Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Trinidad and Tobago (Ratification: 1970)

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

Legislation. The Committee recalls that the Equal Opportunity Act which set up an Equal Opportunity Commission and an Equal Opportunities Tribunal was declared unconstitutional by the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago in May 2004. In its report, the Government indicates that the decision of the High Court was appealed and that the Court of Appeal delivered its judgement on 26 January 2006, upholding the decision of the High Court. A further appeal was made to the Privy Council (No. 84 of 2006) which delivered its judgement on 15 October 2007. The Privy Council overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal, ruling that the creation of the Equal Opportunity Tribunal by the Act is not unconstitutional. The Committee notes that the members of the Equal Opportunity Commission were appointed in April 2008 and that the Government is preparing for the setting up of the Equal Opportunity Tribunal. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on further developments with regard to the establishment and functioning of the Equal Opportunity Commission and Tribunal, and the implementation and enforcement of the Equal Opportunity Act.

The Committee recalls its longstanding comments expressing concern about the discriminatory nature of the provisions of several government regulations, which provide that married female officers may have their employment terminated if family obligations affect their efficient performance of duties (section 57 of the Public Service Commission Regulations; section 52 of the Police Commission Regulations; and section 58 of the Statutory Authorities’ Service Commission Regulation). It also noted that a female officer who marries must report the fact of her marriage to the Public Service Commission (section 14(2) of the Civil Service Regulations). With respect to section 14(2) of the Civil Service Regulations, the Committee had taken note of the Government’s view that this provision is not considered discriminatory in Trinidad and Tobago, as it is an administrative matter related to the practice of women changing their names upon marriage. However, in order to avoid the potential discriminatory impact of such a provision on women, the Committee had suggested that the Civil Service Regulations be amended to require notification of name change of both men and women. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that steps are being taken to have the relevant regulations amended in accordance with the Committee’s comments. Noting the statement of the Government and given the serious nature of the matter, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary action to bring the regulations concerned into conformity with the Convention, and to indicate in its next report the specific steps taken, the  progress, if any, made or any difficulties encountered in this regard.

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

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