Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Poland (Ratification: 1954)

The Committee notes the information in the Government's report.

1. The Committee notes with interest the adoption on 2 April 1997 of the new Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which contains a general prohibition of discrimination with regard to political, social or economic life for any reason whatsoever (article 32, paragraph 2). It notes with interest that, while the Constitutional Act of 17 October 1992 guaranteed equality of the rights of women with regard to remuneration through the principle of equal pay for equal work (article 78, paragraph 2(1)), the new Constitution stipulates that men and women shall have equal rights and shall have the right to equal compensation for work of similar value (article 33, paragraph 2). The Committee recalls that section 11.2 of the 1974 Labour Code (as amended) stipulates that employees shall have equal rights resulting from the performance of identical duties and that this shall apply in particular to the equal treatment of men and women in the area of work. It requests the Government to indicate whether it is envisaged to harmonize the provisions of the Labour Code with the new Constitution which, in keeping with the Convention, provides broader protection.

2. With reference to its previous comments with regard to efforts undertaken by the Government to ensure that gender-neutral factors are used in job evaluation schemes, the Committee, in the absence of the information requested, must repeat its observation that, in general, the factors used in job evaluation schemes often tend to favour one sex and the factors which are likely to be present in the jobs undertaken mainly by women are sometimes omitted and, therefore, not valued. Therefore, the Committee again asks that the Government consider the possibility of examining the job evaluation schemes in operation to ensure that the factors used capture all of the different aspects inherent in the work undertaken by both sexes.

3. Further to its previous comments concerning the wage-fixing method in the budgetary sphere, the Committee notes that the relevant Act of 23 December 1994 has been amended. In the absence of a translation of said amendments, the Committee is not in a position to examine this question and will do so together with the Government's next report.

4. The Committee notes that the Government's report is silent on a number of issues it had previously raised. It must therefore repeat parts of its previous direct request which read as follows:

1. The Committee notes that, in the lowest wage group, women outnumbered men in 1994 on a ratio of 1.5:1, which represented an improvement over the situation in 1991-92, when the ratio was 2:1. In addition to women's employment being exceptionally high in particular sectors where the wages are relatively low, the Government indicates that the difference between men's and women's wages results also from the nature of the work performed by men and women. It also states that the number of women employed in managerial posts is lower, mainly because women are reluctant to undertake jobs that require long hours or demand a high level of responsibility. The report also cites other factors that contribute to the wage differential, including women's shorter period of professional work (which results from the possibility of earlier retirement), their work intervals stemming from maternity leave, their choice of less intense and less arduous professions, and women's less frequent availability for overtime or additional work. The Government acknowledges that in order to counteract the wage differential, particular activities to promote women into better paid areas and posts are required. It points out in this respect that, as women's lower wage levels determine the level of their social benefits (such as pensions), their situation in life is maintained at a weaker level, even after retirement.

2. The Committee has emphasized frequently that a comprehensive approach in the area of equality of opportunity and treatment is of particular importance for the application of Convention No. 100. Most of the obstacles to equal remuneration, to which the Government refers, come within the scope of Convention No. 111 (ratified by Poland) and some others concern also Convention No. 156 (not ratified). Accordingly, the Committee hopes that the Government will consider how it might improve the application of this Convention through the implementation of measures which, though related to Convention No. 100, fall within the scope of other ILO instruments. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information indicating the measures being taken to reduce the wage differential between men and women.

The Committee hopes the Government will make every effort to provide the requested information in its next report.