CMNT_TITLE

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Albania (RATIFICATION: 1957)

Other comments on C100

Direct Request

DISPLAYINFrench - SpanishAlle anzeigen

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Addressing the gender pay gap and its underlying causes. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that there is no gender pay gap in the public sector, as salaries are determined for the job position and are not based on gender. In this regard, the Committee would like to recall that pay inequalities or gender bias may result from pay scales themselves, even if they apply without distinction to male and female civil servants. When these pay scales are established, certain criteria used to evaluate and classify duties may be overvalued and favour male workers, such as physical effort, while others relating to traditionally “female” occupations, such as care work, are generally undervalued. Where tasks are largely performed by women, their frequent undervaluation results in an undervaluation of the posts in question and consequent pay inequalities to the detriment of women. Pay inequalities in the public sector may also result from unequal access for men and women to allowances, bonuses or other advantages. With respect to the private sector, the Government indicates that, according to the Evaluation Report of the National Strategy for Gender Equality (NSGE) for 2016-20, in 2020, the gender pay gap amounted to 10.1 per cent (with men being paid more than women on average) and decreased by 0.6 percentage point compared with the previous year. In 2019, the gender pay gap was highest in the manufacturing sector, where it reached 24.6 per cent, and lowest in the construction sector. By occupation, the Government indicates that the gender pay gap is highest for craftsmen, and equipment and machinery assembly workers (24.2 per cent) and lowest for the armed forces (3.0 per cent). The Committee observes that the Government reported similar figures on the gender pay gap in the National Review of the implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995) – Beijing + 25. In this report, the Government also indicated the concerns raised by the European Commission in 2018 with regard to the high proportion of women in the informal labour market, especially in the textile industries and footwear and the lack of disaggregated data on the number of women working in the informal economy (National Review for the Republic of Albania, 30 April 2019, pages 10-11). More generally, the Committee observes that the Gender Equality Index for the Republic of Albania published in 2020, concludes there are high levels of sex segregation in the labour market, with employment rates for women higher than for men in the social sectors of education, human health and social work (13.8 per cent of employed women and 3.9 per cent of employed men worked in these sectors in 2018) (page 11). In this regard, the Committee recalls that the horizontal and vertical occupational segregation of women into lower paying jobs or occupations and lower-level positions without promotion opportunities has been identified as one of the main underlying causes of pay inequality (2012 General Survey on Fundamental Conventions, paragraph 712). Noting that the gender pay gap is persistent and particularly high in certain sectors, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures adopted, in cooperation with workers’ and employers’ organizations, to specifically address horizontal and vertical occupational gender segregation and to increase the labour force participation rate of women in the formal labour market. Lastly, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to provide up-to-date statistical data, disaggregated by sex, on the distribution of workers in the different sectors of the economy, by occupational category, both in the public and private sectors, specifying their corresponding remuneration levels, and data on the gender pay gap in different sectors of the economy.

Articles 1(b) and 2. Definition of work of equal value. Legislation. The Committee recalls that section 4(8) of the Gender Equality Law of 2008 and section 115(4) of the Labour Code provide for different definitions of “work of equal value” and it requested the Government to provide information on their application in practice in comparing different jobs. The Committee notes the indication by the Government that job descriptions are not usually considered under the objective criteria set in section 115(4) of the Labour Code (the nature of the work, its quality and quantity, work conditions, professional background and seniority, physical and intellectual efforts, experience and responsibility), which constitutes an obstacle to the application of the principle in practice. The Committee also notes that the Government does not specify whether any measures are envisaged to harmonize the different definitions of work of equal value provided for under the Gender Equality Law and the Labour Code. The Government also reports on the awareness-raising activities on gender equality of the State Inspectorate of Labour and Social Services (SILSS), in cooperation with the Public Procurement Agency. The SILSS has placed a particular emphasis on the apparel industry where almost 95 per cent of workers are women. An awareness campaign was organized on the protections offered under the labour legislation and inspectors distributed leaflets on this theme. However, the campaign was interrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. While taking note of this information, the Committee stresses in this regard that public awareness-raising is essential to address prejudices and stereotypes regarding the professional abilities and aspirations of women (2012 General Survey, paragraph 865). On the number of relevant cases, the Government indicates that in 2020, two complaints for unequal treatment were addressed to SILSS and that in both cases, it was concluded that they were not justified. In 2020, there were 9 cases filed in Court on matters of discrimination in which the Commissioner for the Protection of Discrimination was summoned as an interested party. Three of them were completed in 2020 (one complaint was partially granted and another dismissed and both cases are currently pending in appeal, and the third one was declared inadmissible). One complaint was partially granted in 2021 and the other 5 cases are still pending. The People’s Advocate did not handle specific cases related to gender equality during the reporting period, as these matters are usually dealt with by the Commissioner for the Protection of Discrimination. In view of the absence of information provided in this regard, the Committee reiterates its request to Government to indicate whether any measures are envisaged to harmonize the different definitions of work of equal value provided for under the Gender Equality Law and the Labour Code. The Committee also asks the Government to take measures to continue raising awareness among both workers and employers and their respective organizations, as well as judges and other officials responsible for ensuring the implementation of the principle set out in the Convention, and to resume the awareness-raising activities of the SILSS on equal pay for men and women for work of equal value that had been interrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the number, nature and outcome of cases of pay discrimination, in both the private and public sectors, dealt with by the competent authorities.

National strategies and action plans. The Committee asked the Government to provide information on: (1) the activities undertaken and the results achieved under the NSGE and reduction of Gender-based violence and Domestic Violence 2011–15 (NSGE – GBV and DV 2011-2015), as well as the Action Plan for Supporting Women Entrepreneurs for 2014–20, in matters relating to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value; (2) the progress achieved in the adoption and implementation of the new NSGE for 2016–20 (NSGE 2016-20), as well as on any other action plan aimed at implementing the principle of the Convention: (3) whether the National Council on Gender Equality has been involved in the elaboration and implementation of such strategies and action plans. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain information relating to equal remuneration. It notes however that the Government indicates that: (1) the review of the implementation of the NSGE-GBV and DV, showed an increase in the number of women, both in general and within vulnerable groups, with access to employment and vocational training programs; (2) women entrepreneurs had also been accompanied through the creation of a special support fund; (3) the NSGE Evaluation Report showed an increase in the participation of women and girls in the labour market; (4) the NSGE 2021-2030, which provides inter alia for improving the legal framework and policies that enable equal sharing of work, and unpaid family care, between men and women, is being approved; and (5) the National Council for Gender Equality (NCGE), an advisory body on state policies on gender equality, is consulted for every evaluation report and elaboration of draft strategies and plans on the matter. The Committee asks the Government to provide updated information on the elaboration and adoption of the National Strategy for Gender Equality 2021-2030, in particular on the measures envisaged with respect to equal remuneration for men and women, as well as on any other strategy or plan adopted aiming at advancing the application in practice of the principle of the Convention. The Committee also asks the Government to provide detailed information on the implementation and results of these policies relating to equal remuneration for work of equal value, including specific information on the monitoring and review mechanisms in place to measure their impact.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the method and criteria used to establish the classification of jobs and the corresponding salary scales without gender bias and to ensure that jobs largely performed by women are not undervalued in comparison with predominantly “male” jobs but evaluated objectively on the basis of the work that they involve. For the public service, the Government indicates that the civil service positions are classified according to categories, classes and the nature of the positions, in accordance with section 19 of the Law No. 152/2013 on civil servants. The nature of the institution in which the position is situated and the importance of the job position in relation to the institution’s mission are criteria used for the classification of job positions and consequently the determination of the corresponding salary category. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on the job evaluation methods used for the private sector. The Committee recalls that a job evaluation is a formal procedure which, through analysis of the content of jobs, gives a numerical value to each job. Analytical methods of job evaluation have been found to be the most effective where they compare and classify jobs on the basis of objective factors relating to, for example, skills/qualifications, efforts, responsibilities and working condition (2012 General Survey, paragraph 700). The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the criteria used for the classification of job positions in the public sector are objective factors, such as skills/qualifications, efforts, responsibilities and working conditions and to clarify how the criteria of “importance of the position in relation to the institution’s mission” referred to in the Government’s report is being measured. The Committee further requests the Government to explain how it ensures that these criteria are free from gender bias. Lastly, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on any measure adopted to promote the use of objective job evaluation methods in the private sector.