Karoshi: Death by Overwork in Japan

Karoshi -- Japanese "salary men" work late into the night before clocking out

As American managers puzzle over how to help employees “thrive” at work, Japan struggles at the other end of the spectrum — how to keep employees from working themselves to death. Karoshi, literally translated as “death from overwork,” is an officially recognized cause-of-death in Japan. In the United States, one of the few countries where employees work more paid hours than Japanese employees, we commonly think of karoshi as someone else’s problem. But is it?

Karoshi is a well known phenomenon in Japan, where victims commonly work 14-hour days, seven-day weeks and die at an early age. Some karoshi victims have been known to work 80 straight days and more than 100 hours of overtime for months at a time. This brutal regimen is rooted in a culture that reveres hard work and self-sacrifice, as well as a 1980′s economic boom that drove demands for productivity, followed by a grueling economic recession that led to deep-seated job insecurity ever since. A 2004 International Labour Organization survey revealed that more than six million Japanese were working an average of more than 60 hours per week.

The first documented case of karoshi occurred in 1969, reportedly when a 29-year-old married man working in the shipping department of Japan’s largest newspaper died suddenly of stroke while at work. The Workers Compensation Bureau of Japan’s Ministry of Labor eventually deemed shift work and overwork as the causes of the death. Five years later, the man’s family received compensation.

In subsequent years, karoshi became an increasingly known phenomenon in Japan, predominantly among white collar workers known as “salary men.” The direct medical causes of karoshi were usually heart attack and stroke. A variation of the phenomenon is karo jisatsu, suicide due to overwork. (Suicide is believed to be underreported due to its stigma in Japanese culture, but in 2009 Japan’s national police agency estimated that 10,000 suicides, of the total 30,000 occurrences in Japan that year, were related to work.)

Tetsunojo Uehata, the medical authority who coined the term, defined karoshi as a “condition in which psychologically unsound work processes are allowed to continue in a way that disrupts the worker’s normal life rhythms, leading to a buildup of fatigue in the body and accompanied by a worsening of preexistent high blood pressure and a hardening of the arteries, finally resulting in a fatal breakdown.” More specifically, karoshi is linked to crushing workloads, relentless hours, absence of work/life balance, and silent suffering with no outlet to express dissatisfaction and no influence over work conditions.

In 1994, the government’s Institute of Economics estimated the number of karoshi deaths at around 1,000 or 5 percent of all deaths from cerebrovascular and cardiovascular disease in the 25 to 59 age group.

Some researchers have drawn a connection between the Japanese prevalence of karoshi and the nation’s commitment to lean production, the efficiency-above-all else approach to manufacturing that ultimately helped spawn the Lean Six Sigma approach that has taken American industry, especially healthcare, by storm.

One of the most notorious cases of karoshi occurred in 2002, when Kenichi Uchino, a 30-year-old manager of quality control at Toyota, collapsed dead at 4am — at work — having perservered more than 80 hours of overtime each month for the previous six months. Toyota and the Japanese government refused to compensate Uchino’s family, arguing that much of the overtime was voluntary and unpaid. Japanese courts didn’t buy it, and the family was compensated by both the government and Toyota. (Compensation for karoshi has been reported to frequently be the equivalent of $20,000 per year and up to $1 million dollars in punitive damages). The case led to systematic reform — new government regulations limiting overtime and promoting work-life balance, and corporate reforms, as well.

According to an insightful article by British journalist Emma Holmqvist

In response to mounting pressure, many Japanese companies are now making an effort to establish a better work-life balance… Toyota has upped its game, and has attempted to limit overtime to 360 hours a year, which amounts to about 30 hours monthly. Meanwhile, some companies run recorded announcements to urge their staff to go home or take a break at certain times, while firms such as Nissan have introduced telecommuting to ease the burden of employees with children. Taking the overtime issue more seriously still, a string of large corporations have begun operating with days strictly prohibiting overtime, requiring staff to leave the office promptly at 5:30pm.

But the extent to which these changes have influenced rates of karoshi is unclear. Widespread reports suggest that Japanese workers continue to work exorbitant overtime hours — off the books (“cloaked overtime” or furoshiki). And cases of overwork leading to non-disabling illness and to neglected health are not tracked. Indeed, the nature of the culture is that even true cases of karoshi, for which victims’ families can be compensated, are not likely to be reported. Some have speculated that the reigning issue has shifted — from prevalent work-related stroke and heart attack to a greater prevalence of work-related suicide.

Does karoshi exist in the United States, one of the few industrialized nations where employees work more reported hours than Japanese employees (though it’s believed that the Japanese tip the scales with cloaked overtime)? Some writers have drawn comparisons, such as Matthew Reiss writing on American Karoshi in the New Internationalist, and a Bostinno.com post called Karoshi: How Chronic Long Hours May Kill, And How Startup Life May Point to the Future.

American culture differs from Japan’s. In the United States, individualism reigns supreme. And the U.S. tradition of organized labor and workplace regulation reflects a different attitude toward the employee/employer relationship. Perhaps the difference in Japanese and American approaches to karoshi can best be illustrated with this observation: Whereas Japan has been criticized for sweeping karoshi under the rug, the U.S. has given karoshi little attention beyond one company’s development and the subsequent popularization of the video game “Karoshi: Suicide Salaryman.”

When it comes to employment and health, are Americans having strokes and heart attacks — or committing suicide — after suffering in silence under crushing workloads?  Or is something else at work? We’ll get to that in an upcoming post.

Health Risk Assessments: The Baby and the Bath Water

When considering your health risk appraisal, be cautious before throwing out the baby with the bath water.The ShapeUp employer survey found that employers are increasingly skeptical about health risk assessments. An evocative infographic summarizing the survey results shows that, if employers’ wellness budgets were cut in half, HRAs would be programs they’d be most likely to cut. Three times as many respondents would eliminate their HRAs, for example, compared to those that would eliminate health coaching. Approximately 50% of respondents “do not believe in HRA.”

But some of the survey respondents’ comments — as well as much of the employee wellness literature — reveals that employers Continue reading

Are Health Risk Assessments Effective?

Are health risk assessments effective? Three systematic reviews have sought to answer this question.

Technology Assessment: HRA

Technology Assessment: HRA (click to access the pdf)

One of the most rigorous and most recent analyses, Health Risk Assessment: Technology Report, conducted by McMaster University Evidence-based Practice Center for Agency for the Healthcare Research and Quality, examined 118 studies of health outcomes associated with HRAs. The report concluded:

Many HRA programs demonstrated improvements on intermediate health outcomes such as blood pressure, cholesterol, physical activity, or fat intake. However, only one article considered Continue reading

How Useful Is Health Risk Assessment for Predicting Health Care Costs?

Health risk assessment and medical claims predict high health care cost employeesHealth risk appraisals are used to serve several purposes, with varying levels of success. In addition to identifying employees with health risk factors, HRAs also are commonly used to predict health care costs based on the health risks and chronic conditions they measure. And, as a logical next step, they also are used to predict potential for health care cost savings. For example, an HRA vendor’s analysis of aggregate data may state something like, “Based on your group’s profile, you will pay an estimated 4 million dollars based on excess health risk next year.” (This is a mild oversimplification of what a report might really include.) They’ll go on to say, “You can save x millions of dollars by reducing health risk.” They may say you can save money by Continue reading

How Valid Is A Cholesterol Measurement?

Worksite biometric screening results for cholesterol, triglycerides, and HDLAs the saying goes: Garbage in, garbage out. The validity of a health risk appraisal inevitably is limited by the validity of the data entered into it — which includes mostly self-reported data but also, sometimes, biometric data uploaded via the back-end. A lot of people malign self-reported data and revere biometric lab values. But self-reported data may be more valid than we think. And, using one example of a biometric, we’ve seen that blood pressure screening results may not Continue reading

How Valid Is A Worksite Blood Pressure Measurement?

Employee having blood pressure measured through sweater at onsite biometric screening

This employee is having the pressure of her giant sweater measured so that she can add it her health risk appraisal.

Self-reported data on health risk appraisals has its pros and cons, despite the failure of many wellness and benefits professionals to acknowledge the pros. What about data obtained at worksite biometric health screenings? How valid is it?

[For this post, "biometric" refers to the measurement of biological test results, as opposed to its increasingly popular usage describing the identification of individuals based on their biology. "Valid" is used in a more casual, rather than statistical, context.]

No health test is perfect. For an example, Continue reading

How Valid is Self-Reported Health Risk Appraisal Data?

One of the most common knocks on health risk appraisals is that, by definition, they rely on self-reported data. Critics assume self-reported data biased and inaccurate. In fact, one of the respondents in the Shape Up employer wellness survey was quoted as saying, “Biometric screening is a prerequisite for any program. …Self-reported is pointless.” So the real question is not just whether self-reported data is valid, but how it compares to other sources of data, such as biometric screenings (and medical claims data, too), generally perceived to be the gold standard.

The true validity of self reported data is murky. Most of the research on self-reported data validity is Continue reading

What Is an HRA (Supposed to Be)?

At some point in every health educator’s life, someone, frustrated by the fact that none of the seemingly endless choices of health risk appraisals on the market are the perfect fit for your organization, will suggest, ”Why don’t we develop our own HRA?” When you hear this, run the other way.

Unless your organization has expertise in epidemiology, has a readily available source of frequently updated mortality databases that include diverse populations, and has a high level of expertise in questionnaire design, preventive health, chronic disease, health communications, medical cost prediction, productivity measurement, and health behavior theory, it has little chance of being able to Continue reading

The (Theoretical?) Framework of Employee Wellness

How is employee wellness supposed to work?

We still haven’t wrapped up our commentary on the Shape Up employer wellness survey. Things got stuck when it came to understanding the opinions employers expressed about health risk appraisals. In order to understand their opinions of HRA’s we need to know their expectations of HRA’s. And, to do that, it’s important to appreciate how health risk fits Continue reading