Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Canada (Ratification: 1972)

Further to its observation, the Committee notes the detailed information in the report and the attached documentation supplied by the Government in reply to its previous direct request.

1. At the federal level, the Committee notes the Government's statement that the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) has begun to carry out, over a period of five years, a compliance audit designed to assess the employer's employment equity status based on the 12 statutory requirements of the Employment Equity Act. It notes that the CHRC was to make an assessment of its strategy in terms of impact by the end of the first audit year (1998). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of the compliance audit as regards the principle of equal remuneration between men and women for work of equal value. Please also provide information on the rulings of the Employment Equity Review Tribunal concerning equal remuneration.

2. The Committee notes the Government's reply that no amendments are currently planned with regard to the amendment of section 11 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Committee notes from the statistics supplied by the Government that the wage gap has been further declining for the private and public sector (with the average salary of women employees in the public sector in 1997 being 80.5 per cent of men's average salary). The Committee notes the Government's statement that the CHRC would still like to see improvements to the pay equity provisions in the Act with regard to definitions and expectations, time frames for job evaluations, pay adjustments, positive participation of unions and a model for ensuring compliance which is based on cooperation and monitoring. Noting also that the Government announced that it would take a comprehensive review of the Act to ensure its effectiveness in promoting and protecting human rights in the next century, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of this review and on the follow-up given to the recommendations of the CHRC, in particular with regard to section 11 of the Act. Please also indicate any measures taken or contemplated to reduce further the wage gap in the public and private sectors, such as public information and awareness campaigns and general programmes to promote equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women with regard to access to vocational training and access to employment.

3. Article 3 of the Convention. With regard to pay equity in the public service, the Committee notes the information in the Government's report that the Universal Classification Standard (UCS) has been developed further in 1996-97 and tested during the first half of 1998, involving public service employees from the different departments, the unions, the Office of the Auditor General and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It further notes that during 1998, new job descriptions will be created based on the new standards and that, in 1999, after discussions with the unions, all positions in the public service will be converted into the UCS. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply, in its next report, a copy of the final text of the UCS. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the number of men and women employed in the various occupations classified under the new system and an indication of their remuneration, as well as to keep it informed on the impact of the UCS on the resolution of equal pay systems. The Committee also notes the information in the report that a Guide to Pay Equity and Job Evaluation has been published by the CHRC, which provides detailed practical information on the development and implementation of job evaluation and pay equity plans, and it would be grateful to receive a copy of this guide.

4. The Committee further notes, with regard to the public service, the decision issued by the Federal Court on the Bell Canada case, submitted to the Federal Court of Appeals, which states that comparisons between predominately female and generic (male) jobs was not in accordance with the Human Rights Act and which seems to put a strained interpretation on section 11 of the Act. It notes that the Human Rights Tribunal has revoked the opinion of the Federal Court and that the Court of Appeal is still to decide on the method of calculation for the adjustment of salaries. The Committee also notes the decision brought before the Human Rights Tribunal with regard to a longstanding complaint by the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) that government employees in female-dominated job categories, such as secretaries, clerks, hospital workers and librarians, were not receiving equal pay for work of equal value. The Tribunal ordered that payments to employees be calculated based on a job comparison formula put forward by the CHRC and that the Treasury Board and the PSAC will have one year to agree on the distribution of payments. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed on the above cases and on the follow-up given to them once a decision has been made.

5. Provinces and territories.

(a) Alberta. In its previous request, the Committee noted the amendment of section 6(1) of the Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act and requested the Government to clarify the exact meaning of the expression "substantially similar work". The Committee notes the Government's statement that for the purpose of section 6(1), jobs need not be identical, but a high degree of similarity must be demonstrated on the basis of equal skill, equal effort, equal responsibility and similar working conditions. In its 1986 General Survey on equal remuneration, the Committee had noted that some of the factors used to evaluate jobs tend to favour men over women. It further notes that some factors which may be more likely to be present in the jobs undertaken by women may not be identified and therefore not valued in job evaluation schemes, as is often the case with caring skills and responsibilities, human relations and manual dexterity. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the criteria on the basis of which the above factors are determined and the methods used when comparing jobs for the purpose of section 6(1) of the Act.

(b) Ontario. With regard to job evaluation methods established under the Pay Equity Act, the Committee notes the decision of the Ontario Court (General Division) that the amendments to the Pay Equity Act contained in the Savings and Restructuring Act of 1996 (Bill 26) -- which discontinued the proxy method for achieving pay equity -- were unconstitutional, with the result that the proxy method has been reinstated under the Pay Equity Act. As a consequence, the Government states that it has committed funds to cover retroactive proxy pay equity, and funds for pay equity programmes. The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide information, in its next report, on the practical application of the three comparison methods for achieving pay equity in the private and public sectors. The Committee further notes the amendments to the Pay Equity Act providing flexibility when redoing a pay equity plan in case of restructuring in the municipal and parts of the broader public sectors, and allowing employers and unions to negotiate a new gender-neutral comparison system when redoing a pay equity plan after a sale, merger or takeover. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed about the practical application of the Pay Equity Act as amended, particularly with respect to reviews of pay equity plans.

(c) Quebec. Further to its observation, the Committee notes that, according to section 57 of the newly-adopted Pay Equity Act of 21 November 1996, in respect of each job class, the job evaluation method used must take into account: (1) the required qualifications; (2) the responsibilities; (3) the effort required; and (4) the conditions under which the work is performed. The Committee refers to its comment under point 5(a) and requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the criteria on the basis of which these factors are determined and used in the job evaluation. Please also continue to provide information on cases brought before the Labour Court and the Human Rights Commission regarding the application of the Act as well as on the activities carried out by the Commission on Pay Equity under section 93 of the Act.

(d) British Columbia and Nova Scotia. While noting from the Government's report that pay equity and low wage redress initiatives have been taken in the health and community social services sectors, the Committee notes that these sectors continue to fall outside the scope of the Pay Equity Framework and Sectoral Guidelines in British Columbia. It further notes that there continues to be no significant progress on the extension of pay equity to private sector corporations and bodies in Nova Scotia. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed on any developments in this regard.

(e) North West Territories. According to the Government's report, there have been no substantive changes with regard to section 6(1) of the Fair Practices Act regarding equal pay. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments with respect to the application of section 6(1) of the Act and to indicate any other measures taken or envisaged which contribute to the achievement of equal remuneration between men and women for work of equal value.

(f) Newfoundland and Saskatchewan. The Committee notes the information in the report that the Government of Newfoundland is currently reviewing strategies to revise its job evaluation, compensation systems and policies to ensure that equity in remuneration is extended to all employees on a permanent basis. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of the above review. As for pay equity initiatives in Saskatchewan, the Government states that, since pay equity only closes 20 to 30 per cent of the wage gap, it has adopted a multifaceted approach which includes the enhancement of the childcare system, the development of mandatory employment equity programmes, updating labour standards legislation to provide benefits to part-time workers, and to strengthen maternity protection and other family-related benefits. It further indicates that, once a workable process is fully established in the provincial public sector, methods for expanding pay equity legislation to cover the private sector will be considered. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application of the principle in the public sector and indicate any other measures taken or envisaged to promote the application of the principle in the private sector.

(g) Yukon. The Committee notes from the Government's report that section 42 of the Yukon Employment Standards Act enshrines the principle of equal remuneration between men and women for "similar work performed in the same establishment under similar working conditions and the performance which requires similar skill, effort and responsibility, (...)". The Committee refers to its comment in point 5(a) and requests the Government to provide information on the specific criteria which determine these factors and the methodology used for comparing the value of the work performed and provide information on the practical application of section 42 of the Employment Standards Act.