Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Republic of Korea (Ratification: 1997)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. Article 1 of the Convention. Application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value beyond the same establishment. The Committee refers to section 8(1) of the Equal Employment Act under which any employer shall pay equal wages for work of equal value in the same business. In its previous comments the Committee pointed out that the principle of equal remuneration as set out in the Convention extends beyond cases where work is performed in the same establishment or business, and that this makes it possible to address the discriminatory effects of horizontal occupational segregation. In this regard, the Government merely repeats previous statements to the effect that the principle of equal remuneration has not been introduced at the industry level. The Committee therefore asks the Government to indicate whether any measures are being taken or envisaged to ensure that wages in sectors predominantly employing women are not set on the basis of gender-biased undervaluation of the value of the work performed in these sectors.

2. Comparing remuneration for jobs of a different nature. The Committee notes that the Supreme Court, for the first time issued a ruling regarding gender-based wage discrimination, in which it relied on the definition of equal pay for work of equal value as contained in the Ministry of Labour’s Regulation No. 422 on Handling Equal Employment Matters (Supreme Court Decision SCR2002 DO3883, 14 March 2003). The Committee notes that according to the Regulation and the ruling work of equal value refers to jobs which are equal or almost equal by nature or which, though slightly different, are considered to have equal value. In this regard, the Committee recalls that under the Convention it should be permissible not only to compare the remuneration received for equal or similar jobs, but also for jobs which are of a different nature. The Committee asks the Government to elaborate further on the meaning of the expression “slightly different”, as used in the Regulation and the Supreme Court ruling of 14 March 2003.

3. Article 2. Promoting and ensuring the principle’s application. The Committee notes from the Ministry of Labour’s Report on the Monthly Labour Survey that the gender wage gap remained very high at around 37 per cent in 2003. The Government indicates a number of factors that contribute to this: the use of seniority-based pay systems in connection with the generally shorter job tenures of women; the fact that women work less often in larger companies which pay better wages; gender discrimination; the low employment level of highly educated women (female concentration in clerical jobs), and women’s entry into jobs below or unrelated to their educational background and into irregular work following family-related career breaks. In this context, the Committee notes that the Government is taking or planning a number of measures to promote the better application of the Convention’s principle. These measures include: (1) requiring employers to justify wage differences between male and female workers; (2) strengthening labour inspection to eliminate wage discrimination; (3) affirmative action on a trial basis in public companies and government subsidiaries, to expand female employment, increase the proportion of women in managerial jobs and assign more women to main divisions; and (4) encouraging companies to address the issue of equal remuneration for work of equal value as a matter of personnel management. The Committee asks the Government to provide:

(a)   information on the steps taken to develop and implement each of the measures mentioned above, practical experience acquired, and results achieved with regard to closing the gender wage gap;

(b)    indications regarding any other measures relevant to the Convention’s application taken under the third basic plan on equal employment established by the Ministry of Labour under section 6 of the Equal Employment Act; and

(c)    statistical information on the levels of remuneration received by men and women in the different sectors, industries and occupational groups; the participation of men and women in non-regular employment (part-time, fixed-term, daily and temporary employment); their levels of remuneration; and information on developments regarding women’s job tenure.

4. Article 3. Objective job appraisal. Recalling its previous comments with regard to the promotion of objective job appraisal, the Committee notes that the Korean Women’s Development Institute’s project on this issue has not led to the development of a standard model for job appraisal but that the Institute suggested improvements to Administrative Regulation No. 422. It also notes the Government’s intention to revise the regulatory framework regarding the principle of equal remuneration in the light of these suggestions, following consultations with social partners and the Government’s expectation that companies will increasingly use job evaluation to set wages due to the fact that performance-based pay systems were on the increase. The Committee asks the Government to:

(a)   keep it informed on the progress made in improving the regulatory framework concerning the principle of equal remuneration;

(b)    continue to provide information on the introduction of objective job evaluation systems by companies and the involvement of workers’ representatives in this regard, in accordance with section 8(2) of the Equal Employment Act, as well as information on the impact of the operation of objective job evaluation on the earnings of men and women.

5. Parts III and IV of the report form. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on recent cases concerning wage discrimination, decided by the Presidential Commission on Women’s Affairs and the Committee on Gender Equality Promotion of the Ministry of Gender Equality, as well as by the courts.