CMNT_TITLE

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Trinidad and Tobago (RATIFICATION: 1997)

Other comments on C100

Observation

Direct Request

DISPLAYINFrench - SpanishAlle anzeigen

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Employment policy. The Committee previously noted that, due to resource constraints, the Minister of Labour and Small Enterprise Development (MOLSED), had been unable to continue the development of a Decent Work Policy and Programme of Action, but that the principles of the Decent Work Agenda, including the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value, were taken into account as part of the current review of labour legislation. The Committee notes the Government’s statement, in its report, that the MOLSED continues its review and reform of existing labour legislation in order to ensure, amongst other things, alignment with the fundamental principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. Recalling the importance of implementing fully the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard, more specifically on any review of labour legislation undertaken with a view to ensuring the implementation of this principle, which lies at the heart of the fundamental right of gender equality.

Article 2(2)(b). National minimum wage. Referring to its previous comments where it requested information on the minimum wage, the Committee notes the adoption of Legal Notice No. 341 of 8 November 2019 which increased the national minimum wage from 15 Trinidadian dollars (TTD) to TTD17.50 per hour. The Committee welcomes this information. The Committee asks the Government to provide updated statistical information on the percentage of women and men who are paid the national minimum wage, as well on any obstacles encountered, in particular in sectors in which women predominate.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that several job evaluation exercises had been implemented in the public service since the early 2000s and requested the Government to provide detailed information on the method used in that framework and the results achieved. It notes the Government’s statement that there is no detailed documentation on the methodology used but the public service relies on the Position Classification Method (PCM) of Job Evaluation. The Government adds that such method evaluates the value of the job, and not the person, comparing the job content to existing job descriptions. The evaluation is based on factors such as nature and scope of the job, authority, supervisory responsibility, training or experience required and relative worth of the job; at no time is gender a determining factor for setting wages in the public service. The Government adds that a job evaluation and compensation exercise for the public service is currently ongoing and will be completed in June 2022. Regarding job evaluations in the private sector, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Employers’ Consultative Association (ECA) provides services regarding the conduct of job evaluation exercises to employers, through its Employers’ Solution Centre (ESC). The Government adds that, in this context, ECA uses objective and job-specific factors, (mainly based on the point-factor method), never recommending the use of gender-biased factors. The Committee takes note of this information. In light of the persistent occupational segregation and substantive gender pay gap, the Committee however wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that the effective implementation of the principle of the Convention not only requires that levels of wages shall not be determined on the basis of sex, but goes further by requiring some method of measuring and comparing the relative value of different jobs held by men and women, through an examination of the respective tasks involved, undertaken on the basis of entirely objective and non-discriminatory criteria, such as skill, effort, responsibilities and working conditions, in order to avoid the assessment being tainted by gender bias (see General Survey on fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 695). The Committee asks the Government to provide detailed information on the method used for job evaluation exercises in the public sector and the results achieved. In that regard, it asks the Government to provide a copy of the job evaluation exercise for the public service to be completed in June 2022. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken to promote objective job evaluation in the private sector, based on criteria that are free from gender bias, such as qualifications and skills, effort, responsibilities and conditions of work, with a view to ensure that skills considered to be “female” (such as manual dexterity or skills required in the caring professions), are not undervalued or even overlooked, in comparison with traditionally “male” skills (such as heavy lifting).