H24･11･16 at Tokyo District Court

【Judgement】 invalid dismissal

【Company】 Accelrys

【Category】 RIF

【Reference】 Rodo Hanrei 1069-81

【Position/Salary】 Application Scientist in Customer Service / JPY 7.9M

【Summary】

Although the reasonableness of the workforce reduction measures undertaken by the U.S. parent company is acknowledged, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the defendant's own financial condition was deteriorating at the time of the termination. Furthermore, there is inadequate evidence to establish that there was a compelling necessity to implement a reduction of four positions within the defendant due to the merger of the U.S. parent company. Additionally, the fact that the defendant engaged in new hiring practices, which are contradictory to the asserted need for workforce reduction, suggests that there was not a sufficient necessity to terminate the employment of the plaintiff.

In the present case, wherein sufficient necessity for workforce reduction cannot be established, the termination can only be deemed justifiable if the defendant undertook substantial efforts to avoid the termination. Given that the plaintiff's job description and responsibilities were not limited, the defendant should have considered a wide range of job categories and responsibilities when exploring potential reassignments. Furthermore, it cannot be concluded that there were issues significant enough to warrant an assessment that it was impossible for the plaintiff to return to the customer support role in which they had been engaged for eight years. Therefore, the defendant's assertion that there is no possibility for the plaintiff's reassignment does not constitute adequate fulfillment of the duty to make efforts to avoid termination.