Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Antigua and Barbuda (Ratification: 2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments initially made in 2016.

Repetition

Article 1(a) and (b) of the Convention. Work of equal value. The Committee previously noted that section E8(1) of the Labour Code of 1975, which provides that “no woman shall, merely by reason of her sex, be employed under terms or conditions of employment less favourable than that enjoyed by male workers employed in the same occupation and by the same employer”, did not give full legislative expression to the principle of the Convention. The Committee merely recalls that prohibiting sex-based wage discrimination will not normally be sufficient to give effect to the Convention, as it does not capture the concept of “work of equal value” set out in Article 1(b) of the Convention (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 676). It also recalls the importance of giving full legislative expression to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, particularly given the existence of occupational sex segregation, as women and men often work in different occupations (see 2012 General Survey, paragraphs 673 and 697). In this regard, the Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that the National Labour Board has reviewed the Labour Code and that a report has been submitted to the relevant authority for necessary action. The Committee trusts that the revised text of the Labour Code will clearly set out the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value – which should not only provide for equal remuneration for men and women working in the same occupations, but also for equal remuneration for work carried out by men and women that is different in nature but nevertheless of equal value – and will ensure that the principle of the Convention can be applied even where there is no sufficient comparator group employed by the employer. It requests the Government to report on the progress made.

Remuneration. The Committee recalls its previous comments regarding the use and definitions of the terms “wages”, “gross wages”, “remuneration” and “conditions of work” referred to in sections A5, C3, C4(1) and E8(1) of the Labour Code. The Committee had noted that the definition of “gross wage” appeared to be in accordance with the definition of remuneration set out in Article 1(a) of the Convention, but that it remained unclear whether section C4(1) prohibiting sex discrimination with respect to wages covered the gross wage. While noting the Government ‘s indication that the terms “wages”, “gross wages”, and “remuneration” were used interchangeably in practice, the Committee noted that these various terms were often understood to have distinct meanings, thus potentially giving rise to confusion. Noting the review of the Labour Code, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the revised text will harmonize the provisions of the Labour Code relevant to wages and remuneration, and include a clear definition of “remuneration” which covers not only the ordinary, basic or minimum wage or salary but also any additional emoluments whatsoever payable directly or indirectly, whether in cash or in kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of the worker’s employment, in accordance with Article 1(a) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to report on the progress made in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request directly addressed to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.