Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2021, publiée 110ème session CIT (2022)

Convention (n° 100) sur l'égalité de rémunération, 1951 - Togo (Ratification: 1983)

Autre commentaire sur C100

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Assessment of gender pay gaps. In its report, the Government indicates that, with regard to the assessment of the gender pay gap, in Togo, workers’ pay is not disaggregated by sex and is identical for men and women. While noting that the section 155(1) of the new Labour Code of 18 June 2021 (Act No. 2021-012) provides for equal pay among workers “for the same work or work of equal value” (identical in this respect to section 118 of the former Code) - which properly reflects the principle laid down by the Convention - the Committee states that its request concerned the situation in practice and the means of evaluating it. It emphasizes that in many countries, including those where the legislation is in conformity with the Convention, there are in fact gender pay gaps for work of equal value. In order to reduce these gaps, it must be possible to assess them. To be able to do this, it is necessary to have comprehensive and reliable statistical data on the remuneration of men and women in order to develop, implement and assess the measures taken. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to take the necessary steps to collect and analyse data on workers’ pay, disaggregated by sex, in the various sectors of economic activity, including the public sector, and in the various occupational categories, in order to be able to use them to develop and implement measures aimed at reducing any pay gaps that may exist in practice between men and women for work of equal value. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

Article 2. Application of the principle of equal remuneration by means of collective agreements. In its previous comment, having emphasized that several collective agreements signed by the social partners provided that “under equal conditions of work, skill and output, wages shall be equal for all workers”, a provision which was more restrictive than the principle of equal pay for work of equal value enshrined in the Convention, the Committee requested the Government to take steps to raise awareness among workers’ and employers’ organizations of the principle of the Convention, particularly the concept of “work of equal value”, and to encourage them to consider revising the collective agreements in this regard. The Committee notes that the collective agreements annexed to the Government’s report show the same failure to conform to the principle of the Convention. It also notes the Government’s response that the concept of work of equal value has not been understood by those involved in the world of work (the employers as well as the workers and the Government) and that awareness-raising must be carried out among these three stakeholders in social dialogue. To this end, the Government requests the technical assistance of the Office to ensure a better understanding and implementation of the Convention in the country. The Committee invites the Government to present a formal request for technical assistance to the Office to raise the awareness of all persons concerned of the principle of the Convention. It requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the follow-up given to this request and on activities carried out to ensure that the collective agreements signed among the social partners contain provisions which are in conformity with the principle of equal pay for work of equal value enshrined in the Convention.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. As noted by the Government itself in its report, section 155(4) of the Labour Code indicates that “job evaluation methods are based on impartial considerations pertaining primarily to the nature of the work that the jobs involve”. The Government recognizes, however, that the establishment of the different vocational categories and the determination of the corresponding wage scales are based exclusively on diplomas and not on an objective job evaluation. The Committee once again recalls that the method used must allow for a comparison of the relative value of different jobs, and not of individuals. Tasks to be performed should therefore be examined on the basis of perfectly objective and non-discriminatory criteria, such as skills and qualifications, the effort required, responsibilities and working conditions (see General Survey on fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 695–709). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to raise awareness and train the social partners in objective job evaluation methods. It reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard.

Enforcement. In reply to the questions the Committee asked in its previous comment on enforcement of the Convention, the Government states that: (1) no measures have been taken to raise awareness among workers, employers and their organizations of the legislation relating to equal pay for work of equal value and to reinforce the specific means available to labour inspectors, judges and other public officials to detect and address cases of gender pay inequality; (2) no training activities relating to the principle of the Convention have been organized or planned for labour inspectors and other employees of the labour administration; and (3) no administrative or judicial decisions on gender-related pay discrimination are available. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard, once it has benefited from the technical assistance required above.