Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Honduras (Ratification: 1956)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain a reply to its previous comments. The Committee therefore feels bound to reiterate its previous comment, which read as follows:

Repetition

Wage gap. The Committee notes the extensive statistical data provided by the Government. According to the data provided, women are in the majority in the public sector, with an increase between 2008 and 2010 (105,873 in 2008 and 109,134 in 2010). In contrast, the representation of men declined over the same period (91,082 in 2008 and 85,586 in 2010). The data also show that a higher number of women received remuneration under the minimum wage rate throughout the period (for example, 6,053 women, compared with 1,817 men in 2010). In 2009 a significantly higher number of men than women received over four times the minimum wage (6,692 men compared with 5,524 women). There are no corresponding data for 2010. The Committee notes that, according to the statistics, the representation of men in the private sector is considerably higher than that of women (839,135 men and 283,305 women in 2010). Women are concentrated in agriculture, forestry, hunting and fishing, manufacturing, commerce, hotels and restaurants, and financial institutions and services. The Committee further notes that, according to the Government, the unemployment rate affects women more than men (5.2 per cent for women and 3.2 per cent for men) and the underemployment rate is also higher for women than for men (8.9 per cent compared with 7.7 per cent). In this respect, the Committee notes that the statistics provided, although they offer considerable information on the employment situation of men and women in the country, and to a certain point the earnings received by both men and women, do not provide a basis for determining fully the wage gap that exists between men and women. The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide statistical data on the average wage received by workers in each branch of activity and sector of occupation so that the Committee can combine it with the statistical data already provided by the Government and determine the existing wage gap.

Enforcement. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the consultations and controls undertaken in relation to compliance with the minimum wage. The Government indicates that there is no methodology for more specific evaluations to determine discrepancies in treatment between men and women. The Committee nevertheless observes that the information provided does not indicate that inspections examine compliance with the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value, as established in the Convention. Nor does the Government provide information on the social audits undertaken by organized women to ensure compliance with the right to equal remuneration for work of equal value envisaged in strategic objective 1.3 of the Gender Equality and Equity Plan II, 2010–22. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the inspections carried out in relation to compliance with the principle of the Convention and on the implementation of social audits to ensure the right to equal remuneration for work of equal value.

Minimum wages. The Committee reiterates its request for information on the steps taken or envisaged to apply the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value in the fixing of minimum wages, and on the manner in which it is ensured that, in jobs predominantly occupied by women, minimum wages are not lower than those fixed for work of equal value performed in jobs where men predominate.

Article 4 of the Convention. Collective agreements. The Committee notes that COHEP is not aware of the holding of discussions in the tripartite forums of the Economic and Social Council (CES) or in the National Convergence Forum (FONAC) on the subject of equal remuneration for men and women, and that this subject has not been included on the agenda of the Economic and Social Council. Noting that the Government has not provided information in its report on the measures adopted, in collaboration with the social partners, to promote the application through collective agreements of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value, the Committee hopes that the information requested will be provided in the next report.

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the information provided by COHEP relating to the average earnings received in the manufacturing sector. The Committee notes that, according to the data provided by the Honduran Export Processing Association (AHM), in practice the average wage earned is higher than that agreed in minimum wage commissions, although it is not possible to detect from these figures whether there are wage differences between men and women. The Committee also notes that Executive Decision No. STSS 374 STSS08 on the adjustment on the minimum wage for 2009, which substantially increases the minimum wage, does not apply to the export processing sector (maquila). In view of the number of women working in this sector and the fact that the wages may be determined on the basis of the minimum rates established, the Committee considers that this exclusion may have a disproportionate impact on women. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the reasons for the exclusion of the export processing sector from the application of the adjustment of wage rates. The Committee also asks the Government once again to provide statistical data on the distribution of men and women by earnings level, economic activity, occupational group or level of education/skills and geographical area.