Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - France (Ratification: 1953)

Gender pay gap. The Committee notes that, according to the key statistics on equality between men and women (2017), the average annual net wages of women working full time were 18.6 per cent lower than those of men in the private sector and in public enterprises in 2014 (20.1 per cent in 2009). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, where characteristics of salaries and posts are identical, there is an unexplained gap of 9.8 per cent. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the gender pay gap in different sectors of the economy.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Legislative developments. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Act No. 2014-873 of 4 August 2014 on substantive equality between women and men which sets out, in particular, that the gender equality policy should include actions aimed at guaranteeing equality in employment and remuneration, and occupational gender balance, and lays down the obligation for the employer to hold annual negotiations on, inter alia, the definition and the programming of measures to eliminate the gender pay gap. The Committee also notes that the sanctions mechanism, in the event of non-compliance with the provisions on equal pay, which was implemented by Act No. 2010-1330 of 9 November 2010 on pension reform, was amended by Act No. 2015-1702 of 21 December 2015 on the financing of social security for 2016, in particular with regard to the amount of the sanctions. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the implementation of the obligation to negotiate measures each year to eliminate the wage gaps, envisaged by the Act of 2014, and on the results achieved, and to provide information on the functioning of the new sanctions mechanism, by indicating the number of inspections conducted and enterprises concerned, as well as the amount of the sanctions applied in the case of non-compliance. It also requests the Government to provide information on any new legislative or administrative measures adopted in relation to equal pay between men and women within the framework of the current labour law reform.

Application of the principle of equal pay in the civil service. While noting that the Government’s report is silent on this question, the Committee welcomes the Prime Minister’s report of 27 December 2016 entitled “The strength of equality: Wage inequality and career paths of women and men in the civil service”, which highlights the importance of the concept of “work of equal value” in the implementation of wage equality between men and women. The Committee notes that this report contains over 50 recommendations to, inter alia, re-evaluate in financial terms female-dominated occupations and specializations which are undervalued in terms of the same functions and constraints; establish gender neutral evaluation criteria and strengthen training for those who carry out these evaluations; design a common employment portal for the whole of the civil service and systematically list the pay conditions for the post in question; conduct experiments regarding transparency of remuneration in any given administration; create an online evaluation tool on expected remuneration; establish a fund for the revenue from fines collected in cases of non-compliance with the obligations to maintain gender balance in appointments; identify and amend regulatory texts that do not comply with the principle of gender neutrality in the designation of civil service occupations. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the follow-up given to the above recommendations of the report and on any measures taken to implement the principle of equal pay between men and women for work of equal value and effectively combat wage inequalities based on sex in the civil service.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. Development or revision of job classifications. The Committee notes with interest the publication of two guides on objective job evaluation which emphasize the importance of the concept of “work of equal value” to effectively combat the gender wage gap: the guide on a non-discriminatory evaluation of female-dominated jobs, published in 2013 by the Defender of Rights, which develops and explains the objective evaluation process; and the guide on taking gender equality into account in the classification systems, published in 2017 by the Higher Council on Occupational Equality (CSEP), following work by the joint working group on classifications. One of the main objectives of these practical guides is to show that apparently neutral methods of classification can be discriminatory owing to, for example, the selection or omission of certain criteria, and the over- or under-evaluation of certain factors. These tools explain the different stages of the job evaluation process and provide specific examples of objective job evaluation processes carried out in various countries. The Committee also notes that Act No. 2014-873 of 4 August 2014 on substantive equality between men and women has entrusted the CSEP and the National Collective Bargaining Commission with a new mission concerning follow-up to the revision of occupational classifications and the analysis of the negotiations held and good practices. The Committee also notes that the action platform for occupational gender balance set up in 2014 provides that, during the five-yearly review of classifications at the sectoral level, when an average gender wage gap is detected, the social partners shall analyse, identify and rectify the evaluation criteria for posts which may lead to discrimination. Recalling that the implementation of the concept of “work of equal value” involves the adoption of a method based on objective criteria and free from gender bias to measure and compare the relative value of different jobs, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the distribution of the practical guides among workers’ and employers’ organizations, administrative services and the persons or bodies tasked with carrying out the objective job evaluations, particularly with a view to developing or revising job classifications. It also asks the Government to provide information on any revision of job classifications that are being undertaken or already carried out, the results achieved and the difficulties encountered.