Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2010, Publicación: 100ª reunión CIT (2011)

Convenio sobre igualdad de remuneración, 1951 (núm. 100) - Eslovaquia (Ratificación : 1993)

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:

Wage gap. The Committee recalls the significant wage gap between men and women in some of the employment categories, such as legislators, managing and senior employees along with tradespersons and qualified blue-collar workers. The Committee notes from the statistics for the second quarter of 2008 that, since 2005, women’s monthly wages remained around 77 per cent of men’s monthly wages. The Committee notes, however, that with respect to legislators, senior officials and managers, the monthly wage gap between men and women, though remaining high, has decreased from 38 per cent in 2005 to 31.8 per cent in 2008. Similarly, for craft and skilled trade workers, the wage gap between men and women decreased from 38 per cent in 2005 to 34.5 per cent in 2008. For skilled agricultural and fishery workers, the monthly wage gap further decreased from 15 per cent to 11.7 per cent. On the other hand, the Committee notes that the wage gap between men and women increased for clerks from 17 per cent in 2005 to 19.8 per cent in 2008. While noting that the monthly wage gap between men and women has decreased for certain employment categories, the Committee asks the Government to provide more detailed information on the programmes and measures adopted to reduce differences in remuneration between men and women and to improve the access of women to higher paid jobs, as well as their impact. The Committee trusts that such information will be provided in the Government’s next report.

Scope of comparison – same employer. The Committee notes that the equal remuneration provision in the Labour Code (section 119(3)) limits the scope of comparison between jobs performed by men and women to the same employer. The Committee draws the attention of the Government to the fact that limiting the scope of comparison between jobs to the “same employer” or establishment entails the risk that in situations where women are heavily concentrated in certain sectors of activity the possibilities for comparison will be insufficient. The Committee recalls that for the purpose of the Convention “the reach of comparison between jobs performed by men and women should be as wide as allowed by the level at which wage policies, systems and structures are coordinated, taking into account also the degree to which wages fixed independently in different enterprises may be based on common factors unrelated to sex” (paragraph 72 of the 1986 General Survey on equal remuneration). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the level at which wage policies, systems and structures are coordinated and on how it is ensured that the reach of comparisons between jobs performed by men and women is at least as wide as allowed by this level.

Article 2. Wages set by individual agreements. With respect to difficulties regarding the application of the principle of the Convention to those parts of wages that are set by individual agreement, the Committee recalls that it had previously noted that most of the wage differences detected by the National Labour Inspectorate (NLI) concerned flexible components of the wage, which were often determined on the basis of personal attitudes of managers. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that following the amendment of the Labour Code, the right to equal remuneration for work of equal value also applies to wage conditions agreed with employees in individual employment contracts. It also notes that in 2007, labour inspectors registered ten cases concerning discrimination in remuneration, two of which concerned inequalities in remuneration between men and women relating to additional allowances. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the number and the nature of wage claims lodged with the competent labour inspection body, the National Centre of Human Rights or the courts concerning non-compliance with section 119 of the Labour Code, or the Anti‑discrimination Act, 2004, and in particular those relating to differences between men and women with respect to flexible components of the wage. Please also indicate any other measures taken to address practices by individual employers to determine payments on the basis of subjective criteria based on gender bias.

Collective agreements. The Committee notes that Act No. 2/1991 Coll. on collective bargaining, as amended in 2007, provides new specific criteria for the extension of higher level collective agreements. The Government indicates that conditions are currently being created allowing, in justified cases, the possibility of extending by regulation the binding effect of collective agreements based on proposals of the Tripartite Committee. The Government also states that all provisions of collective agreements, which have been extended to other employers, have been negotiated with a view to ensuring they are not discriminatory as regards to sex. The Committee asks the Government to give an indication of the number and type of collective agreements that have been given general binding force by regulations, and to which sectors or employers they have been extended.

Minimum wages. The Committee welcomes the statistics for 2008 on the minimum wages of full-time employees according to education level and economic activity. The Committee notes the Government’s clarification that disparities between men and women, for example in the hotel and restaurant sector, are due to the fact that activities in certain sectors are carried out by persons of one sex rather than the other. With respect to measures aimed at addressing occupational segregation as a means to promote the application of the Convention, the Committee refers to paragraph 2 of its direct request, as well as its comments on the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111).

Promotion of the principle of the Convention. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report concerning the implementation of the various strategic documents relating to the promotion of equal opportunities. It notes in particular the activities aimed at creating conditions to reconcile work and family life of men and women, and those promoting the Ethical Code for Employers. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the specific impact of these activities on reducing the remuneration gap between men and women in the public and private sectors. Please also provide information on the activities of the Gender Equality Council, including the preparation of its National Strategy for Gender Equality, to promote the application of the principle of the Convention.

Article 3. Job evaluation. The Committee notes that section 119(2) of the Labour Code, as amended in 2007, provides that job evaluation must be based on the same criteria for men and women without sex discrimination. In the evaluation of the work of men and women, employers may use other objectively measurable criteria in addition to those given in section 119(2) if they can be applied to all employees without regard to sex. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how it is ensured that the criteria and selection of factors of comparison, the weighing of such factors and the actual comparison, used in job evaluation exercises are free from gender bias and not inherently discriminatory based on sex. The Government is also requested to provide information on any activities carried out or planned in the private and public sectors to undertake an objective evaluation of the jobs performed by men and women.