Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

The Committee also notes the observations of the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU), communicated with the Government’s report, as well as the observations of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) received on 20 September 2019. It further notes the observations of the KCTU communicated with the Government’s supplementary information, as well as the comments of the Government on those observations.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Legislation. The Committee recalls that section 8(1) of the Equal Employment Opportunity and Work–Family Balance Assistance Act (previously referred to as the “Act on Equal Employment and Support for Work–Family Reconciliation”) only provides for equal wages for work of equal value “in the same business” and that the Equal Treatment Regulation (No. 422) limits the possibility of comparing work performed by men and women to “work of a similar nature”. In its last comment, in light of the persistent and high gender pay gap, the Committee urged the Government once again to take the necessary steps to bring the above-mentioned Act and Regulation into full conformity with the Convention. It also asked the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the gender pay gap. In its report, the Government recalls that: (1) since its enactment in 1997, the Regulations on Handling Work related to Equal Employment Opportunity (No. 117) have specified that two jobs which are somewhat different but are recognized as of equal value in essence according to job evaluation constitute “work of equal value”; (2) in 2013, the concept of “work of similar value” was added to the Regulations to provide a clearer standard for equal pay for work of equal value (according to article 4.1 of these Regulations, work of equal value refers to comparable jobs done by men and women which are of “equal or similar” value in terms of required skills, efforts, responsibilities, working conditions, etc.); and that (3) additionally, in 2019, the scope of application of the “provision on prohibition of wage discrimination on grounds of gender” was expanded from workplaces with five employees and more to all workplaces.

The Committee notes that, on 14 March 2019, the Korean Supreme Court held that there must be no “unreasonable” discriminatory treatment based on other circumstances that are not related to work, as well as a prohibition on wage discrimination based on social status or gender under the Labour Standards Act and the Equal Employment Opportunity and Work–Family Balance Assistance Act (Case 2015 Du 46321). In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that paying different lecture fees to full-time lecturers and to part-time lecturers constitutes “unreasonable” discrimination for a circumstance that is not related to work, and is in violation of the principles of “equal treatment and equal pay for equal work”, and thus, are invalid. While welcoming this decision, the Committee notes that the principle of equal pay for equal work upheld by the Court is narrower than the principle laid down in the Convention, as it does not give expression to the concept of equal pay for work of equal “value”, within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention. While noting the various initiatives undertaken by the Government to promote the principle of equal remuneration between men and women workers and to reduce occupational segregation, the Committee wishes to point out that, where legislation forms part of a comprehensive approach toward the elimination of gender-based salary discrimination, it is crucial that such legislation be effective and ensure the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value, within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention. The Committee urges the Government to ensure that its legal framework does not only provide for equal remuneration for equal, the same or similar work, but also address situations where men and women perform different work that is nevertheless of equal value, so as not to hinder progress in eradicating gender-based pay discrimination. In this regard, it asks the Government to provide an updated list of the provisions (legislative, regulatory or otherwise) implementing the principle of the Convention, that is to say ensuring that: (i) men and women receive equal remuneration for work of equal “value”; and (ii) the scope of comparison between men and women extends beyond the same establishment or enterprise.

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