From our other sites
The story
According to a survey by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, the “family allowance” companies pay employees averages ¥17,600 a month, topping ¥20,000 at firms with 1,000+ employees. Only employees with a spouse or children receive it — singles get nothing, so a gap of tens of thousands of yen persists for years based purely on family structure. As work styles and family structures diversify, some companies have begun scrapping the allowance over concerns about this unfairness. On 5ch, opinions split over who actually comes out ahead financially — singles or married employees — with some arguing the allowance should be scrapped and folded into base pay, and others insisting it’s a necessary measure against the falling birth rate.
The “family allowance” — covering things like spousal and dependent-child allowances — is paid out by companies based on an employee’s family situation. According to a survey by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, those who receive it get an average of ¥17,600, rising above ¥20,000 at companies with 1,000 or more employees.
However, singles cannot receive the allowance, meaning a gap of tens of thousands of yen persists for years depending on one’s family situation. In an era where family structures and work styles are diversifying, this unfairness around family allowances is being called into question, and some companies have already begun abolishing them.
On the news program “Watashi to News,” the show considered the disparity in treatment based on family structure and the future of family allowances together with economist Masumi Sai.
Source: news.yahoo.co.jp / Original article here
What people said
Being single with no liabilities is way better.
The scary part is this guy sounds dead serious, not joking…
What kind of upbringing makes someone turn out like that?
I'd love to see whether these singles complaining now would stay quiet if the allowance got scrapped the exact year they got married and had a kid.
Or make it self-reported, and see whether they'd actually file for it once they have kids.
Just raise base pay enough that the allowance isn't even needed.
Should switch to commission-based pay with clearly defined shares.
Three kids means ¥30,000.
And on top of that there's a childbirth allowance too.
Then once the kid grows up and gets married, you even get a celebration/condolence gift payment.
More people thinking that way is exactly why the birth rate is falling.
I've never wanted kids even a tiny bit myself.
That reasoning hasn't actually increased that much.
That's just people past the 'ideal' age for marriage or childbirth comforting themselves.
No point taking it seriously.
Raising a kid costs at least 30 million yen, minimum.
Nobody's got that kind of money.
That's exactly why people stop wanting kids.
Don't say that to the 5ch uncles! (self-deprecating slang for the board's middle-aged regulars)
That's because living costs don't simply double.
Even so, companies pay out family allowances because married employees are seen as more 'stable' from the company's point of view.
You're missing the point.
You should be comparing a single person earning ¥20 million to a household earning ¥20 million combined.
If anything, being single is harder — there's a ton to do once you get home 😩
No there isn't.
Housework's a breeze with modern appliances.
You can simplify meal prep too — freeze ingredients ahead, use a few tricks.
If you can't figure that out, just get married and have your wife do it all for you.
That's already happening.
It's called the 'job-based' pay system.
'My kid has this or that' — leaving early, calling in sick — a lot of the time it's the single employees covering for them.
And back when you were a sick kid, it was your parents — and some single coworker — covering for them too.
Housing allowance: ¥27,000.
If those vanished, that's ¥73,000 less income!
It'd be fine if they added that onto base pay instead, but…
Raising base pay also raises bonuses, so companies will never do that.
Showa-era pay structures are still alive and well.
Shouldn't marriage be the thing that saves you money, not the other way around
Like, singles over 25 get banned from the company cafeteria, or something.
The cafeteria idea is pretty blatant, but Japan probably won't slow the falling birth rate until singles (with some consideration for LGBTQ people) end up far worse off than married people.
What I remember from back then:
Their stance was 'it's weird to get an allowance just for being married, having kids, or owning a house,' so they had none of that — they paid it out as salary instead.
The stock option plan and the pay were both genuinely decent too.
Few employees owned their homes, most rented, and the married-to-single ratio was about the same as other companies, maybe slightly more singles.
This is becoming normal these days, but—
They also had no seniority-based pay, where your salary rises just because you've stuck around longer.
Just pay the allowance out to singles too.
The money saved from cutting it becomes the funding for bumping up new hires' starting salaries.
If you've got a problem with it, go have kids yourself and contribute to the next generation.
In that case, paying out for the kids makes sense — but then the spouse allowance isn't needed, right?
Background and Key Points of This Debate
The family allowance isn’t a legal requirement — it’s a benefit each company sets up on its own, so the amount and eligibility vary from firm to firm. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare’s survey found that larger companies (1,000+ employees) tend to pay more, and the allowance is widely seen as one of the more seniority-system-flavored holdovers in Japan’s wage structure. The thread split over whether singles or married employees actually come out ahead financially: some argued that since a household’s living costs don’t simply double per extra person, having a spouse is the advantage, while others countered that given the burden of childcare and education costs, the allowance is only fair. Some posters also pointed to real companies that scrapped the allowance because folding it into base pay would also inflate bonus calculations — something companies want to avoid — a reminder that allowance policy alone doesn’t fully capture how fair the overall treatment really is.
※This article was excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (Breaking News+) thread “Is the company’s “family allowance” unfair? “Singles don’t get it, but…” “Companies don’t have to do this” — the share of companies paying it is declining”.
Leave a Reply