Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Luxembourg (Ratification: 1967)

Other comments on C100

Direct Request

Display in: French - SpanishView all

Remuneration gaps. The Committee notes that according to EUROSTAT data, the unadjusted remuneration gap between men and women in 2009 was 12.5 per cent, a figure which has not changed since 2007, although it was 10.4 per cent in 2006. It also notes that, according to a study published by the Ministry for Equality of Opportunities in 2010, the Ministry, with the support of the National Statistical and Economic Studies Institute, has made available to enterprises since 2009 a tool for the evaluation of wage equality (LOGIB) through which an analysis can be made of whether an enterprise guarantees equality of wages between women and men, that is whether, for the same work or work of the same value, employees receive the same salary. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures adopted to promote the use of the LOGIB evaluation tool, and on its utilization in practice by enterprises. The Government is also requested to provide information on the action taken as a result of the evaluations carried out and the impact of these evaluations on remuneration gaps between men and women for work of equal value.

Article 2 of the Convention. Collective agreements. The Committee notes, according to the Government’s brief report, that the Research and Studies Institute CEPS/Instead is currently undertaking a qualitative study of collective agreements, particularly with regard to equality of treatment. The Government adds that this information will be provided as soon as it is available. While noting these indications, the Committee recalls that in its previous comment it observed that the Government had decided to maintain for a trial period, the duration of which was not specified, an obligation of means for the social partners to apply the principle of the Convention, or in other words a requirement of negotiation for the social partners, although the obligation to set the means of implementing the principle was not respected. The Committee also noted the Government’s indication that this requirement as to the means could subsequently be replaced by a requirement as to results. The Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the measures adopted, in collaboration with the social partners, to promote a better application of section 162-12 of the Labour Code. It also asks it to provide information on collective agreements containing clauses respecting equal remuneration and reiterates its previous request for information on the conclusion and contents of equality plans for employment and wages negotiated in enterprises, with an indication of the measures envisaged to ensure equal remuneration for men and women. The Committee also asks the Government to provide the findings of the qualitative study of collective agreements in relation to equal remuneration.

The Committee also notes that the Government’s report does not contain a reply to its previous requests for information on the following points.

Occupational segregation. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the tangible measures taken to combat the deep-rooted causes of the wage gaps between men and women, such as occupational segregation, both horizontal and vertical, particularly in terms of education and vocational training, with a view to encouraging women to diversify their occupational choices and to enable them to progress in their careers towards positions of responsibility.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee refers to its previous comment, in which it emphasized the discriminatory nature, in relation to women, of the criteria for evaluation and the classification of functions contained in certain collective agreements. The Committee therefore once again asks the Government to indicate the measures adopted to encourage the social partners to make use of objective methods for the evaluation of jobs based on the work involved, and particularly to ensure that these methods are free from any sexist prejudices and do not result in the jobs in which women are predominant being undervalued.