CMNT_TITLE

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Algeria (RATIFICATION: 1962)

Other comments on C100

Observation

Direct Request

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

Articles 1–4 of the Convention. Assessment of the gender pay gap. The Committee recalls that, according to the data provided by the Government in its previous report, the wage gap in 2011 was in favour of women in almost all sectors, and it considered that this unusual situation could be explained by the low participation rate of women in the labour market and the high level of positions that they occupy. In effect, as recalled in its observation under the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), women working in Algeria in the formal sector generally have high qualification levels and often occupy high ranking positions in sectors occupied predominantly by men and, therefore, in well-paid positions. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government does not provide updated statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on the remuneration of men and women by occupational category, in the private and public sectors. It also notes that data on wages, published regularly by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), are still not disaggregated by sex, which does not allow trends in the gender pay gap to be monitored. The Committee further notes that, according to the survey, “Activity, Employment and Unemployment”, published by the ONS in May 2019: (1) the rate of economically active women (17.3 per cent) remains very low compared with that of men (66.8 per cent); and (2) 62.2 per cent of economically active women hold a higher education degree. It also notes that, according to the World Economic Forum’s annual Global Gender Gap Report 2022, Algeria was ranked third out of 146 countries assessed in terms of equal pay for men and women for similar work, which is significant progress (it was ranked 15th out of 149 countries assessed in 2018). However, the Committee emphasizes that the notion of equal remuneration for men and women for similar work is narrower than the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, enshrined in the Convention, which encompasses not only “equal”, “the same” and “similar” work, but also work that is of an entirely different nature, which is nevertheless of equal value (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 672–675). Lastly, the Committee notes that the same report indicates that women’s estimated annual income is clearly lower than that of men (US$3,310 for women and US$18,000 for men), which ranks the country in 144th place out of 146 countries assessed. In order to follow the trends on pay gaps over time and across sectors – particularly given the low participation of women in the labour market and their high levels of qualification – the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps to regularly collect and analyse statistical data on the remuneration of men and women, by occupational category and in the public and private sectors (including the informal economy if possible), and to supply these data disaggregated by sex.

Articles 1(b) and 2(2)(a). Equal remuneration for work of equal value. Civil service. Legislation. For several years, the Committee has been emphasizing that Ordinance No. 06-03 of 15 July 2006, issuing the General Civil Service Regulations, which prohibits all discrimination, particularly on the grounds of sex (section 27), does not contain any provisions explicitly providing for equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. The Committee recalls that, in the absence of a clear legislative framework, it is particularly difficult for men and women workers to assert their right to equal remuneration for work of equal value vis-à-vis employers, the relevant bodies and the courts. It notes with regretthat no legislative amendment has been introduced in this regard.The Committee therefore once again urges the Government to take the necessary steps to: (i) amend Ordinance No. 06-03 of 15 July 2006 issuing the General Civil Service Regulations, in order to incorporate a provision explicitly providing for equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value; and (ii) assess the pay gaps between men and women in the civil service and raise awareness among public officials and their organizations, as well as personnel managers, of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Article 3. Objective evaluation and classification of jobs in the civil service. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the occupational evaluation of civil servants. It notes, however, that there appears to be some confusion between the concept of performance evaluation – which aims at evaluating the way in which a given worker carries out his or her duties – and the concept of objective job evaluation, namely the calculation of the relative value of jobs that do not have the same content on the basis of the duties to be performed. An objective job evaluation must evaluate the position and not the individual worker. There needs to be an examination of the respective tasks involved, undertaken on the basis of entirely objective and non-discriminatory criteria to avoid the assessment being tainted by gender bias. While the Convention does not prescribe any specific method for such an examination, Article 3 presupposes the use of appropriate techniques for objective job evaluation, comparing factors such as skill, effort, responsibilities and working conditions. For further information, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraphs 695–709 of its 2012 General Survey on objective job evaluation.Therefore, the Committee once again requests the Government to: (i) review the job evaluation and classification method to ensure that the classification of jobs and the applicable salary scales in the public service is free from any gender bias and does not result in undervaluation of jobs mainly occupied by women; (ii) encourage the use of job evaluation methods based on objective criteria, such as skills and qualifications, effort, responsibility and working conditions; and (iii) provide statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on personnel numbers in the respective categories (A, B, C and D) in the public service. The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this regard.

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