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

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Barbados (Ratification: 1974)

The Committee notes with deep concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It expects that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments. The Committee informs the Government that, if it has not supplied replies to the points raised by 1 September 2022, then it may proceed with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the information at its disposal at its next session.

Repetition

Article 2 of the Convention. Minimum wages. The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it noted that the minimum wages for domestic workers had not increased for more than 20 years. The Committee notes from the latest Labour Force Survey data published by the Barbados Statistical Service that in 2015 the number of women domestic workers was almost four times the number of men employed in domestic work. The Committee welcomes the adoption of the Minimum Wage Act 2017 which establishes a Minimum Wage Board to advise the Minister on matters relating to the fixing of a minimum wages (section 3(1)), and which provides for the adoption of Minimum Wage Orders prescribing a national minimum wage or a minimum wage in respect of employees in a specified group or sector, or minimum terms and conditions of service (section 6(1)(a) and (b)). The Government indicates in its report that minimum wage fixing for employees in a specified group or sector will cover minimum wages of domestic workers. The Committee recalls that in the case of minimum wage fixing at the sector level, special attention is needed in the design or adjustment of sectoral minimum wage schemes to ensure that the rates fixed are free from gender bias, and in particular that certain skills considered to be “female” are not undervalued (see General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 683). The Committee requests the Government to: (i) indicate the measures adopted by the Minimum Wages Board to ensure minimum wage rates for specified groups of employees or sectors are fixed, based on objective criteria, free from gender bias, and that work in sectors with a high proportion of women, including domestic work, is not being undervalued in comparison with sectors in which men are predominantly employed; and (ii) provide copies of any Minimum Wage Orders adopted for specified groups or sectors. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the steps taken to adjust the minimum wages of domestic workers taking into account the principle of the Convention so as to ensure that their work is not being undervalued and rates of remuneration are determined without discrimination based on sex.

Article 2. Collective agreements. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that sex-specific terminology was used in wage classifications in some collective agreements, reinforcing stereotypes regarding whether certain jobs should be carried out by men or women, and thus increasing the likelihood of wage inequality. The Committee notes that sex-specific terminology was not used in the wage classifications of sample collective agreements submitted by the Government, but notes that the Government does not provide information on measures taken to ensure that such gender-neutral terminology is used in all collective agreements. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to take steps, in collaboration with employers’ and workers’ organizations, to systematically ensure that gender-neutral terminology is used in defining the various jobs and classifications in collective agreements, and that collective agreements promote the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, and to provide information on progress made in this regard.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee notes that the Government describes in general terms two job evaluation methods used by unionized companies, which are the Hay Guide Chart/Profile and the Factor methods. In this regard, the Committee recalls that when using such methods, particular care must be taken to ensure that job evaluations are free from gender bias, and that the selection of factors for comparison, the weighing of such factors, and the actual comparison carried out are not discriminatory, either directly or indirectly. It also stresses that the determination of criteria for job evaluations and their weighting are matters on which cooperation between employers and workers is particularly important (see General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 701, 705 and 706). Recalling the Government’s previous indication that objective job evaluations are undertaken in non-unionized companies as well as unionized companies, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on measures taken to ensure that job evaluation methods used by these companies, in both the public and private sectors, are free from gender bias, including with respect to the selection and weighing of factors for comparison. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on any such objective job evaluation methods used by the Minimum Wages Board to design or adjust sectoral or occupational minimum wage schemes, including for domestic workers.

Statistics. The Committee notes that the National Employment Policy recognizes the importance of identifying gender gaps in both the public and private sectors and the need to collect, analyse and disseminate gender-specific information to determine the evolution of gender gaps in the labour market. Recalling the importance of the regular collection of statistics in order to undertake an assessment of the nature, extent and evolution of the gender pay gap, the Committee asks the Government to provide information, disaggregated by sex, on the wage levels in the various sectors and occupations.