Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Mauritania (Ratification: 2001)

The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Workers of Mauritania (CGTM), dated 28 August 2015 and 30 August 2016, which highlight the existence in practice of significant gender discrimination in remuneration in relation to jobs of the same value. The CGTM also indicates that employers obstruct access for women to certain senior executive posts and points out that if women do reach that level, they do not receive the same treatment, they are paid a salary approximately 30 per cent lower than that of men, and they do not enjoy the same benefits linked to the posts that they occupy. The Committee notes that the Government, in its communication of 7 October 2015, rejects the CGTM’s allegations and states that there is no gender wage discrimination.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Application of the principle. Legislation and collective agreements. In June 2009, the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards urged the Government to amend the Labour Code and Act No. 93-09 of 18 January 1993 issuing the general regulations for officials and contract employees of the State, in order to give full expression to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value in both the public and private sectors. Section 191 of the Labour Code provides that “under equal conditions of work, vocational qualification and output, wages shall be equal for all workers regardless of their origin, sex, age or status”, which is more restrictive than the principle established by the Convention. The general collective labour agreement (CCGT) of 1974 refers to “equal conditions of work and output” (section 37) and Act No. 93-09 does not contain any provisions on equal pay. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraphs 672–681 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, in which it explains the importance and the scope of the concept of “work of equal value” for enabling a comparison of different jobs since, because of historical attitudes and stereotypes regarding women’s aspirations, preferences and capabilities, women and men do not occupy the same jobs. The Committee recalls that, in determining the respective values of two jobs under comparison, factors such as working conditions and vocational qualifications are relevant but it is not necessary for each factor to be equal in value as it is the overall value of the job that counts, namely when all the combined factors are taken into account. In addition, experience has shown that insistence on factors such as “equal conditions of work, skill and output” can be used as a pretext for paying women lower wages than men. The Committee recalls that, when there are discriminatory provisions in collective agreements, governments should take the necessary steps, in cooperation with the social partners, to ensure that provisions of collective agreements observe the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value (see 2012 General Survey, paragraph 694). The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that it has asked the social partners to communicate their views on the future revision of the Labour Code and the general collective labour agreement (CCGT) in order to align these instruments to international labour standards. Highlighting once again the importance of the concept of “work of equal value” and in view of the persistent pay gap, the Committee trusts that the Government, in the context of the announced revision of the Labour Code and the CCGT, will soon take the necessary steps to amend section 191 of the Labour Code and section 37 of the CCGT and also Act No. 93-09 of 18 January 1993 so that they expressly establish the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee recalls that appropriate data and statistics are crucial in determining the nature, extent and causes of unequal remuneration between men and women, to set priorities and design appropriate measures, and to monitor and evaluate the impact of such measures and make any necessary adjustments (see 2012 General Survey, paragraphs 887–891). Referring to the conclusions formulated by the Conference Committee in June 2009 and in view of the lack of information on this subject, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to collect and analyse data on wages for men and women and invites it to undertake an examination of the causes of the gender remuneration gap in order to devise appropriate remedial measures.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2018.]