Industrial Safety and Health Act Enforcement Actions in Japan

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act, 福井パッケージ（株） (Fukui Package Co., Ltd.) did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay, even though it was required to do so.

Saitama Labour Bureau reported that （株）サトプレ (Yashio, Saitama) was referred for prosecution/public disclosure for having workers perform metal grinding work without being required to use effective respiratory protective equipment, in violation of Article 22 of the Labour Safety and Health Act (労働安全衛生法第22条). The relevant provision cited is Article 27 of the Dust Disease Prevention Regulations (粉じん障害防止規則第27条).

As part of loading an industrial machine weighing approximately 2.4 tons onto a truck using a mobile crane, Asuka Transport (Co.) did not formulate a work plan and had workers perform the work.

Saitama Labour Bureau reported that Tokyu Green System Co., Ltd. was referred for prosecution/public disclosure under the Industrial Safety and Health Act for not having workers’ retreat areas selected in advance when carrying out tree-felling work.

The company did not take measures to stop the hoisting device, even though it was stopped while a load was still applied to the hoisting device of a pile-driving machine.

The Hyogo Labour Bureau reported that (Kabushiki Kaisha) Sancho (（株）三昌), located in Himeji, Hyogo, had assigned forklift operation duties to persons who had not completed the required skills training. The cited provision is Article 20 of the Industrial Safety and Health Enforcement Order.

The company (Y) Matsumura Kogyo did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay after a work-related accident occurred in which the worker required 4 or more days of absence, as required under the Labor Safety and Health Act and the Labor Safety and Health Regulations.

In work using vehicle-type construction machinery, the company did not prohibit workers from entering dangerous areas.

Gunma Labour Bureau reported that (K.K.) Yamagishi Kanko did not install safety devices when using a forging hammer.

At a location approximately 6.4 meters in height, workers were instructed to perform work without fall-prevention measures such as installing a work platform.

The Saitama Labour Bureau reported that (Kabushiki Kaisha) Matsushin Stainless Manufacturing Co., Ltd. was required to perform arc welding work on metal without having workers use effective respiratory protective equipment. (Source text is fragmented.)

The Toyama Labour Bureau reported that (株)北越 was required to have workers use effective respiratory protective equipment, but metal grinding work was carried out without such equipment. (Industrial Dust Disease Prevention Regulations, Article 27; Labour Safety and Health Act, Article 22).

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act, during work to remove standing trees, (Y) P.M.A. Trading used a drag shovel for purposes other than its primary intended use.

For work that could cause heatstroke, (Kabushiki Kaisha) Doryo Koken-sha did not establish a reporting system or take other measures.

Okayama Labour Bureau reported that (K.K.) Hirobayashi did not remove items that could create danger during other work, under the Industrial Safety and Health Act (Article 21) and the Industrial Safety and Health Regulations (Article 477).

Ehime Labour Bureau reported that, when work involving the assembly of scaffolding, etc. was carried out, the company did not have the scaffolding assembly, etc. work supervisor perform the legally required duties.

For a work-related injury requiring 4 or more days of absence from work, (株)プラトー工房 submitted a worker’s injury/illness report containing false information.

The Osaka Labour Bureau reported that (Kabushiki Kaisha) Dian Estate failed to submit, without delay, a Worker Injury/Illness Report for a workplace accident that required 4 or more days of absence from work.

Under the Labour Safety and Health Act, Kashima Club (Co.) was referred for prosecution and publicized by the Fukushima Labour Bureau for having workers carry out tree-felling work without implementing safety measures to prevent danger.

At an approximately 10-meter-high location, when workers were made to use an installed walkway, fall-prevention measures were not taken.

The Iwate Labour Bureau reported that (Y) Ishidu Transport had a forklift operated by a worker who did not have the required qualification.

At a location approximately 10 meters high, the company did not take fall-prevention measures when it allowed workers of a related subcontractor to use an erected walkway.

It is stated that Yokota Unso (Yugen Kaisha) did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay, despite a workplace accident requiring about three months of leave having occurred.

For a workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence from work, Kanagawa Labour Bureau submitted a Worker’s Injury/Illness Report containing false information, in relation to 県水通商（株）.

Tamura Co., Ltd. (（株）タムラ) was referred for prosecution and the matter was made public by the Fukushima Labour Bureau. Workers were assigned to work on the tank of a bulk solids/powder transport vehicle approximately 2.7 meters in height without implementing fall-prevention measures, including requiring the use of a fall-arrest device meeting the required performance.

The Wakayama Labour Bureau reported that Sakurai Kensetsu Kogyo did not establish a work plan in advance when having workers perform work using a demolition grab.

The Tokyo Labour Bureau reported that (株)ポジティブ＆ブレイン did not have a cover or similar protective device installed on a cutting machine used for food processing.

The Shimane Labour Bureau reported that (Y) Shimane Senkai caused diving work to be carried out without carrying sharp cutting tools, in violation of Article 22 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act (労働安全衛生法), specifically referencing Article 37 of the High-Pressure Work Safety and Health Regulations (高気圧作業安全衛生規則第37条).

Under the Labor Safety and Health Act, Fukui Case Co., Ltd. was referred for prosecution and publicized by the Fukui Labour Bureau for not installing a safety device when allowing a punching press to be used.

According to the Nagano Labour Bureau, (Co., Ltd.) Sankyo was referred for investigation and publicized for not appointing a chief in charge (業主任者) for boiler handling work, as required under the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Safety Regulations.

For Daio Engineering (Co.) and Daio Paper Corporation (Kani Plant), regarding the inside of piping, the company did not take measures to prevent health hazards caused by carbon monoxide. (Article 22 of the Order on Prevention of Health Impairment due to Specified Chemical Substances; Labor Safety and Health Act Article 22 is referenced in the source.)

The Gifu Labour Bureau reported that Ōji Paper Co., Ltd. did not prepare and provide a document stating the hazards and harmful effects of carbon monoxide for the Kani Plant.

The Fukushima Labour Bureau reported and referred 双葉砕石工業（株） for having workers perform work on the roadside using a cargo truck without taking measures to prevent falls.

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act, when work was carried out using a drag shovel, workers were allowed to enter a dangerous area. The case was referred for prosecution and made public by the Fukuoka Labour Bureau.

The Shizuoka Labour Bureau reported that (Kabushiki Kaisha) Sagara Seisakusho did not install effective safety devices, etc., on a press machine.

Aichi Labour Bureau reported that Nihon Biso (Co.) did not conduct inspections of the gondola’s attachment section condition and the functioning of safety devices before starting work using the gondola, as required under Article 22 of the Gondola Safety Regulations (Labor Safety and Health Act, Article 20).

A workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence occurred, but (Kabushiki Kaisha) Sita Kogyo did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay.

Gunma Labour Bureau reported that Kaneko Hayashi Sangyo (Y.K.) did not stop the operation of a machine when performing machine adjustment work.

The Fukuoka Labour Bureau reported that シドーサイクル工業（株） used a forklift for purposes other than its primary intended use, in violation of Article 151-14 of the Industrial Safety and Health Regulations (under the Industrial Safety and Health Act).

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act, (Noda Iron Works Co., Ltd.) was referred for investigation and publicized by the Gifu Labour Bureau for not having the press machine work supervisor store the key switch used to switch safety devices.

On a work deck approximately 4 meters high, workers were allowed to perform work without fall-prevention measures such as guardrails, at the Kansai Steel Branch (関西鉄鋼支店) of Konoike Transport Co., Ltd. (鴻池運輸(株)).

Aichi Labour Bureau (愛知労働局) reported that (株）庭善造園 submitted a Worker Injury/Illness Report containing false information regarding a work-related injury/illness requiring 4 or more days of absence from work.

Sakaitama Labour Bureau reported that Eikou Kensetsu (Co.) had workers perform work without implementing safety measures to prevent danger from falling objects, including setting up restricted entry areas.

For a workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence from work, Hokkaido Kyoshin Tokki Co., Ltd. submitted a Worker Injury/Illness Report containing false information.

(Yū) Big Bell was referred for prosecution and publicized by the Tottori Labour Bureau for failing to inform workers of the necessary measures and procedures to prevent worsening of heatstroke symptoms, despite having assigned them to demolition work in an environment with a temperature of 31°C or higher.

The company, Hokuriku Road Planning Co., Ltd. (北日本道路企画（株）), did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay, despite a work-related accident that required 4 or more days of absence from work.

Niigata Labour Bureau reported that (Oguro Co., Ltd.) failed to submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay after a work-related accident occurred that resulted in 4 or more days of absence from work.

In repair work for a lift-type work vehicle, Yanmar Agrijapan (Co.) Tohoku Branch Odate Sales Office was not made to use a safety stopper for preventing the Yanmar Agrijapan arm from descending.

Mie Labour Bureau reported that (有)大村建設 did not take necessary measures to prevent workers’ danger caused by the fall of a vehicle-based lifting/handling/transport machine.

At a forestry worksite with a work platform edge approximately 6 meters high, the individual business operator had workers perform work without implementing fall-prevention measures such as enclosures.

In a timber felling and extraction worksite, when conducting forestry cable work, Ōkawa-mura Forest Association did not prohibit workers from entering areas that could pose danger to workers, such as by failing to provide “no entry” markings.

During assembly work, (有)TNコーポレーション did not have the person in charge of directing the assembly work determine the method of the work and direct the work.

The Tokyo Labour Bureau reported that when (株)エコネット conducted work using a tractor and a shovel, it allowed workers to enter dangerous areas.

Under the Labor Safety and Health Act, (Kansai Kanayama Casting Co., Ltd.) was referred for investigation and publicized by the Osaka Labour Bureau for not establishing a specific signal to be used when starting machine operation.

The Osaka Labour Bureau reported that (Mori Kōzai Co., Ltd.) in Kadoma, Osaka Prefecture had workers without the required qualifications perform rigging (tackle) operations.

The Ehime Labour Bureau reported that, when (K.K.) Kamikaihatsu conducted demolition work for an apartment building made of concrete with a height of 5 meters or more, it had not established a work plan in advance.

The company, 川口建設（株）, was referred for investigation and publicly disclosed by the Wakayama Labour Bureau for not having established a work plan in advance when having workers perform work using a drag shovel.

When (株）グリーンジャパン had workers perform work involving feeding accumulated PET bottle material into a bag-opening machine, it had not taken measures to prevent the risk of workers falling from the opening of the bag-opening machine.

In a public bathhouse, for a fuel supply equipment used for water heating, (Y) Pokapoka was not maintaining the cover of the screw conveyor.

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act, the company (有）ぽかぽか was subject to a referral and public disclosure by the Ishikawa Labour Bureau for not conducting inspections and maintenance of safety devices, etc.

When performing work using a cargo motor vehicle, (有）中村建材 allowed workers engaged in the work to enter a dangerous area.

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act (Article 20), 五十畑石材工業（株） was referred for investigation and publicized by the Tochigi Labour Bureau for not installing a cover over a belt conveyor.

Aichi Labour Bureau reported that (SUEHIRO SANGYO CO., LTD.) had workers perform work without implementing fall-prevention measures, including requiring the use of a fall-arresting device with required performance, on the step of a concrete mixer truck at a height of 2.6 meters.

(Kikyo Co., Ltd.) submitted a Worker Injury and Illness Central Ward Report containing false information regarding a work-related accident requiring about three months of leave.

Aichi Labour Bureau reported that when work was carried out using a drag shovel, workers were allowed to enter a dangerous area.

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act (Article 23), Ina Land Improvement District (上伊那郡伊那土地改良区) was referred for prosecution and publicized by the Nagano Labour Bureau (長野労働局) for having one worker perform inspection and cleaning work for an agricultural waterway without providing a safe passage. The case is associated with Minowa-mura (箕輪村).

Iwate Labour Bureau reported that Shida Sangyo Co., Ltd. (address: Ofunato, Iwate Prefecture) did not take measures to prevent the collapse of stacked “hai” (bales/loads) when having workers perform unloading work. The “hai” storage was stacked to a height of about 3 meters.

Gunma Labour Bureau reported that Kanda Logistics (Co.) North Kanto Supervisory Warehouse, Oura-machi, did not use a fall-prevention device when taking products from racks while operating a picking forklift from the driver’s seat.

Aichi Labour Bureau reported that (Mizuno Machinery Co., Ltd.) had assigned rigging work to an unqualified worker.

At a work location approximately 2.8 meters high, (Y) Karizawaen had workers perform work without taking fall-prevention measures.

Action type: referral for investigation and public disclosure (送検・公表). Authority: Ishikawa Labour Bureau (石川労働局). Company: （株）日誠産業. The company was reported for not having workers use effective respiratory protective equipment when performing metal parts grinding work using a disk grinder, as required under the Dust Disease Prevention Regulations (粉じん障害防止規則) Article 27. The matter is linked to Article 22 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act (労働安全衛生法). Date shown: R8.8.10.

Aichi Labour Bureau (愛知労働局) reported that Kuki no Unyu (Co.) (久木野運輸（株）) submitted a Worker Injury/Illness Report (労働者死傷病報告) containing false information regarding a workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence from work.

Ehime Labour Bureau reported that Mizushima Kaihatsu (Co.) was referred for prosecution and publicized for allowing workers to enter dangerous areas when performing work using vehicle-based construction machinery.

The Ehime Labour Bureau reported that Matsumatsu Unyu (Co.) did not require protective helmets to be worn when workers were unloading cargo from trucks with a maximum loading capacity of 5 tons or more.

Nara Labour Bureau reported that (Kabushiki Kaisha) Masu-Tada Meiboku-ten (Honsha factory) had not appointed a chief for work involving woodworking machinery at its “No.本社工場” despite having five or more woodworking machines.

For a workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence from work, 栄進工業（株） submitted a Worker Injury/Illness Report containing false information.

Okayama Business Office of Mitsubishi Chemical (Co.) was referred for prosecution and publicized by the Okayama Labour Bureau for having workers perform work involving handling flammable substances without taking measures to prevent an explosion or fire.

When conducting work involving flammable substances, Mitsubishi Chemical (Co.) did not have the site supervisor take the necessary measures. (Labor Safety and Health Act Article 20; Labor Safety and Health Regulations Article 257)

A labor accident requiring about two months of leave occurred, but (K.K.) NEXT did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay.

The Hokkaido Labour Bureau reported that (Eagle Co., Ltd.) had workers perform work on a scaffold approximately 5 meters high without providing a work platform.

A workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence occurred, but Matsumoto Sangyo Co., Ltd. did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay.

Tokyo Labour Bureau reported that (株)八坂工業 did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay, even though a work-related accident occurred that required an absence from work of 4 days or more.

As a specified principal contractor (特定元方事業者), 下ノ江造船（株） did not carry out, on an ongoing basis, communication and coordination between the company and the relevant subcontractors.

Under the Industrial Safety and Health Act (Article 21) and the Industrial Safety and Health Regulations (Article 537), Shizuoka Labour Bureau reported that (Co.) CBS had workers perform work in Chuo Ward without implementing hazard prevention measures such as setting off-limits areas to prevent danger from falling objects.

The Ishikawa Labour Bureau reported that Kōkyū Chūkō (Co.) had instructed an unqualified worker to perform metal cutting/welding work using combustible gas and oxygen.

(YS Kogyo Co., Ltd.) was referred for investigation and publicized by the Osaka Labour Bureau for not requiring the use of a safety block when performing mold removal work on a press machine.

The Oita Labour Bureau reported that (株）清明産業 did not take measures to prevent explosions when having it perform ship painting work.

The company Igarashi Construction Co., Ltd. was prosecuted and publicly announced by the Fukushima Labour Bureau for violations related to the transportation of construction machinery without using the legally mandated ramp boards.

Chiba Factory of Yamazaki Baking Co., Ltd. was subject to investigation and public disclosure by the Chiba Labour Bureau for not conducting inspections and maintenance of safety devices, etc.

The company Japan Kanzei was prosecuted and publicly announced for violating the Labor Safety and Health Law by failing to establish a work plan when operating a shovel loader.

A sole proprietor was referred for prosecution and publicized by the Hiroshima Labour Bureau for having an unqualified worker perform rigging (slings/hoisting) work and for operating a mobile crane without the required qualification.

At a location approximately 8 meters high, workers were instructed to perform work without fall-prevention measures such as installing a work platform.

Osaka Labour Bureau reported that Matsumatsu Kogyo (Co., Ltd.) was referred for investigation and publicized under the Industrial Safety and Health Act and the Industrial Safety and Health Regulations for failing to install safety devices, etc., on a press.

A labor accident requiring 4 or more days of absence occurred, but the company did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay.

For a labor accident in which a worker of a subcontractor was injured, Mitsui Sumitomo Construction Co., Ltd. submitted a false “overall management status report” and made false statements.

Niigata Labour Bureau reported that Ōkawa Steel (Co.) had an unqualified worker operate a crane.

The Osaka Labour Bureau reported that Kishiwada Seiko Co., Ltd. allowed workers to enter a hazardous area when performing work using a forklift.

The Hyogo Labour Bureau announced that Daichiya Co., Ltd., Amagasaki Branch, was prosecuted and publicly disclosed for using a forklift for purposes other than its main use, in violation of the Industrial Safety and Health Act and its regulations.

The Hyogo Labour Bureau reported that (Kabushiki Kaisha) Daichiya had a workplace accident requiring 4 or more days of absence from work at its Amagasaki sales office, but did not submit a Worker Injury/Illness Report without delay.

The company (有)佐藤製作所 was referred for violation of the Labor Safety and Health Act for failing to ensure the storage of keys related to press machine operation supervisor changes in Takahata Town, Yamagata Prefecture.