Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reports.

Articles 1(b) and 2(2)(a) of the Convention. Work of equal value. Legislation. For many years, the Committee has been noting the restrictive interpretation given to “work of equal value” referred to in section 135(a) of the Labour Code, through the 1990 Rules implementing the Republic Act No. 6725, which define it to mean “activities, jobs, tasks, duties or services which are identical or substantially identical”. The Committee notes, from the Government’s reports, that it is still working towards the adoption of amending guidelines that will bring the definition into conformity with the Convention. In this regard, the Committee refers the Government to its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 675. The Committee urges the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that the amending guidelines are adopted in the near future and that the new definition of “work of equal value” gives full legislative expression to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, including but not limited to, “identical”, “equal”, “the same” or “similar” work, but also encompassing work that is of an entirely different nature, but which is nevertheless of equal value.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government’s reports do not provide any information on this point. The Committee thus refers to its general observation which states that in order to establish whether different jobs are of equal value, there has to be an examination of the respective tasks involved. This examination must be undertaken on the basis of entirely objective and non-discriminatory criteria to avoid an assessment being tainted by gender bias. While the Convention does not prescribe any specific method for such an examination, it does presuppose the use of appropriate techniques for objective job evaluation. Whatever methods are used for the objective evaluation of jobs, particular care must be taken to ensure that they are free from gender bias. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on whether the Bureau of Local Employment has developed the Human Resources Development Plan and, if so, to provide detailed information on how it is ensured that the selection of factors used for comparison, the weighting of such factors and the actual comparison carried out are not discriminatory, either directly or indirectly. The Committee also requests the Government to supply information on any initiatives taken by the workers’ and employers’ organizations to determine wages on the basis of an objective evaluation of jobs.

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