Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - New Zealand (Ratification: 1983)

Addressing the gender pay gap in the public service. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government, including that: (1) the Gender Pay Gap Action Plan 2018–20, the Public Service Gender, Māori, Pacific and Ethnic Pay Gaps Action Plan 2021–24 (Kia Toipoto) and pay equity settlements are also contributing to a decrease in the Public Service Māori pay gap, from 11.2 per cent in 2018 to 6.5 per cent in 2022, and the Pacific pay gap from 21.6 per cent in 2018 to 17.7 per cent in 2022; (2) the Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlements Act has been amended to increase the minimum wages for this group of workers from the period 1 July 2022 to 31 December 2023; and (3) the Public Service Commission will continue to annually publish gender and ethnicity data on pay, overall representation, leadership representation and occupational groups. The Committee notes with interest the decrease of the gender pay gap in the public sector. It asks the Government to continue providing information on the measures implemented to continue to reduce the gender pay gap in the public sector and address its underlying causes, in particular in the framework of the Kia Toipoto 2021–24, and on the progress achieved.

Articles 2(2)(c) and 4. Collective agreements. Cooperation with workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s: (1) indication that the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2018 has not had a significant impact on addressing the gender pay gap; (2) statement that where there is a reference to closing the gender pay gap, it is not uncommon for collective agreements to include a reference to the use of Gender Pay Action Plans or to the Gender Pay Principles guidelines and to explicitly commit to implementing transparent pay systems; and (3) information on the content of pay provisions in collective agreements in the public service. The Committee notes however that these pay provisions (which may include elements of step-based progression or have a “committed” annual progression system) do not appear to specifically refer to the principle of equal remuneration between women and men for work of equal “value”. The Committee also notes that the NZCTU indicates that: (1) following a 2023 court decision, it was determined that pay equity issues cannot be raised by unions during collective bargaining unless agreed upon by employers. In the NZCTU’s view, this ruling places a significant restriction on women workers’ right to collectively bargain and strike on issues that are deeply important to them; and (2) the Government should take all necessary steps to ensure that collective bargaining continues to serve the important function of setting employment terms that are consistent with the minimum employment standards, such as those set by the Equal Pay Act 1972. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that the amendments to the Equal Pay Act 1972 (which came into effect in November 2020) introduced separate legislative processes for pay equity bargaining, which explains why pay equity issues cannot be raised by unions during the collective bargaining process. This approach is intended to make it easier for workers and unions to raise pay equity claims, using a collaborative process familiar to workers, unions and businesses. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the functioning of the separate legislative process for pay equity bargaining to which the Government refers, and its effectiveness in ensuring equal remuneration between men and women for work of equal “value”.

Enforcement. The Government indicates that a Pay Equity Taskforce, operating within the Public Service Commission, provides guidance and advice to Ministers and agencies, businesses, and the community sector on pay equity claims and the pay equity process. It also provides educational webinars and workshops to increase the understanding of the pay equity process in New Zealand. With regard to the Committee’s previous findings on access to remedies, BusinessNZ indicates that women do not face legal barriers to access to justice, but that it may be possible that there is a lack of information about workers’ rights. Noting the absence of specific information provided on this point, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the number, nature and outcome of any cases or complaints concerning pay inequality dealt with by the labour inspectors, the Employment Relations Authority, the Employment Court and any other competent authorities.

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations provided by Business New Zealand, transmitted by the Government.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Addressing the underlying causes of the gender pay gap. Occupational segregation. The Committee takes note of the indication in the Government's report that the: (1) Tokelau Public Service (TPS) respects the principle of equal employment opportunities, which is open equally for men and women and follow well-established guidelines for selection processes; (2) there are currently seven men and six women (with one position vacant) at the director level; (3) men and women are afforded equal access to educational and training opportunities, including through the Tokelau Scholarship Scheme. The Government further states that the private sector is almost non-existent, but that women play a critical part through household business initiatives such as handicrafts and cooking. The Committee takes note of these indications and asks the Government to provide information regarding the distribution of men and women in the different employment grades in the public sector.

Articles 2 and 3. Application of the principle of the Convention. Objective job evaluation. Public service. The Government indicates that the review of the Human Resources Manual (HRM) was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other factors, but that the first draft is complete and ready for consultations. The Government further recalls that job descriptions in the TPS Remuneration Framework were established according to the Hay job evaluation method, and that several workshops were held to enable participants to determine position ‘value’ and apply the Remuneration Framework. As regards salary differences between Tokelauan and non-Tokelauan workers, the Government indicates that: (1) remuneration levels in Tokelau are considered comparable with neighbouring countries; and (2) that such differences take the form of additional allowances and mostly occur at the director/CEO and Senior Adviser Levels. It also indicates that, when recruiting from abroad, the Tokelau Government covers all relocation costs to Tokelau and back at the end of the contract. The Committee trusts that the Government will ensure that the principle of the Convention is taken into account in the review of the Human Resources Manual, i.e. that when applying such evaluation method, it is exempt from any gender bias and does not give rise, in practice, to an under-evaluation of jobs mainly occupied by women. Please keep the Committee informed of progress made in this regard.