CMNT_TITLE

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

Other comments on C100

Observation

Direct Request

DISPLAYINFrench - SpanishAlle anzeigen

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Legislation. Work of equal value. For more than a decade, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact 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 and limits the scope of comparison to jobs performed for the same employer. While it notes that the legislation refers to various objective factors in the evaluation of jobs, the Committee would like to highlight nonetheless that 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. In addition, the Committee wishes to underline that the application of the principle of the Convention should not be limited to comparisons between men and women in the same establishment, enterprise or sector but allows for a much broader comparison to be made between jobs performed by men and women in different places or enterprises, or between different employers or sectors. Where women are heavily concentrated in certain sectors or occupations, there is a risk that the possibilities for comparison at the enterprise or establishment level may be insufficient (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 676–679 and 697–698). Given the persistence of occupational gender segregation in the country, noted by the Committee in its comments under the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Committee asks the Government to take the necessary steps to amend the definition of “work of equal value” provided for in section 119a(2) of the Labour Code, in order to give full legislative expression to the principle of the Convention. In doing so, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that, when determining whether two jobs are of equal value, the overall value of the jobs is considered and that the definition allows for jobs of an entirely different nature to be compared free from gender bias and that the comparison goes beyond the same employer. It asks the Government to provide information on any progress made in that regard, as well as on the application in practice of section 119a(2) of the Labour Code, including by providing concrete examples on the manner in which the term “work of equal value” has been interpreted in administrative or judicial decisions.

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