A post on social media recently argued that some companies are not suffering from a “labor shortage,” but from a shortage of people willing to endure slave-like conditions.
One example was a job paying around 2.8 million yen per year, including night-shift allowances, under a three-shift system.
At first glance, it may sound unrealistically low.
But if the client company pays 1,800 yen per hour to the staffing agency, and the agency’s margin is 30%, the numbers start to make sense.
The client pays 1,800 yen per hour.
If 30% is taken as the staffing agency’s margin, the worker receives roughly 70%.
1,800 yen × 70% = 1,260 yen
That means the worker’s hourly wage is about 1,260 yen.
A full-time calculation looks like this:
1,260 yen × 8 hours × 20 days × 12 months = about 2.42 million yen
1,260 yen × 8 hours × 21 days × 12 months = about 2.54 million yen
With night-shift premiums, allowances, and a bit of overtime, the annual income can reach around 2.8 million yen.
So “2.8 million yen per year, including night shifts, under a three-shift system” is not impossible.
The disturbing part is that the worker only reaches that amount by selling their health, sleep rhythm, and physical energy.
If the 1,800 yen billing rate is tax-inclusive, the real situation may be even worse.
This is not simply a labor shortage.
It is more like a shortage of people willing to endure bad conditions at a low price.
1. Dispatch Workers Are Not Just Underpaid. They Are Easier to Remove from the Workplace
Another serious problem is instability.
Legally speaking, the client company does not directly “fire” a dispatch worker.
The employer is the staffing agency.
Also, ending a dispatch contract does not automatically terminate the worker’s employment contract with the staffing agency.
But in practice, the worker can still be removed from the workplace.
The client company can say:
- “This person is not a good fit.”
- “They make too many mistakes.”
- “They seem physically unable to keep up.”
- “We do not want to renew the contract.”
- “Please send someone else.”
Night shifts, rotating shifts, low pay, accumulated fatigue.
Fatigue reduces concentration.
Reduced concentration increases mistakes.
Mistakes are treated as a nuisance.
Then the worker becomes easier to replace.
That is cruel.
The system makes people tired, then blames them for the consequences of being tired.
If a job involves night shifts, rotating shifts, physical strain, unstable contracts, and the risk of being blamed for mistakes, the wage should be significantly higher.
But in many workplaces, the structure becomes:
- Use people cheaply.
- Put them in exhausting work.
- Blame them when fatigue causes mistakes.
- Replace them if they cannot keep up.
- Still call it a labor shortage.
That is not a healthy labor market.
That is a broken workplace zoo.
2. The Strangest Part Is When Workers Themselves Start Policing Wages
The most interesting and frightening part is not even the low wage itself.
When someone says:
- “The pay should be higher.”
- “These conditions are too harsh.”
- “Night shifts and rotating shifts should be compensated better.”
Other workers often respond:
- “Have you produced enough results to deserve higher pay?”
- “If you want more money, prove your value first.”
- “The company cannot afford it.”
- “Stop complaining and improve yourself.”
This is fascinating.
If a manager or an executive says this, it is at least understandable.
They represent the company’s interest in controlling labor costs.
But often, the people saying this are not executives.
They are ordinary workers.
Sometimes they are team leaders, senior workers, or people with a small amount of responsibility, but they are still workers.
Yet they participate in wage suppression.
From the employer’s perspective, this is extremely convenient.
The company does not have to say, “We do not want to pay you more.”
Workers say it to each other.
- “Have you produced enough results?”
- “Do not be spoiled.”
- “Everyone else is enduring it.”
- “This is just how work is.”
Workers lower their own bargaining power for free.
They become unpaid guards for management.
3. “Have You Produced Results?” Is a Magic Phrase That Lowers Wages
Of course, performance matters.
Higher pay can require higher responsibility, higher skill, or stronger contribution.
That part is not wrong.
The problem is when every wage discussion is reduced to individual performance.
Wages are not determined only by personal output.
They are shaped by:
- Labor market rates
- Physical workload
- Night-shift burden
- Rotating-shift burden
- Working hours
- Responsibility for mistakes
- Employment instability
- Difficulty of hiring
- Turnover risk
- The company’s ability to raise prices
- The type of work management chooses to accept
But when workers say, “If you want higher pay, produce more results first,” the discussion becomes dangerously narrow.
It erases the company’s responsibility.
The company should also be asked:
- “Are you offering conditions that allow people to stay?”
- “Are you pricing the work properly?”
- “Are you accepting cheap contracts and pushing the burden onto the workplace?”
- “Are you calling it a labor shortage while keeping unattractive conditions?”
- “Are you blaming individuals for mistakes caused by fatigue?”
The phrase “Have you produced enough results?” makes all of these questions disappear.
It turns a structural problem into an individual failure.
That is why the phrase is powerful.
That is why it is dangerous.
And that is why it is convenient for management.
4. When Team Leaders Do This, It Becomes Even More Painful
This becomes especially painful when a team leader does it.
A team leader is usually not an executive.
They do not decide the company’s pricing.
They do not control the labor budget.
They do not determine profit distribution.
But they carry some workplace responsibility.
That can make them partially identify with management.
They may think:
- “I endured this too.”
- “New workers should not complain so quickly.”
- “Prove yourself first.”
- “The workplace has to keep running.”
- “If they make mistakes, I have to clean it up.”
Their frustration is understandable.
If someone makes mistakes, the team leader often has to fix them.
If someone quits, the team leader may have to fill the gap.
If the workplace is understaffed, the team leader suffers first.
So instead of blaming the wage structure, the leader may blame the worker in front of them.
- “I understand you are tired, but mistakes cause trouble.”
- “If you cannot keep up physically, this may not be for you.”
- “You cannot complain about pay before proving yourself.”
But when a worker-side leader starts suppressing other workers, they are also suppressing themselves.
Because they are still workers.
If the position of workers does not improve, the position of team leaders will not improve either.
If the wage floor of the workplace stays low, the leader’s wage is also limited.
If the culture says “endure low pay,” the leader remains trapped in the same culture.
This is the tragedy of the wage-suppression leader.
In the short term, they may feel like they are protecting the workplace.
In the long term, they weaken everyone’s bargaining position.
5. One Benefit of Hiring People Is That They May Undervalue Themselves
This is a harsh point, but it is worth saying.
One advantage of hiring people is not only that they work for you.
It is also that, under certain conditions, they may internalize the idea that they are not worth more.
Workers may start thinking:
- “I have not produced enough results.”
- “I need to work harder before asking for more.”
- “I am causing trouble for the company.”
- “I should improve myself before complaining.”
- “I should be grateful for what I have.”
Then, if there are worker-side leaders, they spread the same mindset to others.
- “Have you produced enough results?”
- “Do not be spoiled.”
- “We all went through this.”
- “Contribute to the company first.”
At that point, wage suppression becomes automated.
Management does not need to do all the dirty work.
Someone inside the workplace does it for them.
This is the unpaid guard for management.
Of course, this is a cynical way to describe it.
But structurally, it is not far from reality.
6. Why “Performance-Based” Language Feels So Persuasive
The phrase “produce results first” is powerful because it sounds reasonable.
It is true that people cannot demand unlimited pay without skill, responsibility, or contribution.
That is why the language of performance is so persuasive.
But performance requires conditions.
To produce results, workers need:
- Authority
- Training
- Clear evaluation standards
- Enough staffing
- Reasonable rest
- Systems that prevent mistakes
- A workplace where achievements actually affect pay
Without those conditions, “produce results” becomes empty moral pressure.
In a job with night shifts, rotating shifts, low pay, unstable contracts, and fatigue-driven mistakes, the question should not only be:
“Did the worker produce enough results?”
It should also be:
“Did the workplace create conditions where results are possible?”
Performance-based language works only when the conditions are fair.
In a broken system, it becomes a tool for wage suppression.
7. Workers Lowering Each Other’s Wages Hurts Everyone
When workers police each other’s wage expectations, the company benefits.
If someone asks for higher pay, coworkers shut them down.
If someone says the conditions are unreasonable, coworkers call them spoiled.
If people quit, the problem is framed as weakness, not bad conditions.
The company does not have to change.
But in the long run, nobody wins.
Bad conditions remain.
People do not stay.
The workplace stays understaffed.
The remaining workers become more exhausted.
Fatigue causes more mistakes.
More mistakes lead to more blame.
More blame leads to more people leaving.
And the team leaders suffer the most.
The anger should not be aimed only at the tired worker in front of you.
It should also be aimed at the low-price structure, the exhausting shifts, the lack of staffing, the poor training, and the workplace design that turns fatigue into individual blame.
If the position of workers does not rise, your own position does not rise either.
That is the part many people miss.
8. A Healthier Way to Respond
If someone says, “I want higher pay,” a healthier response is not:
“Have you produced enough results?”
A better response is:
Let’s look at whether the current pay matches the role, responsibility, workload, and risk.
If higher pay requires specific results or skills, those standards should be made clear.
At the same time, night shifts, rotating shifts, physical burden, and unstable contracts should also be reflected in compensation.
For a team leader, a better response might be:
Mistakes are a problem.
But if fatigue is causing mistakes, we should look at staffing, shifts, training, and work design—not only individual effort.
Pay should also be discussed in relation to the actual burden of the job.
This does not ignore performance.
It also does not erase the structural problem.
“Have you produced enough results?” closes the discussion.
“What should be evaluated, and what should be reflected in pay?” opens the discussion.
That difference matters.
9. Conclusion: It May Not Be a Labor Shortage. It May Be a Shortage of People Willing to Endure Bad Conditions Cheaply
A job paying 2.8 million yen per year, including night shifts, under a three-shift system.
A client billing rate of 1,800 yen per hour.
A 30% staffing margin.
A worker-side hourly wage of roughly 1,260 yen.
The numbers can work.
But the conditions are harsh.
The worker is underpaid, physically strained, and easier to remove from the workplace.
If fatigue leads to mistakes, the worker is blamed.
If the worker asks for better pay, other workers may say, “Have you produced enough results?”
This is both fascinating and disturbing.
It is convenient for management when workers police each other’s wage expectations.
But if workers keep doing that, the position of all workers declines.
Team leaders are not exempt.
They may suffer the most.
Workers need to stop acting as unpaid guards for low wages.
The question should not only be, “Have you produced enough results?”
The question should also be:
- Does the pay match the workload?
- Does the pay reflect employment instability?
- Does the pay reflect night shifts and rotating shifts?
- Is the workplace causing mistakes through fatigue?
- Is the company pricing its work properly?
- Are workers helping suppress their own bargaining power?
This may not be a labor shortage.
It may be a shortage of people willing to stay silent while being underpaid, overworked, and easily replaced.
And if workers themselves defend that system, the broken workplace zoo will remain broken.
参考メモ・出典候補
公開時に必要に応じて本文脚注へ移動。
厚生労働省「派遣会社のマージン率等について」
- 派遣マージンには派遣会社の利益だけでなく、社会保険料・教育訓練費なども含まれる。
- 派遣会社にはマージン率等の情報公開が義務付けられている。
- URL: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/0000077386_00013.html
厚生労働省「マージン率等の情報提供について」
- マージン率は、労働者派遣に関する料金の平均額から派遣労働者の賃金の平均額を控除した額を、派遣料金の平均額で除して得た割合。
- URL: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/11600000/000634367.pdf
厚生労働省「深夜割増」
- 22時から5時までの労働には、通常賃金の25%以上の割増賃金が必要。
- URL: https://www.check-roudou.mhlw.go.jp/qa/roudousya/chingin/q5.html
厚生労働省・都道府県労働局「労働者派遣契約の中途解除や不更新があった場合には」
- 派遣契約と労働契約は別のもの。
- 派遣契約が中途解除されても、即座に派遣労働者を解雇できるものではない。
- URL: https://jsite.mhlw.go.jp/kagawa-roudoukyoku/content/contents/001110228.pdf
厚生労働省「労働契約法第16条」
- 解雇は、客観的合理性と社会通念上の相当性を欠く場合、権利濫用として無効。
- URL: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/bunya/roudoukijun/faq_roudoukeiyakuhou_04.html
エン・ジャパン「2026年4月度 派遣社員の平均時給」
- 2026年4月度の三大都市圏平均時給は1,713円。
- URL: https://corp.en-japan.com/newsrelease/2026/45404.html
愛知労働局関連「愛知県最低賃金」
- 令和7年10月18日から愛知県最低賃金は時間額1,140円。
- URL: https://jsite.mhlw.go.jp/aichi-hellowork/list/seto/saichin_00002.html
