Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Netherlands (Ratification: 1971)

1. Measures to address the wage gap. With respect to differences in remuneration in the private and public sectors due to certain factors such as the type of contract and occupational gender segregation, as well as those remuneration differentials between men and women that could not be explained, the Committee notes the findings of the final report “Equal Pay – Now or Never” of February 2007 of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” confirming an unexplained pay difference between men and women of 7 per cent. The Committee notes that the study group has looked into pay differences that find their origin in exclusion from collective agreements of certain employees, in scaling and valuation of jobs, in part-time work, in specific contracts or in discrimination, and that it has made a number of recommendations to address these issues (see also points 3, 4 and 5 of this direct request). The Committee notes in particular that, with a view to detecting more effectively unjust pay inequalities, the study group recommends, among other things, that the use by companies as well as the Government and civil service of control tools such as Quick Scan equal pay and the Management Tool on Equal Remuneration should be stimulated, and that their effects should be monitored during 2007. The study group also recommends that equal pay should be addressed in a wider context by given additional attention to combining work and family life, greater involvement of employees in working-time arrangements, and breaking the glass ceiling by stimulating diversification policies in companies and stimulating career ambitions of women. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on: any follow-up given to the recommendations made by the study group “Equal Pay Works to address equal pay in wider context, and the results achieved. Noting further that the labour inspectorate will publish its 2006 survey on remuneration, the Committee asks the Government to forward a copy once it has become available”.

2. Equal remuneration with respect to pension schemes. The Committee refers to its previous comments regarding the need for corrective action to be taken to compensate women who had previously been excluded from participating in those schemes, and the limited participation of women in supplementary pension schemes due to exclusion of certain job categories (so-called white spots). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that now that the costs for reparation of pension schemes have to be paid by employer and employee, it is stimulating the social partners to make agreements for occupational pension provision by fiscal incentives. The Government further states that, together with the social partners, it is studying the number of employees without occupational pension provision in 2006, the results of which will be available in 2007. With respect to the so-called white spots in occupational pensions, the Government states that once the data on the progress in the reduction of these “white spots” are available, it will be in a position to provide information on the job categories that are excluded from the pension schemes and on the number of men and women employed in these categories. The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to provide further details in its next report on the results of the study on occupational pension provision and on the job categories that are excluded from the pension schemes, as well as on the measures taken to address these issues with a view to ensuring the application of the principle of equal remuneration between men and women to pension schemes.

3. Collective agreements. Application of the principle of equal remuneration to part-time workers. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the 2007 report of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” that 49.8 per cent of the women working in the Netherlands in 2005 were employed half time. The study group concludes that there are still certain provisions in collective agreements that directly or indirectly lead to pay inequalities due to the exclusion of certain groups of employees, including part-time workers, from certain provisions (e.g. exclusion of part-time workers from overtime bonuses if overtime hours do not exceed the normal 40-hour working week). The Committee notes that the study group recommends to the social partners that, in order to avoid pay differences in collective agreements, a critical review in terms of equal pay is necessary so that exclusions can be objectively justified. The Committee further notes from the Government’s report that the 2006 survey on distinctions in working hours in collective agreements has not been published yet but that it is expected that the percentage of agreements that make distinctions will have decreased. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the outcome of the survey on distinctions in working hours and on the follow-up given to the recommendations of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” to address pay inequalities resulting from exclusions in collective agreements, in particular with respect to part-time workers.

4. Pay structures: Flexible pay systems, performance pay and long pay scales. With regard to measures to reduce apparent pay differences between men and women in flexible pay systems, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the study group “Equal Pay Works!” was to hold several activities on flexible pay systems and on their consequences for gender neutral job evaluation. The Committee notes the findings of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” that performance-related pay will increase in the coming years. Therefore, using gender-neutral criteria when judging performance will be important as well as to monitor who in the organization are profiting the most or the least from this type of pay. However, the report of the study group does not contain any information on the results achieved in reducing pay differences in flexible pay systems. In addition, the Committee notes that the study group indicates that long pay scales may result in pay inequalities since many female employees – who often have shorter working careers – will never reach the top within their bracket. In order to help diminish pay inequalities, policies should take into account personal development of female employees and their promotion into new jobs in new scales in their own or in a new company. The duration of pay scales should be reduced and scaling women that return to the labour market in scale zero should be avoided. The Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report: (1) on the measures taken or envisaged, including cooperation with the social partners, to avoid that pay structures, including long pay scales, result in pay inequalities between men and women; (2) on the specific impact of certain measures, such as the equal pay control tools, on reducing pay inequalities between men and women resulting from flexible pay systems; and (3) the efforts made to ensure that performance-related pay systems are based on objective criteria free from gender bias.

5. Article 3. Promotion of the principle and tools for objective job evaluation. The Committee notes that the report on the evaluation of the gender-neutral job evaluation manual was not annexed to the Government’s report. It further notes the information in the Government’s report that the study group “Equal Pay Works!”, which comprises representatives from the social partners and the Equal Treatment Commission was set up to raise awareness on equal pay in companies, trade unions and in collective bargaining and to promote the instruments on equal pay. The Committee notes various activities of the study group to develop quick equal pay tests and to disseminate existing control tools on equal pay. With a view to detecting more effectively unjust pay inequalities, the study group recommends, among other things, that the use by companies as well as the Government and civil service of control tools such as Quick Scan equal pay and the Management Tool on Equal Remuneration should be stimulated, and that their effects should be monitored during 2007. It further highlights that, in situations where no job evaluation system is in place, criteria for scaling should be transparent and open for checks. Some collective agreements feature only a small number of job descriptions with few indications of qualification levels and entail the risk of non-meticulous scaling. Also, many companies still use random pay criteria such as “last pay” and “negotiation skills” which may lead to unequal pay. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken, in cooperation with the social partners, to ensure that companies who do not have a job evaluation system use objective criteria for determining pay free from gender bias. Please also indicate how the use of the equal pay control tools on reducing the unexplained differentials in remuneration between men and women in both the public and private sectors, including in the health sector. Please also provide a copy of the evaluation report of the gender-neutral job evaluation manual.

6. Part III of the report form. Enforcement. The Committee notes the summary provided by the Government of the decision of the High Court of 30 January 2004 concluding that not every violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work had to lead to pay adjustments for the workers who were paid less than they should have been. The main objective was to test fairness and reasonableness and the principle of equal pay for equal work in equal circumstances had to be taken into consideration but other circumstances could also be taken into account. The Committee refers to its 2006 general observation and draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the High Court’s interpretation of equal remuneration appears to give a more restrictive interpretation of the principle embodied in the Convention and in the national legislation which refers to equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. Moreover, by indicating that not all pay differences found in violation of that principle have to lead to pay adjustments, the effective enforcement of the principle of equal pay might be at stake. In order to assure itself that the Convention is being effectively applied, the Committee asks the Government to clarify in its next report whether the High Court’s decision indeed only concerns equal pay for men and women for equal work, and to specify what would be other circumstances that could be taken into account when deciding whether or not pay adjustments in equal pay cases are justified. Please also provide a copy of the High Court’s decision as well as copies of any other decisions involving questions of principles relating to Convention No. 100.