Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Slovakia (Ratification: 1993)

Article 2 of the Convention. Work of equal value. Legislation. For a number of years, the Committee has been noting that section 119a(2) of the Labour Code, as amended in 2007 by Act No. 348/2007 Coll., which defines work of equal value as being “work of the same or comparable complexity, responsibility and difficulty, carried out under the same or comparable working conditions and producing the same or comparable capacity and output for the same employer” is narrower than the principle of the Convention. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that, while factors such as complexity, responsibility, difficulty and working conditions are clearly relevant in determining the value of jobs, when examining two jobs, the value does not have to be the same or even comparable with respect to each of the factors considered. Determining whether two different jobs are of equal value consists of determining the overall value of the jobs when all the factors are taken into account. The principle of the Convention requires equal remuneration for work which is of an entirely different nature, including work with different levels of complexity, responsibility and difficulty, and which is carried out under entirely different conditions and produces different results, but which is nevertheless of equal value (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraphs 676–679). The Committee recalls that the Labour Code (section 119a(2)) also limits the scope of comparison to jobs performed for the same employer and that the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value should not be limited to comparisons between men and women in the same establishment, enterprise or sector. While noting from the Government’s report that comparison between employers bound by the same higher-level collective agreement is possible, the Committee recalls that the principle of the Convention allows for a much broader comparison to be made between jobs performed by men and women in different enterprises or between different employers or sectors. Where women are heavily concentrated in certain sectors of activities or occupations, there is a risk that the possibilities for comparison may be insufficient at the level of the establishment (see General Survey, 2012, paragraphs 697 and 698). The Committee asks the Government to consider amending the definition of work of equal value in section 119a(2) of the Labour Code to ensure that, when determining whether two jobs are of equal value, the overall value of the jobs is considered and the definition allows for the jobs of an entirely different nature to be compared free from gender bias and going beyond the same employer. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 119a of the Labour Code, including any judicial or administrative decisions and their outcome. The Government is also asked to provide information on any measures taken to promote objective job evaluation in the private sector and to ensure that the process is free from gender bias.

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