[Feature: Disability and Society] Roundtable Discussion: Thinking About the Future of Disability Employment

Today, we have gathered people who are actually involved in various ways with the theme of employment for people with disabilities, and I would like to hear your stories.

More than 10 years have passed since the Services and Supports for Persons with Disabilities Act came into effect in 2006. Since then, various laws have been established, such as the amendment of the Act on Employment Promotion etc. of Persons with Disabilities (enacted in 1960), and the enforcement of the Act on Comprehensive Support for Persons with Disabilities and the Act on the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities. I believe a foundation has been built to some extent to accept people with disabilities into the workplace and society. It seems that various prejudices are gradually disappearing, and a major paradigm shift from the "medical model to the social model" of disability has also occurred.

Furthermore, since April of this year, the obligation to employ people with mental disabilities has arisen, and the statutory employment rate for people with disabilities has risen further. I believe that employment for people with disabilities is currently at a major turning point. Amidst this, this summer, the issue of inflated employment numbers for people with disabilities at central government ministries and agencies made headlines.

Today, I would like to have people with mental disabilities participate as well and have everyone speak candidly.

First, it is certain that employment for people with disabilities in Japan has made considerable progress over the past 10 years, but I would like to hear from each of your perspectives what specific progress has been made and how you evaluate it. To start, Mr. Marumono, what are your thoughts?

First, I will speak from the perspective of the policies of the government and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. As a nation, the government has rushed to develop legislation with the primary goal of ratifying the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted in 2006, Japan's ratification approved in 2014). Additionally, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare has aimed primarily for the quantitative expansion of employment and has steadily increased the number of employed persons. In particular, with the "mandatory employment of people with mental disabilities" starting in April of this year, this movement has accelerated, and the statutory employment rate has jumped (from 2.0% to 2.2% for private companies). However, because these measures were pushed forward rapidly, various problems have emerged.

In the employment of people with disabilities, most of the burden falls on the companies and organizations that accept them. When large numbers are mandated in a short period, the side accepting people with disabilities loses the leeway to think about the essential question of "why we must employ people with disabilities," and there is a sense that they have ended up just playing a numbers game to achieve the statutory employment rate. I believe the typical example of this is the "inflated numbers issue" that has been causing a stir recently.

To solve this problem, I believe we are at a turning point where we must shift from policies that emphasize numbers, such as "quantity of employment," to policies that emphasize ease of working, such as "quality of employment."

Since the numbers have increased considerably, there has been a certain level of achievement. However, as a result of the government pushing companies, various distortions have also emerged.

Next, I would like to hear from Mr. Idenawa. After working at a company, you have been working in welfare. Looking back on the progress of the past 10 years from your position of supporting the employment of people with disabilities, what are your thoughts?

I haven't been in the welfare field forever; after my father passed away 14 years ago, I entered the world of welfare from a company to succeed him. It is a facility for people with intellectual disabilities in Hiratsuka called Social Welfare Corporation Shinwa Gakuen.

There are about 500 users, and about 200 of them are in the employment-related category, doing various things centered on the assembly of automobile parts for Honda. Kenshin Co., Ltd. is the sales contact company for Shinwa Gakuen.

I entered the world of welfare in 2005, and the enforcement of the Services and Supports for Persons with Disabilities Act the following year was a major reform, the first in half a century even for the welfare field. Until then, it was called the "administrative measure era." What changed with the Support Act was the emergence of the word "user." This means that instead of people with disabilities being subject to administrative measures, they are in the position of consumers who utilize welfare services.

On the other hand, as Mr. Marumono mentioned, labor policies such as the employment of people with disabilities also progressed rapidly. Linking with that to some extent, "from welfare to employment" became a slogan for welfare policy, and a new business called "Employment Transition Support Service" based on the Services and Supports for Persons with Disabilities Act was created.

In this service, public funds with high unit prices for compensation are paid to welfare facilities as subsidies in order to place people using welfare facilities into general employment. Every facility jumped at this Employment Transition Support Service. This is a business where people from special needs schools are trained and sent into general employment within a fixed-term program of two years.

While it is ideal for people with disabilities to be employed and work at general companies, reality is not so easy. To be blunt, I think those who can go into general employment are only a small fraction. Many people must continue to work within welfare facilities. Even before then, the gap between welfare and employment was large, but the disparity between welfare and employment has widened further.

Therefore, partly because it was felt that too wide a disparity was not good, "Employment Continuation Support Type A Offices" were created within the Services and Supports for Persons with Disabilities Act. This is a so-called "employment type" where the office enters into an employment contract with the person with a disability, and the government actively encouraged this. As a result, the number of Type A offices increased about fivefold in just five or six years, from 707 in 2010 to 3,455 in 2016.

They increased too rapidly, didn't they?

That's right. This also brought about distortions. From a company's perspective, running a Type A office brings in welfare budgets—that is, subsidies—and quite a few "bad Type A" offices appeared that were aiming for those subsidies.

Thinking that this cannot continue and that we should aim to make Type A offices sound, a national organization called Zen-A-Net (National Association of Employment Continuation Support Type A Offices) was formed about three years ago. The government is also providing guidance to make Type A offices sound, and I believe that Type A offices will be weeded out in the future.

In short, I think both labor policies and welfare policies have aimed for quantitative expansion over the past 10 years. In the future, I believe we need systems and policies that aim for a "total best," where more diverse places of employment such as hybrid models of welfare and employment are created, allowing people with disabilities to choose from various options, and where quality and quantity are balanced and consistent.

You've pointed out some very good points. Despite the considerable gap between the welfare field and corporate employment, the employment rate was pushed up anyway, but people attending welfare facilities cannot enter general employment so easily.

Even so, by increasing Type A offices, quite unnatural things have occurred. Originally, more work was needed to bridge the gap between the two to some extent.

In particular, I think there is a significant lack of consideration for those who have no choice but to work in a non-employment format, specifically "Employment Continuation Support Type B." Among those working in Type B, which used to be called vocational aid centers, there are some with quite high abilities, but even so, they cannot go to Type A, and general employment is difficult.

Those who go to Type A have their rights as workers protected, but those in Type B are treated as trainees and cannot even work overtime. I believe this is a human rights issue for people working in Type B. The ILO has also pointed out that the form of employment for users in Japan's vocational aid centers is a violation of recommendations, and it is also being called a problem regarding the worker status of those working in welfare facilities.

Next, I would like to ask Mr. Mitsui, who is involved in the employment of people with disabilities at Recruit, to speak about the progress of the past 10 years from a corporate perspective.

Ten years ago was the year the Lehman shock occurred, but the economy recovered after that. I took this job about seven years ago, and I feel that since that time, the era of employment for people with disabilities has been one of expansion after expansion, along with the enhancement of legal aspects.

There are various challenges, but thinking about the positive parts first, because there is a number called the statutory employment rate, we as a company had no choice but to challenge ourselves with various things.

I think there have been three challenges since I arrived. The first point is that we accepted people with mental disabilities, whom we had not accepted until then. We have been exploring ways to utilize their abilities by figuring out how they can work as colleagues.

The second point is that we accepted people with immune disorders. These people are more in the category of social disability than physical disability, and I think there was still resistance from those around them about working together. We gradually created a foundation for accepting such people within the company by holding study sessions and the like, and now we accept about 30 people, with about one person in each department. When it becomes like this, people feel they can come and work at this company.

The third point is the acceptance of people working from home in regional areas. We started with the hypothesis that among people with disabilities living in regional areas, there might be those who are talented but unable to work because they cannot reach jobs. Currently, 52 people with disabilities are working in the form of regional telecommuting. It was difficult because we set high goals, but that's exactly why I'm doing it with the positive thought that we must do things that haven't been done before.

On the negative side, some companies have emerged that do things like suspicious disguised employment. I do wonder about that.

I see. While some companies took the gradual rise in the statutory employment rate positively, thinking, "Alright, let's give it a challenge," other companies felt a considerable burden.

In the case of Recruit in particular, since your main business is related to human resources, it feels like you are taking it positively.

I believe we are a company in a position where we must act that way.

Now, Mr. Sekimura, I would like you to look back and tell us what you think about these past 10 years from the perspective of a person with a mental disability.

I think there are still many people with disabilities who cannot be open about their disability in the workplace. I work mainly as a sole proprietor in the position of a social insurance and labor consultant, but I also work a little in an employed capacity elsewhere. Also, as a person with schizophrenia, I am active in spreading understanding by being open about my disability.

The reality of society is that many people with disabilities cannot speak up. Therefore, I have been active with the theme of becoming their spokesperson, deepening people's understanding of disabilities, and eliminating discrimination.

For myself, both my work with disability pensions as a social insurance and labor consultant and the part where I am employed and working involve doing things I like, so I don't feel stress, and I am truly happy to be able to engage in the activities I like in this way.

However, very few people with disabilities can feel this kind of happiness, and the vast majority are still unable to be employed and cannot have a point of contact with society. As a person with schizophrenia, I would be happy if there were more employment and workplaces that develop the advantages or strengths of people with disabilities.

Mr. Mitsui, you mentioned that you have been working on various initiatives for people with mental disabilities over the past 10 years. From the corporate side, is there consideration for having such individuals do things they are good at?

Companies might not have reached the point of providing that much consideration yet. Right now, we are at the stage of "let's accept them anyway," and it might be at the level of "we have a foundation to accept those who have exceeded a certain level."

I think there are still difficult aspects to accepting people with major disability characteristics, at least when considering commuting every day. They are required to come to the office in the morning, say "good morning," and behave "normally." I think this "normalcy" is often painful, especially for people with mental disabilities.

When it comes to working from home, the range of "normal" expands. I mentioned earlier that there are 52 people working from home, and there are quite a few people with schizophrenia, including someone who says, "I am talking to aliens."

I was like that too (laughs).

They might say things like, "The earthquake that happened in Hokkaido the other day was my responsibility." But even that person can say "good morning" via video conference in the morning in the environment of their home and work normally via chat. So, I have a feeling that the use of ICT might further expand employment for people with mental disabilities.

I see, that's interesting. Mr. Idenawa, when trying to link people with mental disabilities from welfare to employment in the welfare field, the method is different from the traditional approach for people with intellectual disabilities, isn't it? What kind of ingenuity can be applied on the welfare side in that regard?

That is difficult, and I am always troubled by it. Shinwa Gakuen, which we run, was originally a facility for people with intellectual disabilities, but the way of support for intellectual disabilities and mental disabilities can sometimes be the exact opposite.

People with intellectual disabilities may have a low IQ, but their bodies are healthy and they are mentally stable, so if you say "Good morning, let's do our best today" when they arrive, they respond brightly with an "Oh!" However, if you do that to a person with a mental disability, they might feel it as a burden instead.

We were advised by staff at welfare facilities specializing in mental disabilities that while it's okay to say "You did your best" later, you must not say "Let's do our best." I always end up doing the "Let's do our best!" thing (laughs).

So you choose your words carefully while observing their condition.

That's right. We must thoroughly research support methods that match the characteristics of the disability.

Since the barriers between the three disabilities (physical, intellectual, and mental) were removed by the Services and Supports for Persons with Disabilities Act, and it became possible to accept all people with disabilities, Shinwa Gakuen must also actively accept people with mental disabilities.

However, because the staff side lacks experience, it is quite difficult. I think the welfare side also needs to study more.

The reason the statutory employment rate for people with disabilities for companies rose from 2% to 2.2% this year is that the employment of people with mental disabilities became mandatory. However, looking at actual statistics, if we were to seriously consider accepting people with mental disabilities into the workplace, an increase of only 0.2% is an impossibly low figure.

I interpret this 0.2% as a figure that includes a bit of "fine-tuning," for lack of a better word, based on social conditions and the like. Mr. Marumono, do you think that with an increase of 0.2 percentage points, the employment of people with mental disabilities, which currently faces various challenges, will progress?

As far as people with mental disabilities are concerned, a 0.2% increase in the statutory employment rate is completely insufficient to accept all those who "want to work." I agree with Mr. Nakajima's point about it being "fine-tuning based on social conditions." However, I think a rapid increase would dampen the hiring motivation of the accepting side. So, I think it's an employment rate that balances things with "measures to mitigate drastic changes." On the other hand, since 50% of companies fail to meet the employment rate, it will be important to think about how to get them to employ people.

In any case, as I said at the beginning, I want companies to employ people while thinking about the "essence" of disability employment, rather than just for the sake of matching numbers.

Also, while it's called the "mandatory employment of people with mental disabilities," companies are not told what percentage of people with mental disabilities they must employ. I hear that people with mental disabilities, for whom management methods have not been established, are sometimes avoided at joint interview sessions, which are places for recruitment. Though it seems to vary slightly by region.

Mr. Idenawa, from the welfare side, is it desirable for the statutory employment rate to keep rising?

I think the statutory employment rate, the so-called quota system, is good. Germany and France also adopt it, and it's hard to evaluate without numbers. However, it's important to ensure it doesn't end with just matching numbers, by skillfully intertwining qualitative guarantees to achieve harmony as a whole.

In particular, the coordination and integration of labor and welfare have been talked about for a long time, but even if you go to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, if you go to the labor department, it's run by people who don't understand welfare at all. Conversely, if you go to the welfare department, they don't understand labor at all.

Even so, I think things are getting better little by little. I think it's a major step forward that users became consumers in the welfare field. If people with disabilities don't choose welfare services, competition won't occur, and bad facilities won't be weeded out.

When the Services and Supports for Persons with Disabilities Act was created, a five-year plan to double wages started in 2007. The goal was to double the average wage of people with disabilities working in vocational aid centers and employment continuation support offices. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare put a lot of effort into this, but the content was essentially about bringing in management consultants to improve the quality of independent products.

As for whether that achieved results, the average wage at Type B welfare facilities is still 15,000 yen (per month). It has certainly risen a little, so I won't say it was a complete failure, but the result is far from what was originally envisioned. After all, there is no high-quality work in welfare facilities. It's difficult to be told to compete with independent products.

In the past, welfare facilities were typically known for baking cookies or bread. Fortunately, our facility was okay because a hit product called "Shonan Mandarin Bread" was born, but other places are really struggling.

Therefore, I think the concept of "deemed employment" proposed by Mr. Nakajima is a good one.

"Deemed employment" is a method where the welfare side and the corporate employment side collaborate. Since immediate general employment is quite difficult, the welfare side takes on work and has people with mental disabilities work even for short periods. By observing them at that time, those who can work are employed, and the company side counts a portion of that toward their disability employment according to the volume of work ordered from the welfare side.

It's a mechanism where high-quality work is provided to welfare facilities. It's a hybrid model of welfare and labor that is happy for everyone: the working person with a disability, the company ordering the work, and the supporting organization.

The company side must hire people with disabilities to raise their employment rate. On the other hand, on the welfare side, Type A must increase productivity because they have to pay salaries. Type B is told to increase wages. It's extremely difficult to achieve all of those, isn't it?

From the company's perspective, they can't hire people with disabilities unless people with a certain level of high productivity come in from the welfare side.

That's right. I think it's particularly tough for medium-sized and small enterprises with about 300 or 400 employees. More than half of the companies are in a situation where they could achieve the employment rate with just one or two more people. The reason they can't do those one or two people is that they don't know what a person with a disability is like, and even if they hire them, they can't afford the management costs. I think that's the problem.

In that case, as Mr. Nakajima said, having them understand it in the form of "deemed employment" might be the first step.

In the case of the Recruit Group, it was a situation where special subsidiaries completely employed people with disabilities, so until I came to this company, I had no contact with people with disabilities. That's why I didn't know. For things you don't know, you become afraid or feel you shouldn't touch them. If there were a mechanism like "deemed employment" that connects them, I think the "don't know" part would start to change.

Mr. Sekimura, I believe you have interactions with other people with mental disabilities. How do you perceive the fact that the current employment rate has risen by 0.2%? What kind of impact do you think it will have in terms of working styles?

My peers with mental disabilities—we call them "peers"—all had expectations that the disability employment rate had risen, but many find that jobs are not easily decided. I feel like nothing has changed in the current situation.

I have a feeling that things might change somewhat if we continue like this, though.

Regarding what Mr. Mitsui said earlier, if a person with a mental disability enters a place that is short by one or two people all by themselves, wouldn't there be anxiety on the part of the worker as to whether they can work normally?

As you say, it certainly might lead to a reaction of "Wait, what?"

How do flexible working styles like "deemed employment" look from the perspective of the individuals involved? I imagine it might be difficult to suddenly go to a company and work full-time every day.

I feel that would be a bit difficult. There are waves in one's physical condition, so I think it is extremely important to be able to work flexibly—for example, being able to take a day off after working for two days—rather than having a fixed 40-hour full-time week.

However, for the corporate side, it would be difficult to suddenly introduce such a system to all departments in their main business operations, as it would require a sudden change to the entire system.

That's true. At a special subsidiary like ours, there are inevitably many tasks where everyone starts and finishes at the same time. This makes it hard to be flexible because the mindset becomes "let's work properly from 9 to 5." It is easy to implement a system where there is no overtime because work ends at 5, though.

Mr. Idenawa, from the perspective of the welfare field, do you have confidence or expectations that you could secure more work if a "deemed employment" system were introduced?

Very much so. We have been receiving orders from Honda for 45 years, and in fiscal 2006, a system called the Special Adjustment Grant was established. Within the Act on Employment Promotion etc. of Persons with Disabilities, a support system for home-based workers with disabilities was created. Under this system, when people with physical disabilities who cannot commute work from home, a company places an order for work rather than employing them, and a certain special adjustment grant is paid to the ordering company based on the wages paid. In addition to homes, welfare facilities that meet certain conditions are also covered.

Under the Act on Employment Promotion etc. of Persons with Disabilities, disability employment adjustment grants and rewards are paid for direct employment, but the special adjustment grants and special rewards are paid on top of those. This was an extremely groundbreaking system.

Until then, no matter how much work Honda provided for people with disabilities, there was nothing that led to social recognition for Honda. This was despite the fact that they were providing work in the welfare employment field while also meeting the statutory employment rate. Since this system was established, Honda has been receiving special adjustment grants since 2008. Currently, Honda is the only company in the automobile industry to do so.

Also, in 2015, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare established an award system to recognize companies that actively place orders with welfare facilities. Ten companies, including Honda, Kao, and JR Kyushu, were recognized. They were honored for contributing to the improvement of welfare by prioritizing orders to welfare facilities rather than just through direct employment of people with disabilities. I think this is a very good measure.

If we strengthen "deemed employment" and these types of order incentives a bit more, companies will benefit from receiving grants, and if it counts toward the statutory employment rate, the situation will change considerably. Furthermore, since companies will look for places that strictly observe price, quality, and deadlines, competitive principles will come into play within welfare facilities. I believe this will become an incentive to raise wages within the welfare system.

Currently, there is no incentive to increase wages at welfare facilities. As you pointed out in your book, Mr. Nakajima, the salaries of welfare facility staff come from public funds (Independence Support Benefits), so even if wages for the disabled increase from 15,000 yen to 30,000 yen, the staff's salaries hardly change. I believe this is a major cause of the stagnation in welfare employment.

That's right. Moreover, since the benefits currently received cannot be diverted to the wages of people with disabilities, staff are instead allocating their own labor hours to the work of people with disabilities. They are somehow managing to pay wages that way.

I think welfare facilities doing such things are actually admirable. In short, they are cutting their own salaries to provide wages for people with disabilities. It is the people at the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare who call that improper who are in the wrong.

However, if "deemed employment" is introduced in the future and hardworking welfare facilities go out to pitch to companies and secure work, their sales will grow. This is called the work account, and since target wages for people with disabilities are set within this, once these are cleared, the next step should be to return the surplus to the staff.

That would be an incentive.

This is truly the ideal and what we are aiming for.

Mr. Marumono, for example, in France, the statutory employment rate is 6%, but up to about 3% of that can be achieved through diverse forms of disability employment. For instance, they can enter into individual labor agreements with people with disabilities or place orders with facilities. In this way, the goal is to achieve the 6% through various forms.

In contrast, Japan focuses on direct employment, and the employment rate is gradually rising. I think companies have concerns about how high it will go in the future. On the other hand, the management of welfare facilities is quite difficult in some areas.

In this context, when thinking about the overall system, I feel it would be better to increase flexibility a bit more. Mr. Sekimura also pointed out that flexible working styles are easier for people with mental disabilities. As the Executive Director of Zenjukyo (National Association of Employers of People with Severe Disabilities), how do you evaluate this?

When I think about "what is best for people with disabilities," I believe what is important is "how many actual jobs there are and how many of them they can actually get." To that end, a reasonable increase in the actual employment rate is ideal.

As you just mentioned, Mr. Nakajima, the statutory employment rate is 6% in France and 5% in Germany. However, I hear the actual employment rate is about half of that. Compared to them, Japan's statutory rate is lower, but in reality, it has been rising steadily and properly, allowing many people with disabilities to work. I think this model is the best.

I believe we should consider "deemed employment" at the stage where the rate continues to rise as it is now and many companies and organizations can no longer keep up. At that time, I think we could divide it into two parts: making the base portion actual employment and allowing "deemed employment" for the portion added on top.

For example, up to 2% would be handled through actual employment. Any amount exceeding that could be allowed through "deemed employment." There was a time when the employment rate for large companies was considerably lower than for SMEs. I am concerned that if it becomes easier for large companies to achieve the employment rate through "deemed employment" rather than through the unfamiliar task of employing people with mental disabilities, companies might all move in that direction at once. I hope for a time when society's understanding of disability progresses and disability employment is no longer called a mere numbers game.

How should disability employment be positioned for Japanese society in the future? We have already discussed how making the employment rate itself the goal can have negative effects, but I would like to hear your opinions on this. Mr. Idenawa, what do you think?

There is a term called "decent work." It means "work that is productive and delivers a fair income, security in the workplace and social protection for families." I believe it is important to realize this decent work everywhere, whether in welfare employment, special subsidiaries, or general employment in companies.

There are many different types of people with handicaps, but my honest feeling is that only a handful of them can demonstrate vocational abilities that meet the Minimum Wage Act in general employment. In that sense, since over 200,000 people are currently working in Type B welfare facilities, from my position, I am ambitiously aiming for "self-sustainable welfare employment."

Specifically, the Basic Disability Pension provides about 60,000 to 70,000 yen. The goal is for them to be able to be independent by combining that pension with the wages they earn from working. According to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare's estimates, a wage of at least one-third of the minimum wage, or about 50,000 yen per month, is necessary.

Currently, the average wage at Type B welfare facilities is about 15,000 yen, so we have to work about three times harder. How can we achieve this? It is an almost impossible task just by baking bread or cookies. Therefore, we should take orders from companies through "deemed employment" and the like.

As Mr. Marumono said, direct employment at companies could be mandated up to, say, 2%. For the portion exceeding that, orders could be placed with welfare facilities. By doing so, we can raise the level of welfare employment, and if we divide the wages paid there by the minimum wage, it can be converted into "deemed" employment.

That's true.

The special adjustment grant system I introduced earlier considers "deemed employment" in the form of a grant, but it only applies to non-employment Type B facilities and excludes employment-based Type A facilities. This is a contradiction in the system, so we need to harmonize it properly.

Also, from the welfare side, I think "off-site work," or in other words, "in-company work," is very good. This is because it is quite difficult to feel "decent work" within a welfare facility.

Currently, we send two teams to a supermarket called "Shimamura," which has 11 stores in our local Hiratsuka. One staff member is attached to a team of four or five users, and this team performs back-yard operations.

They bag vegetables, put products on shelves, clean, and even pull weeds in the parking lot. When they do this, local customers coming to the store say things like, "You're working hard!" They are truly happy, and they can see that they are being useful. Shimamura Store places these orders while also strictly complying with the statutory employment rate, and they were the first in the supermarket industry to receive the special adjustment grant.

Since a community-based supermarket in Hiratsuka is doing this, I think it should be spread nationwide. I believe it would be good to evaluate that through "deemed employment."

By opening up work that is socially necessary rather than confining it within the framework of welfare, connections with society are also created.

Exactly. In terms of employment support for people with disabilities, facility staff have more know-how and a comparative advantage than people in companies, and the burden of labor management for companies is lightened. Companies can also directly employ those who prove to be truly excellent after seeing how they work. And if their disability becomes more severe or unstable, they can return to the facility. The fact that they work for that company doesn't change. I think a system where the individual can go back and forth would be good.

What you just described is exactly the Samhall model used in Sweden. At the state-owned company Samhall, the people with disabilities working there go to various companies to perform tasks like cleaning, stocking goods, and various other jobs. In terms of productivity, they cannot be paid as much as direct employees, so the companies do not employ them directly.

In my facility, when working at Shimamura, the hourly wage is currently 400 yen. It's a format where four or five people cover the work of two part-time workers.

In the case of Samhall, 90% of labor costs are covered by subsidies. But the fact that they only provide up to 90% in subsidies means that a 10% social surplus is being generated. In that respect, they are doing work that is needed.

An hourly wage of 400 yen is very helpful for Type B welfare facilities because it clears the threshold of more than one-third of the minimum wage. It can become a model for self-sustainable welfare employment. The wage return rate is extremely high.

They have truly become a valuable part of the workforce.

Since there is a labor shortage now, the supermarkets are also very pleased.

Mr. Mitsui, what are your thoughts from a corporate perspective on disability employment for society?

I believe that people with disabilities are not uniform; they are a very diverse group. Before I knew about disability employment, my image of people with disabilities was monotone and uniform. But there are all kinds of people. Since there are people with various ways of living, various aspirations, and various abilities, I hope we can provide various environments where those abilities can be utilized.

Mr. Idenawa mentioned that employment in companies is difficult, and that is truly the case. We currently meet 1,000 people with disabilities a year, but we can only hire about 20. However, among them, there are those who want to work alongside others within the Recruit Group, even if it is within the protected world of a special subsidiary. On the other hand, there are also those who prefer employment based on a welfare model. Therefore, I think it is good to have various options available.

There are limits to what private companies can do, but for those who want to work in a private company, I want to provide a wide range of choices.

Mr. Sekimura, compared to the rest of the world, Japan currently has a prominently high number of psychiatric beds relative to its population, and hospital stays are said to be long. In this context, how should people with mental disabilities engage with society, particularly through employment? Could you tell us what kind of society you hope for in the future?

This may be true for non-disabled people as well, but for people with disabilities, getting a job and earning money is something truly irreplaceable.

If it were just about getting money, there is the disability pension, but opportunities to earn income from work in addition to that are hard to come by. Money isn't everything, but for a person with a disability, working and earning money is truly important.

If you have money, you can interact with friends and go to various places. But if you don't, your points of contact with society disappear, and you deepen your isolation. I want people to understand that money is that important to people with disabilities.

I used to work as a caregiver, and now I work with disability pensions as a social insurance and labor consultant, so I have interactions with people with disabilities in that capacity as well. Even as someone with schizophrenia, I am sometimes told "thank you" by clients and care recipients. When I think that working helps people and they say "thank you" to someone like me, it brings tears to my eyes.

Work is truly important for people with disabilities in the sense that they can feel they are useful to society, and some people even recover their physical condition by getting a job. I still cannot forget the joy of receiving my first paycheck. I was truly happy.

Employing people with disabilities in the workplace is fundamentally about understanding the disability. If that is missing, everything else disappears.

I have opportunities to go to Sophia University, Shukutoku University, and others to teach about my experiences with schizophrenia and basic knowledge of disability pensions. Mental health education for young students is an important proactive investment for the future of mental health and welfare in Japan.

I take pride in this activity as a major social contribution I can make as a person with a disability, and I hope that such activities will spread throughout the country.

Thank you very much. That was a story that only someone directly involved could tell.

Finally, Mr. Marumono, who has been involved in disability employment for the longest time, based on what has been discussed so far, could you tell us what direction you are thinking of for the future?

Mr. Sekimura mentioned that "by working, I felt I was being useful to society," and I think a society where one can truly feel that is the society we should aim for from now on.

What is most lacking in society right now is the desire to understand people with disabilities. How to foster that is something we must work on over the long term.

People with mental disabilities often face mismatches with their work, and many quit after a short period. I think this often stems from a lack of understanding of the disability by those around them.

Also, since Mr. Sekimura didn't mention it, I would like to say that "peer counseling," where people with disabilities listen to each other as equals, is being re-evaluated recently. People with mental disabilities feel relieved by talking about their struggles to others. They also think about their own ways of coping by hearing about other people's experiences. It's the same for non-disabled people, but being listened to has a very significant meaning.

However, attending psychiatrists are very busy, so they won't listen to a single patient for 15 or 30 minutes. This leaves people with mental disabilities very dissatisfied, leading them to keep changing doctors, and eventually, many end up without a doctor they can trust.

So, the doctor brings in a peer counselor to listen to the patient's story on their behalf. Since peer counselors are themselves people with mental disabilities, they understand the situation well, and the other person talks straight about anything.

They then summarize what they heard and convey it to the psychiatrist. Having people with mental disabilities work as peer counselors is very helpful for psychiatrists.

Also, there is a blind manager at a certain company who works on developing new products for visually impaired people. He uses the things he finds most difficult as a visually impaired person as ideas for product development.

I think it is important for companies to find and create a wide range of jobs that can be done precisely because the person has a disability. By having people with disabilities do those jobs, people in society will feel, "Our lives became easier because this person did this." By doing so, people with disabilities will have a place in society. When they have a place, the idea of coexistence in society naturally emerges.

Therefore, what we must do is create many jobs that can only be done by people with disabilities. I believe that by doing so, understanding of people with disabilities will deepen.

Thank you very much. That was a very good discussion.

Listening to everyone, I felt that disability employment is actually not just about people with disabilities. It's about facing the individual properly and determining what kind of environment and working style is most desirable for them. What is the job that truly fits that person? For people with disabilities, this is an urgent issue right in front of them, but it is also necessary for all working people.

I feel that unless we position the importance of disability employment in that way, we won't get people at the actual sites of employment interested. And as I truly felt through today's roundtable discussion, if the currently highlighted "work-style reform" incorporates the idea from disability employment of "fitting the work-style to the human" through flexible employment formats, it will lead to the double benefit of improved happiness and productivity. In that respect, disability employment can be called a "mirror reflecting society."

Thank you all very much for today.