Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Senegal (Ratification: 1962)

Articles 1(b) and 2 of the Convention. Equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. Legislation and collective agreements. For around 15 years, the Committee has been emphasizing that section L.105 of the Labour Code, which provides that “where conditions of work, vocational qualifications and output are equal, wages shall be equal for all workers, irrespective … of gender”, does not give full effect to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value established by the Convention as it does not reflect the concept of “work of equal value”. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that section L.105 of the Labour Code “targets precisely work of equal value” and that “this same requirement is contained in the collective agreements”. It also indicates that aspects linked to the concept of “work of equal value” are always settled through social dialogue and collective bargaining between employers and workers with the support of the Government and that, after its adoption by the parties, each collective agreement is the focus of an outreach, training and information campaign among the actors concerned, in order to make it more accessible. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government refers to provisions prohibiting gender-based wage discrimination in the new national inter-occupational agreement adopted on 30 December 2019. The Committee emphasizes, however, that these provisions are not sufficient to give effect to the principle of the Convention as they do not take into account the concept of “work of equal value”. The Committee recalls that Article 2(2) of the Convention gives free choice as to how to give effect to the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value and that wage fixing processes and collective bargaining mechanisms can go a long way to eliminating gender pay gaps and wage discrimination, and to promoting equal pay, where such processes and mechanisms are consistent with the principle of the Convention itself. However, where the issue of equal pay is regulated by legislative provisions, these must not be more restrictive than the principle of the Convention, as they constitute an obstacle to the elimination of discrimination against women in respect of remuneration. Furthermore, noting the Government’s indication that the term “work of equal value” could be interpreted in different ways, the Committee recalls that the concept of “work of equal value”, while not defined as such in the Convention, implies that men and women who hold jobs which are different in content, involve different responsibilities and require different skills or qualifications, or different degrees of effort, and which are performed under different conditions but which, as a whole, are of equal value, must be paid equally. While criteria such as working conditions, vocational qualifications and output are among the relevant factors in determining the value of jobs, when two jobs (a female-dominated job and a male-dominated job) are compared, the value does not necessarily have to be the same for each factor – rather the determining value is the overall value of the job, that is to say when all factors are considered as a whole (added together). This principle is essential for eliminating discrimination and promoting equality, as women and men most often hold different jobs, under different working conditions and often in different establishments or for different employers. In this regard, in its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, the Committee provided as examples comparisons between the occupations of wardens in sheltered accommodation for the elderly (predominantly women) and security guards in office premises (predominantly men); or school meal supervisors (predominantly women) and garden and park supervisors (predominantly men). Noting that the steering committee for the Labour Code reform was set up in 2021, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to give full effect in the Labour Code to the principle of equal remuneration between men and women for work of equal value by amending section L.105, which contains provisions that are more restrictive than the principle enshrined in the Convention and section L.86(7), which provides that the principle of “equal work, equal wage” must be included in collective agreements. It requests the Government to specify how it shares with the social partners the contours of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value and how the social partners take into account this principle in collective bargaining on wages.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee recalls that the concept of equal value necessarily implies the adoption of a method that allows for the relative value of different jobs to be measured and compared objectively, whether at the enterprise or sector level, national level, in the framework of collective bargaining or through wage-setting mechanisms. The Government indicates that everything relating to vocational qualifications, classification and relative value of occupations at all levels, basic pay of each occupational category, conditions for career development and all other aspects associated with the equal value of work are determined in the freely chosen collective agreements of enterprises, sectors or branches between employers and workers. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to promote the use, by the social partners, of objective job evaluation methodology based on non-discriminatory criteria such as qualifications, effort, responsibility and working conditions to determine the relative value of jobs when setting wages and/or classifications. It requests the Government to carry out, in cooperation with the social partners, awareness-raising activities on the concept of “work of equal value” and the importance of using objective job evaluation systems, free from gender bias (namely under-evaluation of skills considered as “natural” for women, such as dexterity and those required in caring professions, and the over-evaluation of skills traditionally considered as “masculine”, such as physical force). It once again requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

Statistics. Since 2007, the Committee has been requesting the Government to provide full statistical information on the remuneration received by men and women in the various sectors and branches of activity. The Committee notes the statistical data provided by the Government on employment and wages. It notes, however, that these statistics are not disaggregated by sex and therefore do not allow for an evaluation of the extent of any wage gaps between men and women. The Committee recalls that appropriate data and statistics are crucial in determining the nature, extent and causes of discrimination and unequal remuneration, to set priorities and design appropriate measures, to monitor and evaluate the impact of such measures, and make any necessary adjustments. It recalls further that comparable statistics are necessary to enable an accurate assessment of changes over time (see 2012 General Survey, paragraph 891). The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary steps to collect and analyse data on the remuneration of men and women in the public and private sectors, disaggregated by sex, sector of the economy, and, if possible, occupational group, and to include this information in its next report. It also asks the Government to provide any information or survey available on the gender pay gap in the country.

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