Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2024, Publicación: 113ª reunión CIT (2025)

Convenio sobre igualdad de remuneración, 1951 (núm. 100) - Israel (Ratificación : 1965)

Article 2 of the Convention. Application of the principle of the Convention to live-in caregivers. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that: (1) there is no change in the legal framework of the employment conditions of live-in caregivers; and (2) the provisions of the Hours of Work and Rest Law, 1951, including the provisions on overtime pay, do not apply to live-in caregivers. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that no provision in the Convention limits its scope as regards individuals or branches of activity. The Convention applies to “all workers”, and the principle of equal remuneration for men and women shall apply everywhere. It further points out that, while the Convention is flexible regarding the measures to be used and the timing in achieving its objective, it allows no compromise in the objective to be pursued (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 670). Additionally, the Committee considers that legislative measures that ensure respect for and the full realization of the fundamental principles and rights at work in the context of domestic work are essential to ensuring decent work for domestic workers (see the 2022 General Survey on securing decent work in the care economy, paragraph 627). The Committee recalls that, in its previous reports, the Government had indicated that the process will take time and that it has decided to adopt a gradual approach towards improving the situation of caregivers. Noting the passage of substantial time raising this issue, the Committee again urges the Government to: (i) ensure the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal “value” within the caregiver sector, a female-dominated sector; (ii) identify benchmarks or milestones to mark progress towards achieving the objectives of the Convention in a time-bound manner; and (iii) provide information on any measures taken to raise awareness among the users and beneficiaries of care services, and the general public as a whole, of the need to recognize the value of care work. The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard.

Scope of comparison. The Committee recalls that under section 2 of the Male and Female Workers Equal Pay Law, 1996, the right to equal pay is limited to men and women “employed by the same employer in the same workplace”. For years, the Committee has been asking the Government to indicate what measures are being taken or envisaged to extend the scope of comparison beyond the same employer or workplace. It has constantly reaffirmed that the application of the Convention’s principle allows for a much broader comparison to be made between jobs performed by men and women in different places or enterprises, or between different employers. As women tend to be more heavily concentrated in certain sectors or occupations, there is a risk that the possibilities for comparison at the enterprise or establishment level will be insufficient, and steps should be taken to ensure that an equal pay claim can be made (see the 2012 General Survey, paragraphs 697–699). Consequently, the reach of comparison between jobs performed by men and women should be as wide as possible, in the context of the level at which wage policies, systems and structures are coordinated. The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report is once again silent on this point. The Committeetherefore urges the Government to report on the measures taken to amend section 2 of the Male and Female Workers Equal Pay Law, 1996, to extend the scope of comparison for the remuneration of jobs of equal value beyond the same employer or workplace.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. For a number of years now, the Committee has stressed the importance of adopting objective job evaluation methods for implementing the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, as the concept of “equal value” requires some method of measuring the relative value of different jobs. While the Convention does not prescribe any specific method for such an examination, Article 3 presupposes the use of appropriate techniques for objective job evaluation free from gender bias, as job evaluation is the process of assessing the relative worth of jobs in an organization, using an objective and reliable evaluation system. The Government reiterates that, under section 5 of the Male and Female Workers Equal Pay Law, 1996, the Labor Court can decide to appoint an evaluator if the plaintiff shows a beginning of evidence that the law has been transgressed, thus leaving the responsibility of job evaluation to the Courts. The Committeethus requests again the Government to indicate the specific measures envisaged or adopted with the aim of establishing or promoting mechanisms for the objective (including free from gender bias) evaluation of jobs in the private and public sectors, and to provide details on the outcome of the cases where the Labour Courts have decided to appoint a job evaluator.

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