the same situation, would feel that it caused problems that cannot be overlooked.

The guidelines list six representative types, with examples of conduct considered to fall within, and outside, power harassment. The examples are not exhaustive, and the assessment may differ depending on the circumstances.

In practice, disputes most often turn on element (2). The same warning may be assessed differently depending on how often it was given, how long it lasted, the words used, and whether it was given in front of others.

The guidelines list four main groups of measures that employers must take.

1. Clarify and communicate the policy: Make clear the policy that power harassment must not occur, and communicate it to all workers including managers. Set out in the work rules or similar documents the policy of dealing strictly with harassers and the action to be taken, and communicate it.
2. Set up a complaints system: Designate a complaints desk in advance, inform workers, and enable the staff to respond appropriately to the content and circumstances of each complaint.
3. Respond promptly and appropriately after the event: Establish the facts promptly and accurately. If harassment is confirmed, take appropriate measures for the victim and in respect of the harasser, and take steps to prevent recurrence.
4. Accompanying measures: Protect the privacy of the complainant, the alleged harasser and others, and inform workers of this. Provide that workers will not be treated disadvantageously for making a complaint or cooperating in fact-finding, and communicate this.

Dismissal or other disadvantageous treatment of a worker because they made a complaint, or stated facts while cooperating with the employer's response, is prohibited by law (Art. 31(2)).

As an example of fact-finding, the guidelines mention the complaints desk staff or HR department hearing both the complainant and the alleged harasser, while paying attention to the complainant's mental and physical state and how they perceived the conduct. Where the two accounts conflict and the facts cannot be sufficiently established, the guidelines mention measures such as hearing from third parties.

Records are what the company will rely on if it is later asked to explain its response. It is advisable to keep the following together for each case.

• The date and time of the complaint, the complainant, and what was reported (when, where, who said or did what)
• What was heard from the complainant, the alleged harasser and third parties, with the date and the person who conducted each interview
• Emails, chat messages, recordings and other materials provided
• The company's findings and the reasons
• Measures taken for the victim, in respect of the harasser, and to prevent recurrence

If disciplinary action against the harasser is being considered, check whether the conduct falls within the grounds for discipline in the work rules. Discipline that lacks objectively reasonable grounds and is not socially appropriate in light of the nature and manner of the conduct and other circumstances is void as an abuse of rights (Labor Contract Act, Art. 15).

When power harassment occurs, the company may be held liable separately from the individual harasser.

• Employer liability: An employer is liable for damage caused by an employee to a third party in the course of the employer's business (Civil Code, Art. 715(1)).
• Duty of care for safety: An employer must give the necessary consideration so that workers can work while ensuring the safety of their life and body (Labor Contract Act, Art. 5).

For disputes between workers and employers over power harassment, the law provides for advice, guidance and recommendations by the Director of the Prefectural Labour Bureau and conciliation by the Dispute Coordinating Committee (Arts. 35 to 38). Disadvantageous treatment because a worker used these procedures is also prohibited (Arts. 36(2) and 37(2)).

The amending Act (Act No. 63 of 2025) took effect on 1 October 2026. The duty to take measures against power harassment is now in Article 31, and the responsibilities of the State, employers and workers in Article 32. A new duty has also been introduced for employers to take employment management measures against conduct by customers, business partners, facility users and others (so-called customer harassment) (Art. 33). If your internal rules or training materials cite "Article 30-2", the article numbers need updating.

• Check that your work rules state that power harassment is prohibited and provide for discipline of harassers.
• Check that the complaints desk staff and contact details are posted where all employees can see them.
• Decide the procedure from complaint to fact-finding, decision and measures, and a standard form for records.
• State in your rules and notices that complainants and those who cooperate will not be treated disadvantageously.
• Train managers, including on the guidelines' examples of conduct that does not qualify.
• Update article references (Art. 30-2 → Art. 31) and put customer harassment measures in place.

• When the complainant's and alleged harasser's accounts differ sharply and the facts cannot be settled internally.
• When an officer or senior manager is the alleged harasser and internal investigators cannot easily act independently.
• When considering disciplinary action or a transfer for the harasser.
• When an employee, former employee or their lawyer sends a letter claiming damages.
• When the Labour Bureau contacts you about advice, guidance or conciliation.

Q. Can strict guidance alone be power harassment? A. The guidelines say appropriate instructions and guidance given objectively within what is necessary and appropriate for the business are not power harassment. On the other hand, repeated, unnecessarily long reprimands and repeated loud, intimidating reprimands in front of others are listed as examples that qualify. The purpose, frequency, length and wording of the guidance are what decide the matter.

Q. Can conduct by a subordinate towards a manager be power harassment? A. Yes. The guidelines include within a "superior relationship" conduct by a subordinate whose knowledge or experience is needed for the work, and collective conduct by subordinates that is difficult to resist.

Q. The complainant wants to remain anonymous. What should we do? A. The guidelines require measures to protect the privacy of the complainant and others. One approach is to agree with the complainant who will be told what, and to proceed with fact-finding within the scope they consent to.

Q. Must we deal with abusive language from a client's staff? A. From 1 October 2026, employers must take measures, such as setting up a complaints system, so that workers' working environment is not harmed by conduct of customers, business partners and others that goes beyond what is socially acceptable (Art. 33(1)).