Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Panama (Ratification: 1958)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and the annexes attached thereto.

1. The Committee observes that there has been no progress in amending the Labour Code to incorporate the recommendations made in the Convention, since no bill has yet been drafted on Action 1.2, which corresponds to the legal and social equity section of the Women and Development Action Plan. The Committee appreciates that the Government is aware that the principle of equal pay for men and women for work of equal value established by the Convention is broader than the provisions on equality of remuneration in the national legislation. The Government states that not only does the legislation treat the principle established in the Convention restrictively, but that there are also provisions which are discriminatory and legal restrictions that impair the effective exercise of these rights. The Committee notes that, according to the Ministry of Youth, Women, Children and the Family, there should be a review of the Constitution as well as the labour legislation, but no decisions have as yet been taken in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that so far it has not been possible to overcome these shortcomings in the law. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to make the necessary efforts to bring the national legislation into line with the principle of the Convention, and asks the Government to continue to report on progress made in this respect.

2. The Committee notes the promulgation of Act No. 4 of 29 January 1999 establishing equal opportunities for women, particularly Chapter V, which concerns labour. The Committee observes that although the Act establishes that the State shall implement a public policy to reduce segregation between the sexes at work, shall facilitate women’s admission to management posts and adapt formal and informal education and technical training programmes so as to qualify women for better paid jobs, it does not establish a policy to promote equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on measures being taken by the specialized bodies responsible for the coordination, promotion, development and supervision of the public policy to promote equal opportunities for women in public entities, provided for in section 31 of the Act with regard to the promotion of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

3. The Government states that there are problems of wage differentials in practice and that, according to the report Gender implications of wage differentials between men and women, men and women workers are not paid strictly on the basis of merit, and discrimination accounts for between 35 and 39 per cent of the wage differential. The Government points out that the average wage varies according to the geographical area in which women are employed; in the urban formal sector women’s wages tend to be lower than men’s; and this tendency is more marked among women with high-level technical academic training, women with postgraduate degrees earning virtually only half the amount earned by their male counterparts. The Government stresses that there is no sector in which women are on a par with men and no level of education at which women earn as much as, let alone more than, men on average. The Committee also notes that in the public sector women’s pay is 5.5 per cent less than men’s and that in the private sector the wage differential for work of equal value is greater, women receiving 17 per cent less pay than men.

4. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the standards laying down the principle of equal pay are ineffective largely because there is no proper process affording adequate guarantees to women workers in applying for jobs. Furthermore, the purpose of the procedure established by Act No. 53 of 1975, whereby the Ministry of Labour and Labour Development (MIDRATEL) hears applications concerning the minimum wage, is to determine whether or not the employer is paying the minimum wage, not whether the principle of equal pay is being observed. The Committee also notes with interest the conclusions derived from the Clara González national report on the status of women in Panama in 1999, which shows that although 15 per cent of the women questioned suffered wage discrimination, no cases of wage discrimination had been brought to MIDRATEL, and that 40 per cent of the women questioned were unaware that they could seek redress for wage discrimination with MIDRATEL. The Committee asks the Government to provide more information on the measures being adopted to disseminate the labour rights of women more broadly, and on the resources available to them to secure equal pay for work of equal value.

5. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that there are no suitable mechanisms for non-discriminatory job appraisal. The Committee recalls that objective job appraisal means adopting a method to measure and compare objectively the relative value of the tasks performed. Since men and women tend to perform different jobs, it is essential to have a method for measuring the relative value of jobs with different content so as to eliminate discrimination between men and women (see paragraphs 138-152 of the General Survey on equal remuneration, 1986). The Committee reiterates that the Government needs to adopt measures to promote such job appraisal and asks it to report on the progress made.

6. The Committee notes that, currently out of the 40 government institutions, 11 ministries and one decentralized body have institutional handbooks for the classification of jobs duly approved and executed. This amounts to coverage of 41 per cent of the 60,000 government civil servants entitled to have their posts appraised and classified. The Committee hopes that the Administrative Careers General Directorate will continue to provide information on progress and on measures envisaged to strengthen the continuity of the programme for classification, appraisal and remuneration of existing posts both in government bodies where the system has been installed and in those where it is not yet in operation.