Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2012, publiée 102ème session CIT (2013)

Convention (n° 100) sur l'égalité de rémunération, 1951 - Tchéquie (Ratification: 1993)

The Committee notes the observations of the Czech–Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions (CMKOS) attached to the Government’s report and the Government’s reply thereto.

Gender remuneration gap. The Committee notes the detailed statistics provided by the Government which show that the overall average gross monthly earnings of women represented, in 2010, 75.1 per cent of men’s (54.5 per cent in financial and insurance and 69.8 per cent in manufacturing; 91.6 per cent in administrative and support service activities and 83.7 per cent in administration). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the gender pay gap is mainly due to differences in education and the employment situation of men and women in the labour market and, in particular, to the concentration of women in occupations and activities generating lower earnings. The Committee asks the Government to take proactive measures to raise awareness of the gender pay gap and its underlying causes, in particular horizontal and vertical occupational gender segregation, among workers, employers and their organizations, and to address these issues. Please provide information on any measures taken in this respect.

Scope of comparison. For a number of years, the Committee has been pointing out that the Labour Code limits the application of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value to workers employed by the same employer. In reply to the Government’s indication that there are significant differences in the standard of living between the different regions of the country and that this is reflected in the wage rates applied, the Committee recalled in its previous comments that the Convention does not require the abolition of differences in the general wage level between various regions, sectors or even enterprises, where such differences apply equally to men and women. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the application of the principle of equal remuneration between men and women for work of equal value is practically unfeasible among groups of employers. The Committee recalls that the reach of comparison between jobs performed by women and men should be as wide as possible, in the context of the level at which wage policies, systems and structures are coordinated. Where women are 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. Legislation should not exclude the possibility of bringing equal pay claims where no comparator is available within the enterprise, particularly in cases where enterprises predominantly employ women. The Committee recalls that the European Committee of Social Rights has also considered under the European Social Charter that “[a]s comparisons need to be made in order to determine whether women and men really do receive equal pay, the Committee has consistently found that the possibility to look outside an enterprise for an appropriate comparison should exist where necessary” (Conclusions XIII-1, page 121) (General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraphs 697–699). The Committee once again asks the Government to take the necessary measures, in consultation with employers’ and workers’ organizations, to examine the possibility to enable the comparison of jobs beyond the same employer, particularly where there is no appropriate comparator available in the enterprise, in order to implement fully the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Article 3 of the Convention. Objective job evaluation. While noting the Government’s explanation regarding the methods and the procedure used to assess the value of work, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken in practice to encourage the use of such methods and procedures in both the private and the public sectors and to provide information on any job evaluation which was undertaken, and the outcome thereof.

Public service. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the entry into force of Act No. 218/2002 (the Civil Service Act) once again has been postponed until 1 January 2015. The Committee notes that the CMKOS reiterates the same observations according to which the changes in the remuneration of employees in the public services and administration introduced by the Government from 1 January 2011, within a context of budgetary reductions of 10 per cent for 2011, violate the principles of “equal pay for equal work or work of equal value” and “equal treatment as regards remuneration” set out in the Labour Code and are in contradiction with European Union law. According to the CMKOS, with the exception of teaching staff, the employers in the public service have the possibility to apply two different systems of remuneration. The organization states that it is necessary to assess the public service as a whole sector to ensure equal remuneration for work of equal value. In its reply, the Government confirms that this new system has been introduced, in order, among others, to correct possible discrimination on the basis of age due to the seniority principle which deprived young employees from obtaining adequate remuneration in case of high performance. The Government also indicates that the CMKOS’s observations were discussed by the Tripartite Working Team of the Council of Economic and Social Agreement for Co-operation with the ILO, on 22 August 2012, during which the representative of the employers pointed out that in the private sector, differences in remuneration are usually due to overtime or risk bonuses and other factors unrelated to gender. With respect to the public sector, the Committee wishes to point out that pay differentials between men and women may come from the post classification applicable or may arise from inequalities between men and women in the access to, and the payment of, additional emoluments, such as overtime payments, allowances or bonuses. Noting the Government’s indication that no special provisions concerning equality between men and women have been directly adopted with regard to the public service, the Committee asks the Government to provide specific information on the measures taken to ensure that the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value is applied in practice to the public service. The Committee once again hopes that the Civil Service Act will enter into force in the near future and that it will reflect the principle of the Convention, and asks the Government to provide information on the implementation of the Act, once it is adopted, with respect to the principle of the Convention.

Enforcement. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the number of complaints and infringements. However, it seems that this information does not concern violations of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, but rather violations in the field of discrimination or of the right to equal treatment in general. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on any violations concerning specifically the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value detected by, or brought to the attention of the labour inspection services and the Public Defender of Rights (Rights Ombud), indicating the nature of the case, any sanctions imposed and the remedies provided. The Committee once again asks the Government to take the necessary measures to promote public awareness of the legal provisions on equal remuneration between men and women for work of equal value and the procedures and remedies available where there has been a violation thereof, and to assist complainants in such procedures.