Unionization Rate “Actually Around 30%”ーNearly Double Government Figures, With Signs of Growth

12 Dec 2025

On December 10, the Asahi Shimbun newspaper carried an intriguing article titled, “The unionization rate in Japan is not continuing to fall; in fact, it is rising.” Below is a quotation from that article.

「Japan’s labour unions have long been viewed as steadily losing members. However, a new study based on individual surveys suggests that the unionization rateーthe proportion of union members among employeesーis actually close to 30 percent, nearly double the level shown in government statistics, and is even trending upward.」

The research was conducted by Akie Nakamura, senior researcher at the JTUC Research Institute, Susumu Kuwabara, professor at Reitaku University, and Ryu Kambayashi, professor at Musashi University.

According to official government data from the “Basic Survey of Trade Unions” conducted by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan’s estimated unionization rate stood at just 16.1 percent in 2024, continuing a steady decline from 20.7 percent in 2001. In light of this trend, the declining influence of trade unions has often been emphasized.

In contrast, the new study relied on individual-based surveys, including the Japanese General Social Survey conducted by Osaka University of Commerce, as well as JTUC Research Institute’s Short-Term Survey of Workers. The Research Institute is the research arm of RENGO (Japanese Trade Union Confederation). Both surveys were conducted using sampling methods such as in-person interviews, mail questionnaires, and online surveys.

When unionization rates were calculated based on respondents’ answers to whether or not they belonged to a labour union, the Japanese General Social Survey showed a rate of 24.6 percent in 2023, while the Workers’ Short-Term Survey recorded 29.6 percent in 2024. Both surveys indicate a rising trend since the 2000s.

One reason cited for the discrepancy between government statistics and individual surveys lies in the methodology of the Basic Survey. It is conducted as a so-called “comprehensive enumeration” intended to cover all labour unions nationwide. However, unions have no legal obligation to respond, making non-responses common. As a result, actual membership numbers may be under-reported. In addition, because the survey is administered through prefectural labour administration offices, the decline of local government survey systems following administrative and fiscal reforms may also be affecting accuracy.

The strength of labour unions has a major impact on wage negotiations and efforts to improve working conditions. As Nakamura noted, “The influence of labour unions has been assessed based on government statistics of unionization rates. This study shows not only that those figures are likely too low, but also that workers’ awareness of the importance of union membership is increasing.” She added, “Mechanisms for realizing workers’ needs are essential, and the way we understand and grasp those needs has to be reconsidered.”

(Quotes above)

The recent study indicating that Japan’s unionization rate may be reaching nearly 30 percentーalmost double the government’s official figure of 16 percentーraises a critical question about how the social influence of labour unions is assessed. For years, discussions surrounding the “decline of union power” have been based largely on government statistics. Yet the new findings suggest that unions may not be as weak as commonly believed, and that workers’ awareness and willingness to join unions may in fact be growing.

The discrepancy appears to arise from structural issues within the government survey itself, including its reliance on entirely voluntary responses from labour unions and the increasing difficulty that local governments face in maintaining robust data-collection capabilities. This is not merely a technical gap in statistical methodologyーit is a foundational problem that affects labour policy, wage negotiations, and national debates about improving working conditions.

Labour unions should therefore recognize the significance of this discrepancy and avoid underestimating their own influence by relying exclusively on government data. At the same time, a tripartite review body composed of government, labour, and management representatives should be established without delay to examine the causes of this discrepancy. Such a forum would enable a thorough evaluation of survey methods, accuracy in capturing the real situation, and the ways that data should inform policy.

The importance and position of labour unions are demonstrated not merely by unionization rates, but by the solidarity and collective action of workers on the ground. Labour unions must once again reaffirm their role in and influence upon society, relying on data that are firmly rooted in actual conditions.

<Y.T>