{"id":1377,"date":"2026-10-02T06:33:31","date_gmt":"2026-10-01T21:33:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/minnanounion.info\/?p=1377"},"modified":"2026-09-25T06:50:04","modified_gmt":"2026-09-24T21:50:04","slug":"%e3%80%90%e3%83%a9%e3%82%b9%e3%83%88%e3%83%af%e3%83%b3%e3%83%9e%e3%82%a4%e3%83%ab%e5%8a%b4%e5%83%8d%e7%b5%84%e5%90%88%e3%80%91%e3%80%8c%e5%85%83%e5%bd%b9%e5%93%a1%e3%81%af%e9%80%ae%e6%8d%95%e3%81%95","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/minnanounion.info\/en\/archives\/1377","title":{"rendered":"[Last-mile Workers Union] To Mr. Watanabe Makoto, who says, \"Former officers will be arrested\": Are your company's initial response and disclosure preparations ready?"},"content":{"rendered":"

If the management speaks specifically about a serious situation occurring, what preparations are being made by the company? Who is verifying the facts, who is explaining them to the market, and who is dealing with employees and suppliers? Simply explaining the outlook does not constitute a crisis management plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What the union has learned from senior executives is that Mr. Watanabe is telling his colleagues about the prospects for the arrest and prosecution of the former officer. What we are asking is how prepared the current management and the board of directors and audit committee are to handle the situation if facts related to the company are confirmed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prudential provided information the company had obtained when the former employee was arrested.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

As a specific example from the past, Prudential Life Insurance:Regarding the arrest of a former employee of our company dated September 12, 2024<\/a>In that same month on the 9th, we announced the arrest of the former employee. We explained the actions the company had discovered, the damage situation, the confirmation of the contract holder they were responsible for, providing information to the police, and explaining the measures to prevent recurrence and the contact points.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This announcement indicated that the company was not acting on behalf of a criminal court decision, but rather was simply stating the matters that the company itself was aware of and had taken action on. Not only by using the title of former employee, but by explaining the relationship with customers and the company\u2019s response, this would be material for initial consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If it is reported as \"the former officer of the last mile\", what should I explain?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Assuming that the progress of criminal proceedings described by Watanabe is actually confirmed and that the press reports feature the names of past executives and listed securities officials, the company may receive questions regarding their duties during their tenure and their relationship with the company\u2019s dealings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether the explanation that the target person has already resigned is sufficient depends on the facts of the case. If Watanabe himself is holding the actions during his tenure to be the problem, the company must verify the instructions, decisions, accounting procedures, and explanations given to the stock exchange during that time.<\/p>\n\n\n

\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/svg>\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t[Last Mile Workers Union] \"Former officers will be arrested and charged\"; if they speak widely to the surrounding area, why isn't anything being said in the market...<\/span>\n\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n

When new facts are confirmed, please organize the parts that match the information previously explained by Mr. Watanabe and the parts that are different. Company explanations are intended not to indicate that the management\u2019s predictions were correct, but to accurately convey the relationship with the company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first step required is verifying the facts and appointing someone to protect the business operations.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Items to verify the adequacy of disclosure shown by JPX<\/a>This includes ensuring that the timing is appropriate, that there is no false information, that important information is not missing, and that there is no misunderstanding in investment decisions. While expediting the necessary disclosure, a system is needed that does not mix unverified information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The company should prepare to organize the subject matter of criminal proceedings, the verified acts, and the relationship with the company, and explain the matters under investigation separately. If the current management team\u2019s involvement is to be examined, it is necessary to avoid the situation where only that person selects the information and determines the explanation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n