Job Discussion Forums

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

Actually, I would beg to differ. It's more of a blur between the second and third. I say this because I know of people who have been here for years and not signed on to the kokumin nenkin system and never knew they had to (or just didn't do it).

GambateBingBangBOOM · Joined: 04 Nov 2003 Posts: 2021 Location: Japan

I think it's because I used to be on the JET program, and therefore was paying into it, that they 'caught' me (actually, the small dispatch company I was working for told me that I didn't have to pay, so long as I had private traveller's health insurance, because I was no longer a public employee... something that is totally untrue). But I know a few people around here who were never on the JET program who got letters around the same time as I did, so maybe it's sort of the type of thing where they may periodically just check... or not.

Pitarou · Joined: 16 Nov 2009 Posts: 1116 Location: Narita, Japan

GambateBingBangBOOM: You're going to kick yourself. I'll quote from my chat with a HR professional:

GambateBingBangBOOM · Joined: 04 Nov 2003 Posts: 2021 Location: Japan

Well, whatever. If that's true, it's true. It would also mean that you would basically have to go to a lawyer for every single little thing, because they could be just lying.

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

Then please explain why it says this at the very beginning of the Social Insurance Agency web site:

"Under the universal coverage principle, all registered residents of Japan must enroll in one of the appropriate social health care and pension insurance systems."
http://www.sia.go.jp/e/ss.html

tipo · Joined: 18 Apr 2007 Posts: 23 Location: Japan

In some cities they make you join the Kokumen Nenkin Hoken or National Pension Insurance(NPI). These city offices/wards say it is a legal requirement to join. However, after looking at these references I am not so sure if it's a legal requirement or not.

These references are;

http://www.sia.go.jp/e/np.html dated September 14th 2007

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/org/policy/dl/p36-37e.pdf

The above references appear to imply that it is a legal requirement to join the Kokumen Nenkin Hoken. If anyone out there has a Japanese friend who can access the Japanese version of the above then we might be able to shed some light on this issue.

TokyoLiz · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 1548 Location: Tokyo, Japan

Also, please note last year's amendment to the alien registration law -
http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/newimmiact/pdf/leaflet_english.pdf

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

starteacher · Joined: 25 Feb 2009 Posts: 237

The question to ask oneselves is even if a company does not offer you insurance (within its legal limitations whatever that really is), would you take it ? If you don't, I am sure someone would.

If you can think of it, surely they can too. If you were to run a company (in Japan or even back in your home country), you'd find ways to cut costs. Heck, even the governments are doing it. That gets knocked onto the businesses, and that gets knocked on to to main street.

Yes, it would be great if all the companies can be angels, but the first instance, in a world that is deep in recession and cost cutting, is that having a job itself is a lifesaver, let alone having pensions, insurance and bonuses and flight fares etc .

China is booming, yes, but lots of workers there have no security at all. Same as India.

Times are changing, blowing in the wind, man.

PS : Just adding a slightly different perspective to the "problem" in general. Nothing has really changed in the x years as regards to insurance, pensions, etc in the ELT business, and I doubt if anything is going to change for the next y years.

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

Pitarou · Joined: 16 Nov 2009 Posts: 1116 Location: Narita, Japan

I have a dilemma. On the one hand, my knowledgeable, experienced source tells me, "Don't trust the SIA or your ward office. They're all liars." On the other, everybody else seems sure that kousei nenkin is obligatory. We need a tie-breaker:

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

Tie-breaker? Just how trustworthy is that HR official who outright claims that SIA lies?! I would hesitate to believe such a strong claim.

There are 2 pension plans, as you have shown. One is part of shakai hoken, and is obligatory.

The other is for people who are not on shakai hoken, so you can say they are PT or FT (self-employed people can be FT, you know). I'd say go with that definition instead of being so strict with FT vs. PT.

Bottom line: one is on shakai hoken and has pension payments as part of their premiums, or they are not on shakai hoken and should (must) get the other type of pension plan. There may be an exception here and there based on very low income, but let's just assume that we teachers don't fall into that category.

Pitarou · Joined: 16 Nov 2009 Posts: 1116 Location: Narita, Japan

Pitarou · Joined: 16 Nov 2009 Posts: 1116 Location: Narita, Japan

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

This just out from The Japan Times:
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20100202a1.html

New visa rule on insurance to be deleted

The Immigration Bureau is planning to change a new guideline for foreign residents to ease concerns that those without social insurance will be forced to choose between losing their visa and entering the insurance system, a bureau official said Monday.

But some foreigners warn the move won't be enough to entirely free them of the risk of being forced to enter the insurance system.

The wording of the guideline, which is to be enforced April 1, currently stipulates that foreign residents must present their health insurance card when reporting changes to or renewing their residential status. It is the last of the guideline's eight items.

"The bureau will delete item No. 8 by the end of March, and 'lightly mention' the need to present a health insurance card in the introductory passage of the guideline," Immigration Bureau spokesman Yoshikazu Iimura told The Japan Times. "The wording will be in a manner to eliminate foreign residents' concerns that their visas won't be renewed if they don't have insurance."

The bureau will try to persuade foreigners who don't have the card to enter the social insurance system by giving out brochures, but not having the insurance won't affect the bureau's decision whether to grant a visa, he said.

Ronald Kessler, who founded the Free Choice Foundation to raise awareness of the issue, hailed the bureau's plan to delete item No. 8.

"We peacefully and diplomatically explained to them our predicament," he said. "They listened, they understood, and we applaud them for taking appropriate action."

His battle, however, isn't over. Kessler wants local immigration offices not to ask foreigners to show the card and only hand out the brochure. Also, he wants to make sure the Immigration Bureau's intention is clearly delivered to immigration officers at local offices.

"Government documents are vaguely written," he said. "Immigration officers can interpret them however they want."

Foreigners and their supporters have protested the new guideline as an infringement on freedom of choice.

Foreign and Japanese residents are required to sign up for Japan's social insurance system, as stipulated in the Health Insurance Act and the National Pension Act, but there is no punishment for not doing so. Some foreigners choose not to enter the insurance system out of preference for the insurance provided by foreign companies or simply because they don't want to pay insurance premiums.

Also, some clinics that employ English-speaking doctors do not take Japanese insurance. They charge patients the full amount and give them a receipt so they can claim the medical expense later with their insurance company.