Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Jamaica (Ratification: 1975)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

1. In its 1991 observation, the Committee had noted that the Minimum Wage (Printing Trade) Order, 1973, which had provided for sex-differentiated job categories and pay scales had been revoked by the Minimum Wage (Printing Trade) Order, 1989, which had set a single rate of pay for an unskilled worker. However, in other respects the Order had simply removed explicit reference to the sex of the worker from various other categories, while at the same time maintaining both the former definitions of those categories and differentials in the respective increased minimum rates which appeared to correspond to those laid down in the 1973 Order. In the absence of any indication that measures were taken either to evaluate and compare jobs in categories which were formerly sex-denominated by applying non-discriminatory criteria or to ensure that those jobs were open to both sexes, the Committee had been forced to conclude that the wage distinctions based on sex in the 1973 Order had been maintained in the 1989 Order, despite the introduction of neutral language. The Committee had requested the Government to supply detailed information on the measures taken, either alone or in cooperation with the social partners, to ensure the application of the principle of the Convention in the printing trade as well as in other industries, such as the garment-making trade, where the Committee had previously noted that distinctions based on sex had apparently played a role in establishing differential minimum wage rates. At the Conference Committee in 1991, the representative of the Government stated that the tripartite Minimum Wage Advisory Commission would review the Minimum Wage Orders for the printing and garment industries before the end of 1991 and, in doing so, would take account of the Committee's comments regarding the application of the Convention. He assured the Committee that a comprehensive report, as well as copies of the new Orders, would be furnished as soon as this work had been completed. The Committee notes that no further reference is made in the report of the Government to the review of the above-mentioned Orders. The Committee trusts that the Government will indicate, in the near future, that it has taken the necessary action to ensure conformity with the provisions of the Convention. 2. In its previous direct request, the Committee had pointed out that section 2 of the Employment (Equal Pay for Men and Women) Act, 1975, only refers to "similar" or "substantially similar" job requirements, whereas the Convention provides for equal remuneration for work of "equal value", even of a different nature. The Committee notes that the Government has provided no information on the measures taken or envisaged to re-examine national legislation in the light of the requirements of the Convention. The Committee trusts that full information will be provided in this regard in the next report. 3. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that minimum wage orders generally exclude any ancillary benefits from their scope, while the Convention, as well as the above-mentioned Act include in their scope any additional emoluments whatsoever payable in cash or in kind to the worker in respect of work or services performed. The Committee had therefore requested the Government to indicate how, in practice, equal remuneration is implemented with respect to benefits such as housing, marriage or family allowances, in both the private and public sectors. The Committee notes the statement of the Government in its report that there is equal remuneration in both the private and public sectors with respect to the benefits paid or granted in addition to salary. The Committee, however, notes from the Government's report that while the payment of marriage allowances was discontinued during the 1970s, teachers who were receiving the allowance prior to its discontinuation have continued to receive it. Male teachers who fall into this category receive an allowance of $2,400 per annum. The Committee points out that the continuing payment of marriage allowances to, it would appear, only male teachers who had entitlement to them prior to their discontinuation is contrary to the provisions of the Convention. It therefore requests the Government to ensure that those female teachers who were also employed prior to the date of discontinuance of the allowance but who were denied it on account of their sex are also granted a marriage allowance. More generally, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that minimum wage orders and any regulations fixing wages for the public sector cover not only cash minimum wages but also any additional emoluments payable in cash or in kind.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.