Power harassment prevention measures are mandatory for small and medium-sized companies too — consultation desks, internal rules, and what to do after an incident

Bottom line first: Power harassment prevention measures are a legal obligation regardless of company size or industry. Small and medium-sized companies have been covered since 1 April 2022, and the grace period is over. Writing "prohibited" in the work rules is not enough.

What the law asks for is a policy that is decided and communicated, a consultation desk, and — once a report comes in — establishing the facts, showing consideration for the person harmed, taking action toward the person responsible, preventing recurrence, protecting privacy, and not treating anyone disadvantageously for having made a report. The question is whether the system actually works.

From 1 October 2026, the guideline additionally addresses conduct connected with so-called jibaku eigyo (having employees buy the employer's own products), and conduct that prohibits or coerces a person from disclosing sensitive personal information such as sexual orientation, gender identity, medical history, or fertility treatment.

Final legal assessments of particular conduct, and negotiation or litigation once a matter becomes contested, are not handled by this office; we refer you to a lawyer. This article does not reach conclusions on those points either.

Are prevention measures mandatory for small and medium-sized companies too?

Yes. The Act on Comprehensive Promotion of Labour Measures (労働施策総合推進法) requires employers to take the measures necessary in employment management to prevent power harassment, and provides no exemption by company size or industry.

The provision reads:

An employer shall take necessary measures in terms of employment management, including establishing the systems necessary to respond appropriately to consultations from the workers it employs, so that the working environment of those workers is not harmed by conduct in the workplace that is based on a superior relationship and exceeds the scope necessary and appropriate for the business.

Large companies have been covered since 1 June 2020, and small and medium-sized companies since 1 April 2022. SMEs had a grace period during which this was a best-effort obligation, but it ended on 31 March 2022. If your understanding stopped at that grace period, start there. Workplaces with fewer than 10 employees are covered as well.

One note on article numbers. The law is amended on 1 October 2026, and because a new chapter is inserted, this obligation moves from Article 30-2 to Article 31, and the provision on the responsibilities of employers and workers moves from Article 30-3 to Article 32. The substance does not change. This article uses the numbering in force as of September 2026, and thereafter simply calls it the power harassment prevention obligation.

How is "workplace power harassment" defined?

The guideline treats it as conduct that satisfies all three of the following elements:

① conduct based on a superior relationship in the workplace, ② exceeding the scope necessary and appropriate for the business, ③ thereby harming the working environment of the worker

If even one element is missing, it does not qualify. Conversely, instruction given within the scope necessary and appropriate for the business is not power harassment, even if the other person finds it unpleasant. The framework is neither "it is harassment whenever the person feels it is" nor "anything goes as long as you call it guidance."

The guideline then lists six representative types of conduct.

Table: the six representative types of power harassment

Type	What the guideline describes	Point to watch
(a) Physical attack	Assault, injury	Becomes an issue regardless of any link to the work
(b) Psychological attack	Threats, defamation, insults, severe abusive language	Conduct denying the person's dignity is typical
(c) Isolation from human relationships	Segregation, ostracism, ignoring	Seating and information-sharing practices can be in scope
(d) Excessive demands	Forcing work clearly unnecessary or impossible to perform; obstructing work	Distinguish from increased workload in a busy period
(e) Insufficient demands	Ordering work far below the person's ability or experience without business rationale, or giving no work	Distinguish from placement for development purposes
(f) Intrusion into the private sphere	Excessive intrusion into private matters	Handling of sensitive personal information is the usual flashpoint

These six are representative, not an exhaustive list. Conduct outside them still qualifies if the three elements are met, and conduct resembling a type does not qualify if the three elements are not met. The order of assessment is the three elements first, not fitting conduct into a type.

What must a company put in place?

The guideline sets out the required measures in four groups. What is examined is whether the substance is in place — not how many training sessions were held.

Table: the four groups of required measures

Group	Items in the guideline	What the company prepares
Making the policy clear and communicating it	Clarifying and communicating what power harassment is and that it must not occur / setting out in the rules, and communicating, the policy of dealing strictly with those responsible and the content of that response	Policy document, entries in the work rules or other service regulations, means of communication and records
Building a consultation system	Setting a desk for responding to consultations / a system in which the person staffing the desk can respond appropriately	Desk and staff, notice to employees, response procedure, intake form
Prompt and appropriate response after the fact	Confirming the facts of the case / measures of consideration for the person harmed / action toward the person responsible / measures to prevent recurrence	Fact-finding approach, standard forms of consideration and action, recurrence-prevention measures, records
Measures to be taken alongside	Measures necessary to protect the privacy of the person reporting, the person responsible and others, and communicating this / providing and communicating that no one will be treated disadvantageously for making a report or the like	Information-handling rules, statement in the desk's notice

The first and fourth groups are the ones most often missed.

For the first, a policy saying "power harassment must not occur" is not enough on its own. It extends to setting out, and communicating, a policy of dealing strictly with those responsible together with the content of that response.

For the fourth, privacy protection measures must actually be taken and then communicated, and the fact that no one will be treated disadvantageously for making a report must be communicated as well. If it has not been conveyed inside the company, having a system is not sufficient.

Does the consultation desk have to be external?

An internal desk is acceptable. The guideline requires the desk to be designated in advance and made known to workers; it does not limit this to internal or external. Outsourcing to an external body is also permitted. An external desk is not a legal requirement.

That said, at a small company the person to consult is easily the person responsible, or someone close to them. If the president doubles as the desk, what happens when the report concerns the president? Without designing for that, a desk exists but does not function. Combining an external desk is worth considering as a response to that reality.

Decide the following:

• Who staffs the desk, and how roles are divided if there is more than one person
• The procedure that lets the staff respond (what to ask, what to record, whom to escalate to)
• That reports are accepted even at a stage where it is unclear whether the conduct qualifies
• Whether anonymous reports are accepted and, if so, how to explain that fact-finding may not be possible
• The intake form and where it is kept

A report has come in. What do you check first?

When a report arrives, move promptly to fact-finding while checking whether urgent steps are needed to secure safety, what the person reporting wants, and how far information may be shared. Securing safety and establishing the facts are not an either-or. If there has been assault or injury, a different response is needed; if the parties must be physically separated, act first.

Two things should always be conveyed to the person reporting.

The first is the scope of confidentiality. Because fact-finding means speaking with the person said to be responsible, you cannot promise a resolution that no one learns of. Confirm at the outset how much will be shared and with whom.

The second is that they will not be treated disadvantageously for having made the report. The law provides:

An employer shall not dismiss or otherwise treat disadvantageously a worker on the grounds that the worker has made a consultation under the preceding paragraph, or has stated facts when cooperating with the employer's response to such a consultation.

This covers not only the person who made the report but also anyone who cooperated with the investigation and stated facts. Include this sentence in the notice for the desk.

In fact-finding, whom do you speak with?

The structure the guideline sets out is confirming the facts from both the person reporting and the person said to be responsible. Where the accounts do not match and the facts cannot be sufficiently established, you hear from third parties; where that too is difficult, one option is to refer the dispute to a neutral third-party body.

There is no legally prescribed order of "reporter → person responsible → third party." How you proceed depends on the case. That said, before determining the facts or deciding a final measure such as disciplinary action, you need to hear from the side said to be responsible. On the other hand, provisional separation or steps to secure safety, taken to stop harm from spreading, are sometimes done without waiting for fact-finding to conclude. Keep these two apart.

Practical points:

• For each interview, record the date, place, who was present and what was said
• Keep interviews with third parties within the necessary scope, with regard for privacy
• Design the questioning so that who reported what is not revealed
• There are cases where accounts diverge and the facts cannot be settled. Confirm that the aim is not to decide right and wrong for its own sake, but to remove the situation harming the working environment

How do you handle the person harmed, the person responsible, and recurrence?

The guideline lists three things for the response after the fact: measures of consideration for the person harmed, action toward the person responsible, and measures to prevent recurrence.

Where the facts are established, all three are carried out. Consideration might mean a transfer that separates the parties, restoring any disadvantage in working conditions, or follow-up appropriate to the person's physical and mental condition. Where the condition persists and leave becomes a possibility, see our article on leave and return to work for mental health reasons. Action toward the person responsible is taken after confirming the basis in the work rules, as described below.

Even where the facts cannot be established, measures to prevent recurrence are carried out. This is easily misunderstood. Rather than "the facts were not established, so nothing is done," measures such as re-communicating the policy, training, and reviewing the desk's notice are to be taken.

How do you check the work rules and disciplinary provisions?

When considering disciplinary action toward the person responsible, first check whether there is a basis in the work rules or other service regulations. Where a workplace ordinarily employing 10 or more workers provides for sanctions, Article 89 item 9 of the Labor Standards Act requires the type and degree to be stated in the work rules.

Where provisions are made for commendations and sanctions, matters concerning the types and degrees thereof

Whether the disciplinary action is valid is a separate question. Article 15 of the Labour Contract Act provides that discipline lacking objectively reasonable grounds and not found appropriate in general social terms is void as an abuse of right. Having a basis in the rules and the action being appropriate in that particular case must be examined separately.

Judging whether a particular disciplinary action is valid is not handled by this office; we refer you to a lawyer. Do not act on a disciplinary measure before the rules are in place. On the work rules themselves, see our article on work rules.

Is power harassment training itself a uniform legal obligation?

It is not a scheme in which holding training once a year discharges the obligation. Nor is training unrelated to legal compliance. Hold both of these accurately in mind.

First, as examples of how to communicate the policy, the guideline expressly lists holding training and seminars, alongside entries in company newsletters, pamphlets and intranets. Training is a strong means of achieving the communication that is required.

Second, the law provides, as a responsibility of employers:

An employer shall endeavour to deepen the interest and understanding of the workers it employs regarding problems of conduct based on a superior relationship, to have those workers pay the necessary attention to their conduct toward other workers by holding training and taking other necessary care, and to cooperate with the measures taken by the national government under the preceding paragraph.

This is a best-effort obligation. The same article also sets out the responsibilities of workers.

In short, the number of training sessions is not itself a uniform obligation; the substance of the obligation lies on the systems side — communicating the policy, the consultation system, and so on. If you hold training, record when it was held, for whom, and what was covered. It serves as evidence that communication took place.

What changes in the power harassment guideline from October 2026?

The version of the guideline applying from 1 October 2026 has already been published. The framework of the required measures does not change. What changes is the illustration of what can amount to power harassment. There are three points.

First, so-called jibaku eigyo. The guideline will state:

Conduct connected with forced purchase of goods and the like (an act by which an employer has a worker purchase the employer's own goods or services against that worker's free will) also constitutes workplace power harassment where all of the elements ① to ③ in (1) are satisfied.

What must not be overlooked is the condition "where all of the elements ① to ③ in (1) are satisfied." Not every exchange about buying the company's products becomes power harassment, and no seventh type has been added to the six. The order of assessment remains the three elements first. Even so, companies that operate quotas or sales targets would do well to check what actually happens internally.

Second, a change of terminology. What was "性自認" becomes "ジェンダーアイデンティティ" (gender identity). References to sexual orientation were already in the guideline, so they are not newly added. If your internal materials use the older term, align the wording.

Third, an addition to the examples under "intrusion into the private sphere." On the handling of sensitive personal information, the guideline will read:

Disclosing to other workers, without that worker's consent, sensitive personal information such as the worker's sexual orientation or gender identity, medical history or fertility treatment, or prohibiting or coercing that worker's own disclosure of such information.

Alongside the existing "disclosing without the person's consent," prohibiting the person from disclosing it themselves, or coercing them into disclosing it, now appears. The scope is not limited to sexual orientation and gender identity; it covers sensitive personal information including medical history and fertility treatment. Both telling someone "don't say it" and pressing them to "say it" are within the illustration. This bears on how the consultation desk operates and how managers are briefed.

Note that from the same date, 1 October 2026, measures against customer harassment and against sexual harassment toward job applicants and others become new obligations for employers. Those are separate frameworks with different scope and content, so please see our article on customer harassment measures.

So what should the company put in place?

In order, there are seven things.

1. Set out, in the work rules or other service regulations, the policy that power harassment must not occur together with the policy of dealing strictly with those responsible and the content of that response, and communicate it
2. Designate the consultation desk, prepare the staff and the procedure, and make them known
3. Create the intake form for when a report is received
4. Decide how fact-finding proceeds (whom to ask, what to ask, what to record)
5. Decide the standard forms of consideration for the person harmed, action toward the person responsible, and recurrence prevention
6. Establish information-handling rules that protect the privacy of the person reporting, the person responsible and others, and communicate both those rules and the prohibition on disadvantageous treatment for making a report or cooperating with an investigation
7. Check whether any practice could amount to jibaku eigyo, whether wording still reads "性自認," and whether any practice prohibits or coerces disclosure of sensitive personal information

The seventh is a task specific to this year. Even checking just those three points is worthwhile.

What can 四葉社会保険労務士事務所 (Yotsuba Certified Social Insurance and Labor Consultant Office) do?

What we take on is the systems and rules side.

• Preparing harassment prevention regulations, work rules and disciplinary provisions
• Designing the consultation desk and building the internal workflow and intake and record forms
• Preparing materials that communicate the policy
• Designing training from a labor-management perspective
• Building standard forms for after-the-fact response, and organizing how the system runs

We do not handle the following.

• Final legal assessment of particular conduct, determining the legal responsibility of the person responsible or the person harmed, judging the validity of disciplinary action, and negotiation or litigation once a matter becomes contested → we refer you to a lawyer (Bengoshi)
• Judgments on the physical and mental condition of the person harmed, and guidance interviews → we connect you with a physician
• Tax consultations → we connect you with a tax accountant (Zeirishi)

Even where we help design the consultation desk or support intake in practice, we do not make final legal assessments of whether particular conduct qualifies, and we do not negotiate on behalf of a party. On where to turn when disciplinary action or a dispute comes into view, see our article on who to consult about dismissal.

四葉不動産株式会社, 四葉行政書士事務所, and 四葉社会保険労務士事務所 each accept work as separate, independent business entities. Where we introduce another professional, we do so on the basis that you contract with them directly, and we receive no referral fee.

Consultations are free of charge. Please also see our services and how we work.

Frequently asked questions

Q. Are prevention measures necessary even with fewer than 10 employees?
A. Yes. The law requires employers to take the measures necessary in employment management, with no exemption by company size or industry. Small and medium-sized companies have been covered since 1 April 2022, and the earlier best-effort period has ended. Prevention measures apply even at a size where there is no obligation to draw up work rules. The policy is set out in the work rules or other service regulations and communicated.

Q. Is it enough to write "power harassment is prohibited" in the work rules?
A. No. Beyond the prohibition, you must set out and communicate the policy of dealing strictly with those responsible and the content of that response; designate a consultation desk and a system in which staff can respond; carry out fact-finding, consideration for the person harmed, action toward the person responsible and recurrence prevention; take and communicate privacy protection measures; and communicate the prohibition on disadvantageous treatment. If you will impose discipline, also check the sanctions provision under Article 89 item 9 of the Labor Standards Act.

Q. Is it prohibited to treat an employee disadvantageously for making a report?
A. Yes. The law prohibits dismissal or other disadvantageous treatment on the grounds that a worker made a consultation, or stated facts when cooperating with the response to one. This covers not only the person who reported but also anyone who cooperated with the investigation and stated facts. Put this point in the notice for the desk.

Q. If we hold power harassment training once a year, have we met the obligation?
A. No. The substance of the obligation lies on the systems side — communicating the policy, the consultation system, and so on. That said, training is not unrelated: the guideline lists holding training and seminars as an example of how to communicate the policy, and the law provides that employers shall endeavour to hold training and take other necessary care. Training is a strong means, but not sufficient on its own.

Sources for this article

• Act on Comprehensive Promotion of Labour Measures and Stabilisation of Employment of Workers and Enrichment of Workers' Vocational Lives (労働施策の総合的な推進並びに労働者の雇用の安定及び職業生活の充実等に関する法律, Act No. 132 of 1966), Article 30-2 paragraph 1 (measures in employment management) and paragraph 2 (prohibition of disadvantageous treatment); Article 30-3 (responsibilities of the national government, employers and workers) — all as in force until 30 September 2026; from 1 October 2026 these become Article 31 and Article 32
• Act Partially Amending That Act and Others (令和7年法律第63号, Act No. 63 of 2025, promulgated 11 June 2025) — in force from 1 October 2026 (Cabinet Order setting the effective date = 令和8年政令第17号, Cabinet Order No. 17 of 2026). Because a new chapter is inserted, Article 30-2 becomes Article 31 and Article 30-3 becomes Article 32 (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, "comparative table of old and new provisions")
• Guideline on measures employers should take in employment management regarding problems caused by conduct in the workplace based on a superior relationship (令和2年厚生労働省告示第5号, MHLW Public Notice No. 5 of 2020) — the three elements, the six representative types, the content of the required measures, and training and seminars as a means of communicating the policy
• Amendment to that guideline (Public Notice on the arrangement of MHLW-related notices = 令和8年厚生労働省告示第53号, MHLW Public Notice No. 53 of 2026, issued 26 February 2026; applying from 1 October 2026) — addition of the description on forced purchase of goods and the like, change of terminology from 性自認 to ジェンダーアイデンティティ, and addition of prohibiting or coercing disclosure of sensitive personal information
• Labor Standards Act (労働基準法, Act No. 49 of 1947), Article 89 item 9 (matters to be stated where provisions are made for commendations and sanctions)
• Labour Contract Act (労働契約法, Act No. 128 of 2007), Article 15 (discipline)
• Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, "Preventing harassment in the workplace" — the timing of the obligation (large companies from 1 June 2020, SMEs from 1 April 2022)
• Guideline on measures employers should take regarding problems caused by conduct of customers and others in the workplace (令和8年厚生労働省告示第51号) and Guideline on measures employers should take regarding problems caused by sexual conduct in job-seeking activities and the like (同第52号)
• Public materials and statutory texts confirmed on 20 August 2026

This article does not decide whom to consult. 四葉社会保険労務士事務所 can advise on preparing harassment prevention regulations, work rules and disciplinary provisions, designing the consultation desk and the internal workflow and forms, materials that communicate the policy, designing training, and building standard forms for after-the-fact response. Final legal assessment of particular conduct, judging the validity of disciplinary action, and negotiation or litigation once a matter becomes contested are not handled by this office; we refer you to a lawyer (Bengoshi). Judgments on physical and mental condition and guidance interviews are for a physician, and tax matters for a tax accountant (Zeirishi). If a different professional is needed, each is contracted separately, and there is no referral fee. Fees are set out in the fee schedule, and frequently asked questions are collected in the FAQ.

This article is general information. Individual determinations are made by a qualified professional after a consultation, in light of individual circumstances. Written by Joji Uramatsu (Shakai Hoken Roumushi, Gyoseishoshi, Registered Real Estate Transaction Specialist).