Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 1994, publiée 81ème session CIT (1994)

Convention (n° 100) sur l'égalité de rémunération, 1951 - Autriche (Ratification: 1953)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction the information supplied by the Government in its reports to the effect that the new collective agreement for the confectionery industry, which came into force on 5 March 1993, eliminated the wage scales "a" and "b" which had been seen to be establishing discriminatory wage rates, so that separate wage rates for men and for women no longer exist; as well as the 1992 amendment to section 2(2) of the Equality of Treatment Act (BGB1. No. 833/1992) which specifically incorporates the concept of "work of equal value" into that Act and requires respect for it in the fixing of wages in enterprise regulations (including collective agreements).

1. The Committee notes that the Federal Chamber of Labour comments that the wage structure in the country is marked by a clear discrimination against female workers and that it remains to be seen whether the amendment to the Equality of Treatment Act (in above-mentioned Act No. 833/1992) will change this by its improved provisions. Noting the Government's explanation of these 1992 amendments, the Committee asks to be kept informed of any cases arising under the new wording of section 2(2) and their treatment by the Equal Treatment Committee, as well as on the practical effect of the new legislative text.

2. The Committee notes the Government's statement - made also in previous reports - that, given the principle of autonomy of collective bargaining in the country, neither the public authorities nor the legislative bodies intervene in negotiations, but that the legality of provisions in collective agreements can be challenged by the parties in individual litigation. Noting also that, according to the Government, there is no information on any recent cases of a labour court finding a clause in a collective agreement to be discriminatory and thus rendering that clause null and void for the individual worker concerned, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed, in future reports, of any cases where the principle of equal remuneration in a collective agreement is the subject of litigation, for example, before the Vienna Labour and Social Welfare Tribunal (as had been mentioned in previous Government reports).

3. With regard to statutory penalties for violations of the principle, in particular under section 6 of the Equality of Treatment Act (the Equal Treatment Committee to investigate, upon receiving complaints or on its own initiative, alleged infringements of the principle of equality of treatment; in case of non-compliance with a finding that an infringement exists, the Committee may apply to the labour court for confirmation of its finding), the Committee notes that, according to the Government, a declaratory judgement is currently being sought from the Industrial Tribunal in accordance with the procedure of section 6 with regard to whether a worker can claim payment of the difference in remuneration before that Tribunal. Should the Tribunal decide that it can order payment of the difference, the worker will lodge a claim for this payment against the employer, the claim having the force of the judgement. The Committee also notes the Government's statement that the Act does not provide for other penalties, such as fines, as well as its explanation that a worker can in any case take legal proceedings concerning discriminatory payment without having first to use the section 6 procedure. The Committee asks the Government to inform it of any decisions of the Industrial Tribunal in such a case, and of any other case brought before the courts seeking redress of discriminatory wage conditions using the procedures of the Act.

4. The Committee is addressing a direct request to the Government on other points.