Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Ratification: 1971)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2006, Publication: 95th ILC session (2006)

A Government representative provided an update on gender pay gap statistics. The gender pay gap, i.e. the difference in average hourly earnings of men and women working full time without overtime, was 13 per cent as measured. In 2004, this represented a decrease of 1.5 percentage points. Although the gap was at an all time low, the Government was committed to reducing it further and aimed to give women genuine choices in balancing work and home care responsibilities. Since 2004, the most important development had been the creation of the Women and Work Commission, set up to make recommendations on tackling the pay gap. The Commission brought together employers, trade unions and experts in a wide range of fields. The "Shaping a fair future" report, a major outcome, had been presented to the Prime Minister in February 2006 and featured recommendations. The Commission had undertaken a detailed examination of evidence on the pay gap and had agreed to 40 recommendations. It had investigated a range of causes and concluded that there was no single solution to narrowing the gap. It identified a set of solutions that addressed four key areas: (1) informed choice for schoolgirls; (2) combining family and work life; (3) combining lifelong training and learning; and (4) improving workplace practice. The recommendations ensured that action would be embedded in Government work through public service agreement targets, the operation of a Ministerial Committee and a review in 2007. Government action would build on existing policies. All 88 government departments and agencies had in fact completed equal pay reviews and produced an action plan in 2004. Departments were encouraged to monitor progress with action plans and review pay systems. These were indications that the work undertaken was producing a positive impact in reducing the pay gap.

Beyond the civil service, the Government encouraged a voluntary approach to pay reviews. Targets set aimed to have 35 per cent of large organizations completing an equal pay review by 2006. Figures from 2005 showed that 34 per cent of large organizations had completed a review and were on target for 2006. By 2008, 45 per cent of these organizations were targeted to complete an equal pay review. Meeting the target involved initiatives such as the Equal Pay Panel of Experts, led by the Trades Union Congress (TUC), and more strategic implementation of the Women and Work Commission recommendations. The initiative had shown positive results. Two large service companies had conducted or were conducting equal pay audits. The Government believed in a voluntary approach in the private sector, a view reinforced by the Women and Work Commission. The Commission had concluded that legislation was only part of the answer and believed that changing business culture and opening up more quality part-time work, were key determinants in narrowing the pay gap. The Government was carrying out a discrimination law review, which would examine the current anti-discrimination legislative framework and also the scope for simplifying the law on gender-related pay discrimination.

The Government was also committed to closing the part-time gender pay and opportunities gap. In April 2005, this gap was 41 per cent, 1.5 percentage points down from 2004. The pay gap between part-time women workers and full-time men workers was an unacceptable 40 per cent. Government initiative would help to establish more flexible working arrangements for women. A Government commissioned research project into the characteristics of the part-time gender pay gap, which also compared part-time work in the United Kingdom with the other countries, aimed to identify levers for change. Key findings of the report "The part-time penalty" were that the pay differential between women working full-time and part-time within occupations was very small, but occupational segregation of women full-time and part-time explained most of the pay penalty. Women who moved from full-time to part-time work were more likely to change employer and this was a downward move. But the report found that improving access to flexible working seemed to be the most effective way of tackling occupational segregation. The Government had taken steps to promote and enable flexible working, by introducing the right to request flexible working to all parents of children under six and of disabled children under 18. As a result, the percentage of women changing employers when they returned to work almost halved between 2002 and 2006. In addition, almost 70 per cent of the beneficiaries of the up-rating of the national minimum wage in 2004 were women. The Government was working with the social partners and other bodies to bring lasting change to the issue.

The Employer members recalled that the terms of Article 3, paragraph 3, of Convention No. 100, did not permit to conclude that different rates of remuneration corresponding to objective differences in the work performed violated the principles of the Convention. Gender discrimination in pay was an old and difficult problem, involving a broad number of issues. Furthermore, differences in pay were the result of a myriad of factors that also reflected individuals' choices and work preferences; hence non-discriminatory reasons also accounted for why women were paid differently than men. The progress made towards reducing the pay gap would be incremental, and it was important to recognize that legitimate differences in pay would always exist. As the Committee of Experts' 2005 observation did not comment upon the relevant laws, legislation was not at issue: the question, rather, turned upon which strategies to put into practice in order to most effectively address the gender pay gap. The issues with respect to part-time work were especially complicated. The same factors present in full-time work also existed for part-time work; for instance, part-time work also reflected, in part, the work choices women made based on child-rearing responsibilities, or whether or not they were the main breadwinner in the family. And although the information supplied by the Government revealed a significant wage gap between part-time female workers and full-time male workers, was this a general characteristic of all part-time and full-time work? Did the same gap exist between part-time male workers and full-time male workers? The principle of the Convention, though quite simple on paper, was quite complex in its implementation. Ensuring equal remuneration between women and men required ongoing vigilance, which the Government had amply demonstrated.

The Worker members welcomed the information provided by the Government in response to the comments of the Committee of Experts, mainly regarding future intentions. They stated that the Committee had examined the case the last time in 1988 and that the Government had regularly supplied, since then, information on measures taken to give better effect to this Convention, including initiative to reduce the gaps in earnings between men and women, which still averaged 17 per cent. They noted that in the public sector, the earnings gap between men and women was 9.8 per cent, while in the private sector it was 22.5 per cent. The same situation applied in other countries. It was worrying to note that in this area, progress was slow, if one considered that in 30 years the average earnings gap had been reduced by only 10 per cent. In addition, as the Committee of Experts had noted, it was in temporary and part-time work that the greatest differences were found (38 per cent on average). The Committee of Experts should be provided with information on measures taken to reduce the earnings gap in sectors that showed the most unacceptable proportions.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom said that women in the United Kingdom had believed that the passing of the Equal Pay Act in 1970 and the ratification by the United Kingdom of Convention No. 100 would mark the end of their struggle. But, currently, the average hourly earnings of women working full time was 17.1 per cent less than that of men. The average hourly earnings of women working part time were currently 38 per cent less than those of men working full time. Part-time work in the United Kingdom tended to be concentrated on particular grades and sectors which were proportionally paid much lower than full-time work. Forty-two per cent of women worked part time as opposed to 9 per cent of men, and men were concentrated in high-wage employment. The introduction of the national minimum wage was a welcome protection for low-paid workers. Pay inequality was discrimination under the Sex Discrimination Act. Her own trade union, UNISON, had 1.3 million members of whom 1 million were women. Many were in the public sector and low paid. But research showed that women spent their money on food, their children and household items and therefore paying them better would be better for the economy. It would also help avoid child poverty, increase the workforce, make it healthier and help make more taxes available for pensioners. Legislation was not enough. What the Trades Union Congress wanted in relation to Convention No. 100 was: mandatory pay reviews in all sectors, both public and private; transparency and tripartism in all future government commissions on women and pay; and for the Government to fully comply with the Convention in partnership with the social partners as the first step in dealing with child poverty and poverty among women.

The Worker member of Norway noted that the gender pay gap was a significant problem throughout the world, including Europe and the Nordic countries - a fact confirmed by the Director-General's Report to the Conference. The information supplied by the Government revealed that women's wages were still looked upon as supplementary to those of their husbands; this assumption was one reason for the persistence of the gender pay gap. Although the importance of women's work had been widely hailed, the statistical data showed that occupational segregation persisted, and that women continued to earn less than men for work of equal value. The Government had taken measures to realise the principle of equal pay, but further steps were required. It was the Government's solemn responsibility to take the necessary action, including legislative action, to reduce the gap in pay. The United Kingdom's Equal Opportunities Commission concluded that the Equal Pay Act had reached the limits of its usefulness, and radical new action was required. In this regard, it would be of great importance if the laws were amended to allow unions to bring equal pay claims on behalf of groups of women. Finally, the Government should take stronger measures to address the gender pay gap in the private sector.

The Employer member of the United Kingdom declared that the Confederation of British Industries (CBI) wished to highlight the fact that Convention No. 100 was a promotional Convention, ratified by the United Kingdom in 1971. He said that the case concerned equality of opportunity and treatment, and that Article 2 required the promotion and application to all workers of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value. He stressed that real progress had been made in reducing the gender pay gap in his country, and that imposing equal pay reviews was not the answer to gender pay problem. Requiring all employers to undertake equal pay reviews would be too onerous and at odds with Convention No. 100. In 2005, the Employment Trends Survey indicated that 25 per cent of all employers conducted an equal pay review compared to 19 per cent in 2004. Of the larger companies, 40 per cent had conducted an equal pay review with a further 17 per cent planning to do so in 2006, exceeding the government target. Referring to Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention, he said that it was clear that measures existed to promote the objective appraisal of jobs on the basis of work performed. The 2004 research carried out by the Equal Opportunities Commission's (EOC) showed that the percentage of employers who had designed their own review process had increased from 39 per cent to 75 per cent between 2002 and 2003, while the proportion using the EOC's own toolkit had nearly halved over the same period. The issue of the gender pay gap had been fully examined at national level by the Women and Work Commission, whose report did not find that employer discrimination was a cause behind the pay gap but that gender stereotyping and career choices in the education system were the most likely to have a negative effect on the gender pay gap.

The employers in the United Kingdom did not believe that the Equal Pay Act was at the limit of its usefulness or that radical new action was required. Women were protected from the injustice of unequal pay by several legal instruments and mechanisms. Free advice and assistance was also available from the Citizens Advice Bureau and free representation from bodies such as the Employment Lawyers' Association. If a woman succeeded in an equal pay claim before the Employment Tribunal, she was entitled to an award of a pay rise to the level of her male counterpart, identical beneficial terms, and compensation of up to six years' arrears of pay. The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 also protected employees from victimization for making a complaint about equal pay and there was no financial cap on the amount of a compensatory award under this Act. There were also 15 separate pieces of legislation and codes of practice that could be used in claims relating to pay discrimination. The speaker indicated that imposition of a duty on employers to promote gender equality and eliminate sex discrimination was not required as it was not a proactive measure and not a requirement of the Convention. It would also be contrary to the holistic approach to equality and diversity promoted by the Government. The employers in the United Kingdom had already embraced new ways of working. CBI research showed that 90 per cent of employers were now offering a range of flexible working patterns and the country had one of the highest rates of female participation (70 per cent) in the European Union. In 1990, only 8 per cent of managers were women but by 2003, that figure had risen to nearly 33 per cent.

The Government representative thanked speakers for their comments and concluded with three points: (1) in the 30 years since the Equal Pay Act had been passed, the gender pay gap had been reduced from 30 per cent to 17 per cent; (2) the Government had implemented policies for both the public and private sectors; and (3) the best way forward was through promotion of best practices.

The Employer members noted that the Government was making serious efforts on a complex problem that was not easy to solve.

The Worker members observed that the application of Convention No. 100 - a fundamental Convention that was promotional in nature - undoubtedly continue to pose significant problems in our societies, even though the principle of equal remuneration enjoyed widespread acceptance. As the Worker member of the United Kingdom explained, disparities in pay bore profound consequences for family life, professional life, and children's education and well-being. In fact, in most cases, flexibility was required principally on the part of women workers. The differences were less marked, of course, in those areas where public authorities had the means to intervene directly, as in the public sector. In the private sector, however, where the most egregious gaps in pay persisted, it was important for the Government, in concert with the social partners, to enact stronger measures to apply the Convention Given the scale of the problem, the numerous studies carried out in this area, and also the susidiarity principle which influenced EU policy planning, it was advisable that the Committee of Experts undertook an in-depth analysis of these issues.

The Committee noted the Government's statement and the ensuing discussion. It noted the concerns expressed by the Committee of Experts regarding the slow progress in reducing the pay gap between men and women in the private and public sectors, despite the fact that equal pay legislation had been in force since 1975. According to the information examined by the Committee of Experts, the gender pay gap was particularly high in the private sector.

The Committee noted the comprehensive information presented by the Government outlining the numerous and continued measures taken or envisaged with a view to reducing the gender pay gap in the private and public sectors. The Committee noted, in particular, the establishment of the Women and Work Commission which had delivered its report in February 2006. This report contained a set of recommendations to further reduce the gender pay gap, including through addressing gender stereotypes in education and work choice, occupational segregation by gender, measures to reconcile work and family responsibilities, and improving workplace practices and attitudes. With respect to the public sector, an Equal Pay Action Plan was being implemented. In the private sector, a target had been set for increasing equal pay reviews. Further, the Committee noted the Government's indication of the ongoing review of the sex discrimination and equal pay legislation and its determination to reduce the part-time pay gap.

The Committee took note of the debate that had enlightened, amongst other elements, the direct consequences of the gender pay gap on the living conditions of women workers, on their family life and especially on the worrying phenomenon of child poverty.

However, the Committee noted that different views had been expressed concerning the effectiveness of the measures taken so far in reducing the gender pay gap. While the Committee acknowledged that the implementation in practice of this fundamental Convention was complex and would have to be achieved over time, it also emphasized that effective measures needed to be taken in order to accomplish real progress in attaining the Convention's objective of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

The Committee therefore encouraged the Government to intensify its dialogue with the social partners on equal remuneration issues, including on taking more proactive measures to address the remaining gender pay differentials, particularly in the private sector.

Special attention should thereby be given to the temporary and part-time work sector, both for the importance of the gender pay gap and for the concentration of women in those sectors.

The Committee requested the Government to provide the information presented orally to the Committee of Experts in writing, as well as the information requested by the Committee of Experts. In this regard, the Government was also requested to report on the impact of the existing legislation, policies and programmes on the elimination of pay differentials between men and women resulting from direct or indirect discriminatory practices, contrary to the Convention.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1988, Publication: 75th ILC session (1988)

A Government representative noted that three separate points in the Committee of Experts' observation called for a response. The Committee of Experts had referred to the repeated concerns expressed by the TUC that class actions were not admissible in the United Kingdom and that tribunals may therefore have to consider large numbers of applications by individuals. This issue had been fully considered by the Conference Committee in 1986. He emphasised that his Government saw major problems of both principle and practice in providing for class actions. By the term class actions he referred to the possibility of challenging an allegedly discriminatory condition of employment embodied in a collective agreement by taking proceedings based on the circumstances of a single person which if successful would apply to the whole class of workers covered by the collective agreement. To provide for class actions would require a fundamental change in the United Kingdom's judicial procedure. Moreover there would be a general difficulty of ensuring that a plaintiff in a class action was wholly representative of all the individuals in that class. His Government therefore believed that the traditional, established "test case" procedure was a more satisfactory way of approaching this problem. Under the 1986 Sex Discrimination Act, provisions in non-legally binding collective agreements and rules of undertakings which provided for acts unlawful under either the Equal Pay Act or the Sex Discrimination Act were to be automatically void. In view of this Act and of his Government's views on class actions, it was difficult to see what purpose would now be served by giving the Central Arbitration Committee new powers to consider equal value cases. Reference to the Central Arbitration Committee could, in fact, slow down the process. Equal value issues were complex and there were different ways of removing this particular form of discrimination, such as negotiation. The Central Arbitration Committee was not likely to attempt to solve issues of equal remuneration in collective agreements at great speed or without extensive consultation. It would therefore be much quicker and far more satisfactory for the parties to get together and sort out their own solution, if necessary with a variety of different arrangements at local level. The Government representative did not accept the TUC's comments that there would be a need for numerous applications following a decision that a term in a collective agreement was discriminatory and therefore void. This suggested that employers would deliberately refuse to amend agreements unless faced by large numbers of individual applications to an industrial tribunal. Employers who would do this would be foolhardy as they would incur costs as well as pressure from the unions which were parties to the collective agreement. The Government representative stated that his Government would be most pleased to continue to supply copies of all appropriate decisions, both of tribunals and of the higher courts as requested by the Committee of Experts. Another point referred to in the Committee of Experts' report concerned the concept of the hypothetical man or hypothetical woman; this issue also had been fully discussed by the Conference Committee in 1986. The Government representative indicated, as he had done in 1986, that he would be very pleased to hear of any situation where the concept of the hypothetical man had been successfully applied. His Government was quite confident that the arrangements established in the United Kingdom for applying the principle of equal pay were in full compliance with the Convention.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom, speaking on behalf of the Workers' members, noted that the principle of equal pay was at present accepted in many countries, but its application had proven to be somewhat difficult and the issues involved were complex. He emphasised that Convention No. 100 could usefully be served by tripartism. It was unhelpful to have discussions on very complex issues in the present Committee if they had not been preceded by intensive tripartite discussions at the national level. There had been some tripartite discussions on the Convention but they had taken place before or during a general election period when the civil servant representing the Government was not in a position to make any commitment. The Workers' members therefore requested the Government to reintroduce tripartite discussions on this particular Convention in the hope of solving the issue.

The Employer member of the United Kingdom, speaking on behalf of the Employers' members, indicated that while the employers in the United Kingdom subscribed to the virtues of tripartite discussions, the issues which were presently before the present Committee would not necessarily benefit from further tripartite discussion. The issues which the trade unions had referred to this Committee and the Committee of Experts were in fact already satisfactorily resolved by the existing legislation in the United Kingdom. With respect to class actions she pointed out that they depended upon the validity of the membership of the class of persons who sought to be included within it. Employers might well wish to challenge that validity and this would take just as long as repeated and unnecessary tribunal cases. With respect to the concept of the hypothetical man, she could not support the notion of using the hypothesis that a man exists who does the same work or work of equal value as that of a woman and who gets more money for doing it when in fact there was no such man. On the basis of experience, she supported the law in existence which would not be improved by the proposals put forward by the trade unions, and she asked the present Committee to consider carefully before accepting the seemingly innocuous and obviously very tempting solution put before it by the Workers' members.

The Committee noted the measures taken in the field of equal remuneration which had been the subject of the Government's report and comments by the TUC on complex matters, reflected in the Committee of Experts' observation. It also noted the exchange of views on these measures which had taken place in the present Committee. It hoped that the Government would give further consideration in tripartite consultation to the possibility of adopting additional positive action and that it would supply information on measures taken or contemplated.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Unions Congress (TUC) received on 30 August 2021 and the Government’s reply.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Assessing and addressing the gender pay gap. The Committee asked the Government to provide: (1) detailed information on the evolution of the gender pay gap and the measures adopted to address its underlying causes; and (2) statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment. In its report, the Government refers to the data published by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) in the 2020 Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) and indicates that the gender pay gap among all employees has decreased from 17.4 per cent in 2019 to 15.5 per cent in 2020, being the lowest recorded measurement since the survey began in 1997. The gender pay gap for full-time employees has decreased from 9 per cent in 2019 to 7.4 per cent in 2020 and the gender pay gap for part time employees to minus 2.9 per cent. The part-time gender pay gap for part-time workers is therefore in favour of women. The Committee notes that, according to the ASHE, the widest pay gaps are found in the following occupations: precision instrument makers and repairers (46 per cent), production managers and directors in mining and energy (38 per cent), IT engineers (36 per cent), financial institution managers and directors (34 per cent), electronical and electronics technicians (31 per cent), health associate professionals (31 per cent), functional and financial managers and directors (30 per cent). The survey also indicates that the difference in pay is largest among higher earners, showing that the 90-percentile male employee (who earns more than 90 per cent of other men employees, but less than ten per cent) earns substantially more than the equivalent women employee. The Committee notes however that the figures presented in the ASHE exclude overtime from the calculations.

For Northern Ireland specifically, the Government provides the results of the 2020 Northern Ireland ASHE, with detailed statistics on the gender pay gap in the region. Pursuant to the survey, 2020 is the 11th consecutive year where full-time female employees in Northern Ireland earned at least as much as full-time males on average (46p more per hour). It is the only region where the gender pay gap for full-time employees is in favour of women. Considering all employees, the median female employees’ hourly rate is £1.01 lower than the median male employees’ hourly rate. The Committee also notes that the figures presented in the Northern Ireland ASHE do not consider overtime.

On the measures adopted, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that a significant cause of pay gaps is occupational segregation and it is therefore introducing a number of initiatives to make it easier for women to access high-paid jobs in all sectors, through the adoption of support programmes to this aim, such as specific protections for female-led-start-ups and new childcare support. The Government is also raising awareness on the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) careers, through programmes such as “STEM ambassadors”, 45 per cent of whom are women. It is also funding a programme to support computer science teaching that includes a Gender Balance in Computing programme which aims to identify interventions that schools can implement to improve girls’ participation in computing. The Government is also encouraging employers to offer initiatives such as flexible working and returners programmes which can improve prospects for both women and men. Noting this information, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide detailed statistics on the evolution of the gender pay gap and information on the nature and the impact of the measures adopted to reduce such gap. In this regard, the Committee also refers to its comments on the application of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) regarding equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women. Noting that the ASHE and the Northern Ireland ASHE do not consider overtime in the calculation of men and women’s respective hourly rates, the Committee asks once again the Government to collect and provide statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment.

Pay inequalities. Private and public sectors. The Committee asked the Government to provide information on the gender pay gap reporting and its impact in reducing gender pay inequalities in the private sector as well as any measures taken to promote the principle of the Convention. The Government explains that the Gender Pay Gap Regulations 2017 apply in Great Britain to all employers with 250 or more employees and require them to publish and report to the Government on the gender pay gap. The Government stresses that, following the introduction of this obligation, over 10,500 employers report annually on the gender pay gap, bringing much greater transparency and prompting national awareness on the matter. The reporting programme has been extremely successful with 100 per cent compliance during the first two years of reporting. However, the Committee notes that, due to the COVD-19 outbreak in 2020 and the associated impacts on the workforce, the Government Equality Office (GEO) and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHCR) decided to suspend the reporting obligation on the gender pay gap for 2020. For 2021, it decided that employers would have an additional six months to report. The Government further indicates that to support employers, it has published advice on how to diagnose their pay gap and develop an action plan, alongside evidence-based guidance on practical actions to close the gap. With regard to Northern Ireland, section 19 of the Employment Act (Northern Ireland) 2016, gave powers to the Department for Employment and Learning to establish a mandatory system for employers to report gender pay gap information. The Government indicates that this section has yet to be implemented due to a combination of two factors: the lack of an executive in Northern Ireland from January 2017 to January 2019 and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. However, the Government assures that the Executive of Northern Ireland remains committed to the implementation of section 19 of the Employment Act (Northern Ireland) 2016, in the context of the development of a new Gender Equality Strategy which is due to be published, after the approval of the Executive of Northern Ireland, in December 2021.

Further to the Committee’s request concerning the implementation of the reporting obligation on the gender pay gap, the Government indicates that in England, the regulations which apply to public bodies are the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017. These impose reporting obligations in relation to the gender pay gap. Public bodies in Scotland and Wales are covered by separate regulations. It adds that very high levels of compliance in the public sector were seen during the first two years of mandatory gender pay gap reporting (96 per cent and 94 per cent respectively by the deadline, eventually rising at 100 per cent compliance). Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the reporting obligation was suspended for 2020 and additional time was granted in 2021 for public bodies. The Government further indicates that all ministerial departments have published their action plans for reducing their gender pay gap, alongside the publication of their figures.

In its observations, the TUC indicates that there has been no progress concerning the issues raised in its previous observations regarding the low thresholds and lack of enforcement of reporting obligations on gender pay gaps. The TUC also expresses concern over the decision of the Government to push back the reporting deadline during the pandemic. For the TUC, this decision is part of a wider failure in the Government’s COVID-19 response to properly consider the impact of policy decisions on women. Specifically, the TUC is concerned that the Government is failing: (1) in its legal responsibilities, under the public sector equality duty, to ensure that its policies do not disadvantage or discriminate against women; (2) to carry out equality impact assessments on key policy decisions and to take into account the disproportionate impact of self-isolation on women, as fewer of them are eligible for statutory sick pay; and (3) to take into account the additional caring responsibilities placed on women as a result of health restrictions and policies on schools and childcare facilities closures. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its reply to the TUC’s observations, that the statutory review of the gender pay gap reporting regulations will be completed by Spring next year. The Government adds that pay gap reporting: (1) is being used as a proxy measure to enable employees and employers to assess whether the pay is fair; and (2) increases internal transparency about pay, and how pay decisions are made. However, the Government stresses that, being hugely reliant on the quality and breadth of diversity data collected by organizations, pay gap information is seen as just one of a range of metrics that employers can use, and that the most meaningful metrics to indicate fairness will differ depending on the size, nature and location of the organization. Regarding the Public Sector Equality Duty, the Government indicates that it is taking a number of steps to drive effective action, through the Equality Hub that coordinates a working group promoting compliance and sharing expertise, resources and best practice and that provides advice. The Government recalls that the legal requirement in the Equality Act is simply to have “due regard” to the matters set out in the Public Sector Equality Duty and that no specific action is prescribed to demonstrate that “due regard” has been had, though the courts have made it clear that recording the steps taken by the decision maker in seeking to meet the duty is an important evidential element in demonstrating legal compliance and that a systematic approach is good practice. With respect to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on equality, the Government states that it has offered an unprecedented level of support to both individuals and businesses during this pandemic, such as the Self-Employed Income Support Scheme (SEISS), and carefully considered the equality impact of both individual measures and fiscal events on those sharing protected characteristics, including gender. With regard to the evaluation of Shared Parental Leave and Pay, the Government adds that: (1) the fieldwork for much of the research was completed in February 2020; (2) the data are currently being processed; and (3) analysis of this data which will be published, has taken longer than expected due to the impact of COVID-19. The Committee notes this information. In this regard, the Committee stresses the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on the employment situation of women: in most countries, they have suffered greater rates of job loss generally and face significantly higher rates of unemployment than men. Moreover, women are over-represented in high-risk sectors, such as in care work, where demand for their services has increased due to the pandemic. As a result, they have been required to work excessive hours while also continuing to shoulder the primary burden of unpaid care work (General report of the Committee of Experts, adopted in 2020, paragraph 45). The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the measures adopted to address and raise awareness on pay inequality in the private sector. The Committee also asks the Government to provide detailed information on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to comparative rates of job loss among women and men; comparative rates of unemployment; the income of women and comparative work force participation in specific high-risk employment sectors where demand for services has led to required excess hours worked, and to provide information on whether the gender pay gap has widened because of the pandemic. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the findings of the evaluation of Shared Parental Leave and Pay. It also asks the Government to provide information on the main causes of gender pay gaps identified in the public sector and the results of the action plans adopted to reduce these gaps. The Committee also asks the Government to provide specific statistical data on pay levels in the public sector, disaggregated by sex and occupations.

Article 3. Pay audits. The Committee asked the Government to provide information on any case of application of the provisions of section 139A of the Equality Act 2010 and of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 on the possibility for an employment tribunal to order the employer to carry out an equal pay audit. The Government indicates that it is not aware of whether or not these provisions have been used, as most cases do not result in a judgment, either because they are settled outside courts or withdrawn. Recalling that equal plan audits are an important means of promoting and ensuring the implementation of the principle of the Convention, the Committee again asks the Government to indicate in some detail whether and how these tools are being used by the Employment Tribunals.

Articles 2(2)(c) and 4. Collective agreements. Cooperation with social partners. The Committee has repeatedly asked for information on any cooperation initiatives with social partners as well as any collective agreement that includes equal pay issues or promotes the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. The Government indicates that it has supported the business-led and voluntary Hampton-Alexander review published in February 2021 into increasing the number of women in senior positions in the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 350 companies. It also refers to the Sector Deals that are partnerships between the government and industries on sector-specific issues and indicates that a number of sector deals include ambitious commitments to increase the proportion of women. The Government further indicates that it met with the TUC to discuss gender equality legislation, evidence-based actions for employers and the TUC’s actions on gender diversity. The Committee recalls the importance of ensuring that the provisions of collective agreements do not result in indirect wage discrimination against women and that introducing equal pay clauses in collective agreements can be an efficient step to addressing the issue, (General survey of 2012, paras. 694 and 729). While taking note of the information provided by the Government, the Committee once again asks the Government to indicate whether and how collective agreements take into account the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value (such as through the introduction of objective job evaluation methods in the agreements, or the inclusion of equal pay clauses). It further asks the Government to continue to provide information on the manner in which it cooperates with workers’ and employers’ organizations to give effect to the principle of the Convention.

Enforcement. The Committee had asked the Government to provide information on any new development regarding the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 that had been quashed by the Supreme Court. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indications that the Ministry of Justice has frequent discussions with the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy on many aspects of Employment Tribunals and that no final decision has been made regarding the re-introduction of fees, on which any formal proposal would be subject to a public consultation process. Furthermore, as stated above, the Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that most cases do not result in a judgment, either because they are settled out of courts or withdrawn. The Committee stresses that the judicial process of individual complaints to courts or labour tribunals, including providing appropriate remedies and imposing sanctions, is an important feature of the enforcement of the Convention and that courts and tribunals have a crucial role in developing jurisprudence furthering the principles of the Convention, and in providing remedies including orders for equal remuneration, compensation, and reinstatement (see 2012 General Survey, paragraph 883). The Committee therefore asks the Government to adopt measures to ensure the efficiency of the remedies available, both in the private and public sector, before the Employment Tribunals and to provide detailed information on the number of complaints brought in relation to equal pay, as well as on the outcome of these cases (including on the number of settlements, number of withdrawals or dismissals, sanctions imposed and compensation granted).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union Congress (TUC) received on 26 October 2017.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to continue to provide information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors, and on the implementation of the specific measures taken to reduce it and to address its underlying causes. The Committee also requested the Government to include statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment. Regarding the latter, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government which shows that, in almost all sectors for which a reliable estimate is available, men work more paid overtime hours than women (an average of 1.3 hours weekly compared to 0.6 hours for women). The Committee notes that according to the Office of National Statistics (ONS), the gender pay gap for median gross hourly earnings (excluding overtime) varied from 18.2 per cent (after correction) in April 2016 to 18.4 per cent in April 2017 and 17.9 per cent in April 2018. According to the Government, this is the preferred headline measure of the pay gap as it reflects both full-time and part-time earnings and the distribution of employees between them, therefore representing best the overall position of women in the labour market. For the same period (April 2016 to April 2018), the gender pay gap for median earnings for full-time employees decreased from 9.4 per cent to 8.6 per cent. Similarly, the “negative” gender pay gap (in favour of women) among part-time employees varied from minus 6.1 per cent in April 2016 to minus 4.4 per cent in April 2018. The Government explains that average part-time earnings for women have grown faster since 2009 than average part-time earnings for men, indicating that high skilled and better paid women are taking part-time work to accommodate childcare responsibilities. As regards age groups, the Committee notes that figures from the ONS as of April 2018 show that the gender pay gap for full-time employees has virtually been eliminated (i.e. is close to zero) for those aged between 18 and 39 years whereas it widens as from the age of 40 years. For all employees (full-time and part-time), the gender pay gap widens after the age of 30 years and this coincides with an increase in working part-time from this age. The Government indicates that, since 1997, there has been an average annual decrease of almost 0.5 per cent point per year. During that period, according to the ONS, all age groups have seen narrowing gaps apart from those aged 60 years and over, a group for which the gap has widened since 2005. Data from the ONS on the gender pay gap by occupation for full-time employees as of April 2018 reveals that it is in favour of men for all the main occupation groups, ranging from 4.8 per cent for sales and customer service occupations to 23.9 per cent for skilled trades occupations. From a geographic point of view, the same data shows that the gender pay gap for full-time employees has fallen in all regions since 1998, most markedly in Northern Ireland where it is now in favour of women (minus 3.5 per cent). However, in London, where the pay gap was below the national average in 1998, it has narrowed at a slower rate (with virtually no change from 2008 to 2018) and is now the national widest, at 13.7 per cent. Also according to the ONS, the gender pay gap (median) for all employees in the private sector decreased from 24.5 per cent in 2016 to 23.8 per cent in 2018 whereas, in the public sector during the same period, it increased from 18.2 to 19 per cent. The Committee notes the Government’s declaration that it is committed to eliminating the gender pay gap completely. In this regard, it notes the information provided by the Government that voluntary, private and public employers with 250 or more employees are required by regulations to publish their data relating to their gender pay gap and gender bonus gap since April 2018. According to the Government, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has the appropriate enforcement powers if any large employer fails to comply with this obligation. It adds that, while it is not mandatory for employers to produce an action plan to tackle their gender pay gap, the non-statutory guidance strongly encourages them to do this on a voluntary basis. It is confident that increasing transparency around the differences in pay between women and men will encourage employers to scrutinize their own recruitment, remuneration, reward and staff development practices and ensure that steps are taken to close any identified pay gaps. The Government adds that it has adopted a package of measures to modernize workplaces and support the progression of women across all economic sectors, including by: (i) extending the right to ask for flexible working arrangements; (ii) introducing shared parental leave and pay in December 2014; (iii) announcing a funding of one billion pounds a year by 2019–20 for free childcare places and introducing tax-free childcare; (iv) supporting a business-led approach to developing the “female talent pipeline”; (v) announcing a fund of £5 million to increase the number of programmes supporting people returning to work after a career break in the public and private sectors; and (vi) supporting female entrepreneurs to start up and grow their business. In its observations, the TUC states that, due to the threshold of 250 employees for the gender pay gap reporting obligation, only one per cent of companies and 40 per cent of employees are covered, whereas a threshold of 150 employees would ensure a greater coverage and bring the reporting in line with that required by the Public Sector Equality Duty. The TUC also observes that the duty to report does not entail any obligation to adopt an action plan in order to reduce gender pay disparity nor is there any requirement to remedy identified gaps. In addition, according to the TUC, the legislation does not make provision for fines or any other sanction in the event of companies failing to comply with its reporting obligation. It adds that, in practice, very few couples took advantage of the shared parental leave (8,700 couples out of 285,000 potential beneficiaries announced by the Government that is 3.1 per cent). It considers that better support for fathers taking shared parental leave, supplemented by much stronger support for dedicated paternity leave, is necessary to increase the uptake of such leave which could change the established culture regarding parental leave and start to reduce the pay penalty for women. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors, on the implementation of the specific measures taken to reduce it and to address its underlying causes, and to continue to provide statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment.

Public sector. The Committee requested the Government, in its previous comment, to provide information on any development concerning the amendment of the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) Regulations 2011 as well as on any other specific measures adopted to reduce the existing gender pay gap in the public sector and to address its underlying causes. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that these Regulations were updated. The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017 entered into force on 31 March 2017, requiring specified employers in the public sector with 250 or more employees to publish their gender pay gap data by 30 March 2018. Although not compulsory, employers are strongly encouraged to include information on equality objectives connected to the gender pay gap in the data they publish. The Government states that it will closely monitor compliance and will maintain the dialogue with employers in the public sector to encourage them to take action. The Committee wishes to recall that paragraph 1(a) of the Equal Remuneration Recommendation, 1951 (No. 90), provides that appropriate action should be taken, after consultation of the workers’ organizations concerned, to “ensure” the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value to all employees of central government departments or agencies. The Committee also notes the observations of the TUC calling for governmental support to sectorial collective bargaining where pay is low and the number of women workers disproportionately high, such as social care, cleaning and catering (not only in the public sector). Recalling that, where the State is the employer or in a position to intervene in the wage-fixing process, it is obliged to ensure the application of the principle of the Convention and must take effective measures in order to accomplish real progress in attaining the Convention objective, the Committee asks the Government to provide information: (i) on the implementation of the obligation of employers in the public sector with more than 250 employees to provide their gender pay gap data and the results achieved; (ii) on any initiatives taken to raise awareness of employers in the public sector and encourage them to adopt action plans with specific equality objectives; and (iii) on any other specific measures adopted to ensure the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value in the public sector and to address the underlying causes of the existing gender pay gap.

Private sector. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government: (i) to provide information on the number of enterprises that participate in the initiative “Think, Act, Report” (which encourages voluntary gender equality reporting) and on the number of enterprises that have published their gender pay gap in accordance with section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 as well as their bonus gap, and that have adopted specific measures to reduce them; and (ii) to indicate whether it is envisaged that the requirement to publish the gender pay gap might be extended to enterprises with fewer than 250 employees. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that nearly 300 employers, collectively employing over two million persons, signed up to support the “Think, Act, Report” voluntary initiative set up in 2010. It notes, however, that the Government does not indicate how many of them actually voluntarily published their gender pay gap and bonus gap and what actions were taken in order to address the issue. The Government indicates that the Equality Act 2010 (Gender Pay Gap Information) Regulations 2017, which entered into force on 6 April 2017, require employers with 250 or more employees to publish annual information on the gender pay gap by 4 April 2018 and that information is available online. It adds that any employer, whatever its size, can voluntarily publish its gender pay gap figures on the Government’s online reporting service. Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s indication regarding initiatives in Wales to support women’s career advancement and reduce gender pay inequalities, such as the “Agile Nation 2” operation; the “Women Adding Value to the Economy” (WAVE) project; and the “Women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)” working group and board. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the gender pay gap reporting and its impact in reducing gender pay inequalities in the private sector as well as on any measures taken to promote vigorously the principles of the Convention with employers in the private sector.

Article 3. Pay audits. Previously, the Committee requested the Government to evaluate the results achieved by the implementation of section 139A of the Equality Act 2010 and of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 – which gives power to the employment tribunals to order that an employer undertake an equal pay audit in case of an equal pay breach – and to provide information thereon. It notes the Government’s statement to the effect that it is not aware that any such case has happened yet, probably due to the introduction of the above-mentioned regulations imposing gender pay gap reporting obligations. The Committee asks the Government to keep it informed of any case of application of the provisions of section 139A of the Equality Act 2010 and of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014.

Article 4. Cooperation with social partners. Noting that the Government merely refers to the Business in the Community initiative – which is a business-led charity whose membership is composed of employers from private and public sectors – the Committee reiterates its request for information on any cooperation initiatives with social partners as well as any collective agreement that takes into account equal pay issues or promotes the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Enforcement. The Committee, in its previous comment, requested the Government to provide information on the results of the post-implementation review of the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 – which introduced a fee to issue proceedings in the employment tribunals, following which the number of discrimination claims had dropped drastically (from 31,389 in 2013–14 to 17,858 in 2015–16) – as well as on the decision of the Supreme Court on the issue. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Supreme Court found employment tribunals fees unlawful and quashed the Order. It further notes the Government’s statement that it is carefully considering this judgment before deciding how to proceed, taking into account access to justice, the cost of litigation and the manner in which tribunals are funded. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any new development in that regard.

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

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. The Committee notes that according to the Office of National Statistics (ONS), the gender pay gap for median hourly earnings (excluding overtime) decreased from 19.3 per cent in April 2015 to 18.1 per cent in April 2016. For the same period, the gender pay gap (for median earnings) for full-time employees decreased from 9.6 per cent to 9.4 per cent. In April 2016, men working full time earned, on average, more than women (£578 per week compared with £480). Women were paid more, on average, among part-time employees considered separately, resulting in a “negative” gender pay gap (minus 6 per cent in April 2016). In April 2016, the gender pay gap for full-time high earners (top decile) employees was of 18.8 per cent while, for low earners (bottom decile) the gap was of 4.9 per cent. According to the ONS, this is connected to the introduction of the National Living Wage, as women tend to work in lower-paid occupations. The gender pay gap for full-time employees in the private sector decreased from 17.4 per cent in 2015 to 16.6 per cent in 2016. According to the ONS, the gender pay gap in the public sector has also decreased from 11.8 per cent to 11.3 per cent. The Government indicates in its report that, due to existing occupational gender segregation, women work in sectors with lower salaries. For example, they represent 80 per cent of employees working in human health and social work, where the average weekly pay is nearly £40 inferior to the national average. On the contrary, men represent 69 per cent in the information, communications and technology sector and 74 per cent in the energy supply sector where the average weekly pay is considerably higher. The gender pay gap by sector ranges from 26.3 per cent in the electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply sector to minus 11.9 per cent in the mining and quarrying sector. Moreover, the higher the level of occupation, the higher the gender pay gap (20.6 per cent in the managerial category and 5.1 per cent in the caring, leisure and other service occupations). In this regard, the Committee notes that according to the Government Equalities Office report “Trailblazing Transparency: Mending the Gap”, women still only make up around 34 per cent of senior managers, where the greater amount of bonuses are paid. The report also indicates that, taking into account that more than £40 billion had been paid in bonuses in 2014–15, the Government will require larger employers to regularly report on bonuses as part of gender pay reporting regulation. The Government indicates that in order to make further progress in the representation of women in senior positions, different measures have been adopted, such as: the extension of the right to require flexible working time to all employees and flexible parental leave; increased childcare facilities and tax-free childcare; support to women’s entrepreneurship and work with business to reach 33 per cent of women on boards by 2020. The Government further indicates that it is taking measures to tackle social and cultural root causes of the gender pay gap, including addressing occupational segregation. These include, among others, the revision of statutory guidance for schools on careers; the publication of the parents’ guide “Your Daughter’s Future”, as well as measures to encourage gender diversity in careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The Committee welcomes the existing consultation and evaluation procedures applied to the legislation and other implementation measures in order to ensure their effectiveness as well as the continued efforts made by the Government to collect and analyse the nature, extent and evolution of the gender pay gap in the country. The Committee notes, however, that the gender pay gap, while decreasing, remains significant. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors, and on the implementation of the specific measures taken to reduce it, in particular with respect to the higher-paid positions and in sectors where women are mainly employed, and to address its underlying causes. Noting that according to the ONS overtime is not included in the gender pay gap calculations, because this would alter the calculations as men are more likely to work overtime, the Committee requests the Government to include statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment.

Public sector. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), provided for in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, which requires public bodies to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and advance equality of opportunity. The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) Regulations 2011, which apply to England and Wales, require public bodies to publish relevant information showing compliance with the Equality Duty, and to set equality objectives, although gender pay gap reporting is not mandatory. The Committee notes that according to the Government Equalities Office, the Government intends to amend the Regulations in order to include a mandatory requirement for public bodies with 250 or more employees to undertake gender pay gap reporting including data on the bonus pay gap and information on the proportions of male and female employees in each salary quartile. Information concerning overtime and benefits in kind will not be included in the calculation. With respect to the concrete measures already adopted to comply with the PSED, the Government indicates that each public authority decides its own particular actions to meet the equality duty and that this information is not collected. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development concerning the amendment of the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) Regulations 2011 and the inclusion of a mandatory requirement to undertake a gender pay gap report, as well as on any other specific measures adopted to reduce the existing gender pay gap in the public sector and to address its underlying causes.

Private sector. With respect to the implementation of section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 relating to the publication of information concerning the pay of employees for the purpose of showing differences in the pay of male and female employees, the Committee recalls that the Government had adopted the “Think, Act, Report” initiative which encouraged voluntary gender equality reporting. The Committee notes in this respect that the Government Equalities Office carried out a consultation in 2015 concerning the implementation of this initiative. In its response to the consultation, the Government indicated that although nearly 300 employers signed the initiative, only seven had voluntary published their gender gap. The Committee notes with interest that, as a consequence, the Government subsequently adopted the Equality Act 2010 (Commencement No. 11) Order 2016, which brings into force section 78 of the Equality Act requiring larger employers (more than 250 employees) to publish information on their gender pay gap. The Government considers that by identifying those employers that are consistently and successfully ensuring that women are achieving their full potential, good practices can be recognized and disseminated. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of enterprises that participate in the “Think, Act, Report” initiative. It also requests the Government to indicate whether the Order has actually entered into force, and if so to provide information on the number of enterprises that have published their gender gap in accordance with section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 as well as their bonus gap, and that have adopted specific measures to reduce them. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether it is envisaged to extend the requirement to publish the gender gap to enterprises with fewer than 250 employees.

Article 3. Pay audits. The Committee previously noted that pursuant to section 139A of the Equality Act 2010, employment tribunals have the power to order that an employer undertake an equal pay audit in case of an equal pay breach. The Committee notes the adoption of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 which establish the circumstances in which the employment tribunals must order that a pay audit be carried out, the manner in which it should be carried out and the cases in which tribunals may impose a penalty. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it is unaware of any pay audit having been ordered since the entry into force of the Regulations and consequently cannot provide information on the impact of this procedure on gender pay adjustments. In the context of the general procedures to evaluate the existing measures to reduce the gender pay gap, the Committee requests the Government to evaluate the results achieved by section 139A of the Equality Act 2010 and of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 and to provide information thereon.

Article 4. Cooperation with social partners. Noting that the Government does not provide information in this regard, the Committee requests it once again to provide information on any cooperation initiatives with social partners as well as any collective agreement that takes into account equal pay issues or promotes the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Enforcement. The Committee referred in its previous comments to the adoption in July 2013 of the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 which introduced a requirement to pay a fee to issue proceedings in the employment tribunals, following which the number of discrimination claims had dropped drastically, in particular, those related to equal pay issues. On that occasion, the Committee requested the Government to ensure that all workers were able in practice to assert their rights before the courts and to review the existing fees. The Committee notes the Government’s explanation according to which the objective of the order was to reduce costs of the tribunals on the taxpayer and to encourage parties to use other methods of dispute resolution (such as the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service), while maintaining access to justice. The Government acknowledged that the number of claims was considerably lower than those filed before the adoption of the Order, but indicated that other factors such as changes to the employment law, the availability of alternative dispute resolution services and the improving economy also had an impact on the reduction of complaints. Moreover, in June 2015, the Government initiated a post-implementation review of the Order to examine its results and the fulfilment of the initial objectives. The Committee further notes that the Court of Appeal has dismissed the claims filed against the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunals Fees Order 2013, and that the issue is currently before the Supreme Court. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of the post-implementation review of the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 as well as on the final decision on the complaint pending before the Supreme Court. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the evolution concerning the number of complaints filed before the employment tribunals throughout the years.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. The Committee notes that according to the Office of National Statistics, the hourly earnings (median full time gross hourly earnings) excluding overtime of employees were by April 2013, £13.60 for men and £12.24 for women, and that the pay gap between male and female full-time employees was 10 per cent. It has risen by 0.5 percentage points from the previous year. The Government indicates that overtime is not included in the calculation because it can skew the results given that men work relatively more overtime than women and that women are more likely to work part time. In addition, full-time jobs tend to be higher paid than part-time jobs. The Committee notes from the “Think, Act, Report” second year report that 87 per cent of men and 57.1 per cent of women work full time and 13 per cent of men and 42.9 per cent of women work part time, where full-time workers earn £13.03 per hour and part-time workers £8.01 per hour, reflecting an earnings gap of 39.53 per cent. The largest gender pay gap in 2013 concerned the health professionals (25.7 per cent), the business, finance and related associate professionals (20.4 per cent) and the sales, marketing and related associate professionals (16.6 per cent). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the measures adopted or envisaged to tackle the overall gender pay gap, including plans to extend the right to request flexible working hours and establish a flexible parental leave system in 2015. The Government also refers to the recommendations of the Women’s Business Council, following which the Government adopted the Women and the Economy Action Plan in November 2013. The Government also launched, in October 2012, the Equality Advisory and Support Service aimed at individuals who need expert advice and support on discrimination issues, including sex discrimination. The Government also refers to pay audits as an instrument to address the gender pay gap. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and the private sectors, and on the concrete measures taken to address the existing gender pay gap and the impact thereon. Please include statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment, and its impact on the wages of men and women. The Government is requested, in particular, to provide information on the measures taken to address the underlying causes of the gender pay gap, including the vertical and horizontal occupational segregation and the impact of these measures on the participation of women in the labour market, especially in full-time jobs as well as the obstacles encountered. Please provide information on the implementation of the Women and the Economy Action Plan and the Equality Advisory and Support Service in relation to the application of the principle of the Convention and the gender pay gap.

Public sector. The Government refers to the measures adopted for the implementation of the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) and the possibility to impose specific duties to meet the main aims of the PSED. The Committee notes that in England, Wales and Scotland, these specific duties require, among others, to publish objectives and results to demonstrate compliance, and in Scotland they also require the undertaking of an equality impact assessment of policies and practices. In Wales, the Equality Act 2010 (Statutory Duties) Regulations 2011 include a requirement for public authorities to collect information on gender pay differences. The Welsh Strategic Equality Plan of 2012 also includes an objective oriented at the identification of gender pay gaps. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the concrete measures and actions carried out in the framework of the PSED to implement the principle of the Convention. Please provide information on the impact of these measures on the existing gender pay gap in the public sector.

Private sector. The Committee notes that instead of adopting a mandatory approach through section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 (which provides the enactment of regulations to require employers to publish information relating to the pay of employees for the purpose of showing differences in the pay of male and female employees), the Government has opted for a voluntary mechanism to enhance pay transparency: the “Think, Act, Report” a voluntary, business-led initiative which encourages voluntary gender equality reporting to private sector organizations, particularly those with 150 or more employees. The Committee notes that some enterprises have already signed up to this initiative which covers more than 2 million employees. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken and activities carried out in the framework of the “Think, Act, Report” and their concrete impact on tackling the gender pay gap in the private sector. Please also provide information on the specific measures adopted to enhance transparency in the payment of salaries as well as on any other measures adopted in the private sector to identify and correct pay gaps.

Article 3. Pay audits. The Committee notes the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA), section 98 of which inserts a new section 139A into the Equality Act 2010 giving employment tribunals the power to order that an employer undertake an equal pay audit in any case where the tribunal finds that there has been an equal pay breach. Section 139A also provides that further provisions can be made by regulations concerning the content of an audit, the powers and duties of a tribunal for deciding whether its order has been complied with as well as any circumstances in which an audit may be required to be published or may be disclosed to any person. The Committee notes the enactment of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 on 1 October 2014. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the impact of section 139A of the Equality Act 2010 on the number of equal pay audits carried out, the incidence of these pay audits in gender pay adjustments and any obstacles encountered.

Article 4. Cooperation with social partners. The Committee notes that the Welsh Government with the Wales Trades Union Congress have placed trade union equality representatives (TUER) across the public sector to ensure that organizations meet their statutory equality obligations and work towards creating the fairest and most diverse public sector workforce. The representatives also encourage employers to make equality and diversity part of mainstream collective bargaining. In February 2014, the total number of public sector equality representatives across seven trade unions stood at 346. An All Wales Trade Union Equality Representative Network Officer was appointed in May 2013 for a two-year period funded by the Welsh Government. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on similar cooperation experiences with social partners as well as on any collective bargaining processes or collective agreements concluded taking into account equal pay issues and promoting the principle of equal remuneration between men and women for work or equal value.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Enforcement. The Committee notes the adoption in July 2013 of the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 which introduces a requirement to pay a fee to issue proceedings in the employment tribunals. The Committee notes from statistics compiled by the Ministry of Justice that since the introduction of these fees, the number of discrimination claims has dropped considerably, in particular, those related to equal pay issues. The Committee notes that comparing the period from October to December 2013 (the first quarter after fees were introduced) with the period October–December 2012, 83 per cent fewer equal pay claims were accepted by the employment tribunals. The Committee notes that the decreasing trend has continued. The Committee understands that the introduction of fees has been challenged before the judicial authorities. The Committee considers that the establishment of high fees to file claims on discrimination may constitute an obstacle to the enjoyment of the rights embedded in the Convention, particularly as this affects mainly those most disadvantaged and vulnerable to discrimination. The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all workers are able, in practice, to effectively assert their rights before the courts. In this regard, the Committee asks the Government, based on the existing statistics concerning the steep reduction of complaints concerning discrimination filed before the employment tribunals, to review the existing fees established by the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 and to continue to provide statistical information on the evolution of the filing of equal pay claims. Please provide information on the judicial decision concerning the claim filed before the judicial authorities concerning the employment tribunal fees.

The Committee is raising other matters 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.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. The Committee notes that according to the Office of National Statistics, the hourly earnings (median full-time gross hourly earnings) excluding overtime of employees were by April 2013, £13.60 for men and £12.24 for women, and that the pay gap between male and female full-time employees was 10 per cent. It has risen by 0.5 percentage points from the previous year. The Government indicates that overtime is not included in the calculation because it can skew the results given that men work relatively more overtime than women and that women are more likely to work part time. In addition, full-time jobs tend to be higher paid than part-time jobs. The Committee notes from the “Think, Act, Report” second year report that 87 per cent of men and 57.1 per cent of women work full time and 13 per cent of men and 42.9 per cent of women work part-time, where full-time workers earn £13.03 per hour and part-time workers £8.01 per hour, reflecting an earnings gap of 39.53 per cent. The largest gender pay gap in 2013 concerned the health professionals (25.7 per cent), the business, finance and related associate professionals (20.4 per cent) and the sales, marketing and related associate professionals (16.6 per cent). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the measures adopted or envisaged to tackle the overall gender pay gap, including plans to extend the right to request flexible working hours and establish a flexible parental leave system in 2015. The Government also refers to the recommendations of the Women’s Business Council, following which the Government adopted the Women and the Economy Action Plan in November 2013. The Government also launched, in October 2012, the Equality Advisory and Support Service aimed at individuals who need expert advice and support on discrimination issues, including sex discrimination. The Government also refers to pay audits as an instrument to address the gender pay gap. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and the private sectors, and on the concrete measures taken to address the existing gender pay gap and the impact thereon. Please include statistics on the prevalence of overtime, disaggregated by sex and sector of employment, and its impact on the wages of men and women. The Government is requested, in particular, to provide information on the measures taken to address the underlying causes of the gender pay gap, including the vertical and horizontal occupational segregation and the impact of these measures on the participation of women in the labour market, especially in full-time jobs as well as the obstacles encountered. Please provide information on the implementation of the Women and the Economy Action Plan and the Equality Advisory and Support Service in relation to the application of the principle of the Convention and the gender pay gap.

Public sector. The Government refers to the measures adopted for the implementation of the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) and the possibility to impose specific duties to meet the main aims of the PSED. The Committee notes that in England, Wales and Scotland, these specific duties require, among others, to publish objectives and results to demonstrate compliance, and in Scotland they also require the undertaking of an equality impact assessment of policies and practices. In Wales, the Equality Act 2010 (Statutory Duties) Regulations 2011 include a requirement for public authorities to collect information on gender pay differences. The Welsh Strategic Equality Plan of 2012 also includes an objective oriented at the identification of gender pay gaps. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the concrete measures and actions carried out in the framework of the PSED to implement the principle of the Convention. Please provide information on the impact of these measures on the existing gender pay gap in the public sector.

Private sector. The Committee notes that instead of adopting a mandatory approach through section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 (which provides the enactment of regulations to require employers to publish information relating to the pay of employees for the purpose of showing differences in the pay of male and female employees), the Government has opted for a voluntary mechanism to enhance pay transparency: the “Think, Act, Report” a voluntary, business-led initiative which encourages voluntary gender equality reporting to private sector organizations, particularly those with 150 or more employees. The Committee notes that some enterprises have already signed up to this initiative which covers more than 2 million employees. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken and activities carried out in the framework of the “Think, Act, Report” and their concrete impact on tackling the gender pay gap in the private sector. Please also provide information on the specific measures adopted to enhance transparency in the payment of salaries as well as on any other measures adopted in the private sector to identify and correct pay gaps.

Article 3. Pay audits. The Committee notes the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA), section 98 of which inserts a new section 139A into the Equality Act 2010 giving employment tribunals the power to order that an employer undertake an equal pay audit in any case where the tribunal finds that there has been an equal pay breach. Section 139A also provides that further provisions can be made by regulations concerning the content of an audit, the powers and duties of a tribunal for deciding whether its order has been complied with as well as any circumstances in which an audit may be required to be published or may be disclosed to any person. The Committee notes the enactment of the Equality Act 2010 (Equal Pay Audits) Regulations 2014 on 1 October 2014. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the impact of section 139A of the Equality Act 2010 on the number of equal pay audits carried out, the incidence of these pay audits in gender pay adjustments and any obstacles encountered.

Article 4. Cooperation with social partners. The Committee notes that the Welsh Government with the Wales Trades Union Congress have placed trade union equality representatives (TUER) across the public sector to ensure that organizations meet their statutory equality obligations and work towards creating the fairest and most diverse public sector workforce. The representatives also encourage employers to make equality and diversity part of mainstream collective bargaining. In February 2014, the total number of public sector equality representatives across seven trade unions stood at 346. An All Wales Trade Union Equality Representative Network Officer was appointed in May 2013 for a two year period funded by the Welsh Government. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on similar cooperation experiences with social partners as well as on any collective bargaining processes or collective agreements concluded taking into account equal pay issues and promoting the principle of equal remuneration between men and women for work or equal value.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2015.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Enforcement. The Committee notes the adoption in July 2013 of the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 which introduces a requirement to pay a fee to issue proceedings in the employment tribunals. The Committee notes from statistics compiled by the Ministry of Justice that since the introduction of these fees, the number of discrimination claims has dropped considerably, in particular, those related to equal pay issues. The Committee notes that comparing the period from October to December 2013 (the first quarter after fees were introduced) with the period October–December 2012, 83 per cent fewer equal pay claims were accepted by the employment tribunals. The Committee notes that the decreasing trend has continued. The Committee understands that the introduction of fees has been challenged before the judicial authorities. The Committee considers that the establishment of high fees to file claims on discrimination may constitute an obstacle to the enjoyment of the rights embedded in the Convention, particularly as this affects mainly those most disadvantaged and vulnerable to discrimination. The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all workers are able, in practice, to effectively assert their rights before the courts. In this regard, the Committee asks the Government, based on the existing statistics concerning the steep reduction of complaints concerning discrimination filed before the employment tribunals, to review the existing fees established by the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 and to continue to provide statistical information on the evolution of the filing of equal pay claims. Please provide information on the judicial decision concerning the claim filed before the judicial authorities concerning the employment tribunal fees.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2015.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Legislative developments. The Committee notes that the majority of the provisions of the Equality Act 2010, which repealed the Equal Pay Act 1970, came into force in October 2010, with some provisions, including those related to the public sector equality duty, scheduled to enter into force in April 2011. The Committee notes that the Equality Act, as in the Equal Pay Act, continues to provide for equal pay between men and women for like work, work rated as equivalent, and work of equal value, and that work of equal value continues to be defined in terms of the demands with reference to factors such as effort, skill and decision-making (section 65). It also notes that where a question arises before the employment tribunal as to whether one person’s work is of equal value to another’s, the tribunal may require a panel of independent experts to prepare a report on the question (section 131). The Committee notes that pursuant to section 78 of the Act, “Regulations may require employers to publish information relating to the pay of employees for the purpose of showing whether, by reference to factors of such description as is prescribed, there are differences in the pay of male and female employees.” The Government indicates that with the adoption of the Equality Act 2010, the gender equality duty, which required public authorities to prepare and publish a gender equality scheme and to consider the need for objectives to address the causes of the gender pay gap, has been replaced by a new single equality duty.

The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the following:

• (i) the practical application of the Equality Act 2010 as it relates to the principle of the Convention, including information on the cases before the employment tribunal and the courts, and the outcome thereof;
• (ii) whether regulations have been adopted pursuant to section 78 of the Equality Act, or whether such regulations are envisaged, and if so, please provide the details of such regulations;
• (iii) the impact of the Equality Act on the public sector equality duty, in particular regarding the preparation of gender equality schemes and determining objectives to address the gender pay gap;
• (iv) details of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s enforcement strategy for the equality duty as it relates to equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Gender pay gap. The Committee notes that according to the Office for National Statistics, the gender pay difference for all employees decreased from 22 per cent in 2009 to 19.8 per cent in 2010 (based on median hourly earnings); in 2010, the gender pay difference was 19.2 per cent in the public sector and 27.5 per cent in the private sector. The largest gender pay difference was for the financial and insurance activities sectors at 39 per cent. In terms of occupations, the Committee notes that the narrowest pay gap in 2010 was for professional occupations (1.6 per cent) and the widest for skilled trades occupations (31.4 per cent). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the gender pay gap has continued to decrease among lower-paid jobs, and that many women (who in 2009 made up two-thirds of those in jobs paid at the national minimum wage) have positively benefited from the national minimum wage. The Committee notes further from the Equality and Human Rights Commission Triennial Review 2010 “How fair is Britain” that “occupational concentration is consistently found to be one of the most powerful factors in explaining the gender pay gap”, with men concentrated in higher paying industries and women in the public sector, as well as considerable vertical segregation, with women being under-represented in “better-paying, higher status managerial and professional occupations”. In response to its previous request, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has accepted 40 out of the 43 recommendations of the Women and Work Committee, including recommendations aimed at tackling gender inequality in the education system, and gender segregation and stereotyping in education, training and career advice, and assisting workers, both women and men, to balance work and family life, including through promoting quality flexible and part-time working arrangements. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors, as well as on the steps taken to address the pay gap and vertical and horizontal occupational segregation. Please also continue to provide information on the measures taken by the Government Equality Office, the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the Women and Work Committee, as they relate to equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value, and the impact of such measures. The Committee also requests specific information on the concrete steps taken to follow-up on the recommendations of the Women and Work Committee that have been accepted by the Government, and the impact of such measures on reducing the pay gap and occupational segregation.

Promoting equal pay in the private sector. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Equality Act 2010 promotes equal pay in the private sector as it prevents the enforcement of pay secrecy clauses in employment contracts. The Government also states that it is “keen to develop further voluntary approaches to help employers identify and correct wage gaps”, and that the search will continue for further ways to encourage transparency, and on gathering and publishing evidence on the effectiveness of the equal pay audits. The Committee also notes the continuation of the Scottish “Close the Gap” partnership project, focusing on large private sector companies, with an emphasis on awareness raising and encouraging action to address occupational segregation, as well as a similar partnership campaign in Wales. With respect to public procurement, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that approximately £220 billion is spent each year by the public sector through contracts with the private sector, and one of the objectives of the Government Equalities Office is to promote and achieve equality through public procurement. The Committee asks the Government to provide specific information on how the principle of the Convention is promoted in the private sector through public procurement and the impact of such measures. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information to clarify how in practice the application of section 77 of the Equality Act 2010 prohibiting pay secrecy clauses has promoted equal pay. Noting that the Government intends to develop further voluntary approaches to help employers identify and correct pay gaps, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on progress made in this regard. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on the nature and number of equal pay reviews, and any further steps taken to encourage transparency and to gather and publish evidence on the effectiveness of equal pay audits. Please also continue to provide information on the steps taken in cooperation with employers’ and workers’ organizations to give effect to the principle of the Convention.

Part IV of the report form. Enforcement. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to the Equality Act 2010, employment tribunals are able to make recommendations in discrimination cases to benefit the wider workforce and prevent similar discrimination from occurring in future (section 124). The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the number and outcome of equal pay claims. Please also provide specific information on any broader recommendations of the employment tribunals to benefit the wider workforce, and the impact of such recommendations. Please also indicate any other measures taken or envisaged to address the barriers faced by those bringing equal pay claims, as previously raised by the Committee.

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

The Committee notes the adoption of the Equality Act 2010, which repeals a number of legislative texts concerning equality and non-discrimination, including the Equal Pay Act 1970. The Committee will examine the new legislation in detail together with the Government’s report, at its next session. The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Measures to tackle the overall gender pay gap. The Committee notes the Government’s continued commitment and efforts in addressing the causes of the gender pay gap and asks the Government to provide information on the progress made in implementing the 2009 recommendations of the Women and Work Commission (WWC), and their impact on reducing the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors.

Equal remuneration in the public sector. The Committee notes with interest the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Public Authorities) (Statutory Duties) Order 2006 and the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Public Authorities) (Statutory Duties) (Scotland) Order 2007 which require public authorities to prepare and publish a gender equality scheme and to consider the need for objectives to address the causes of the gender pay gap; gender equality schemes are to be reviewed every three years. It also notes with interest the statutory Gender Equality Duty Code of Practice for England and Wales which came into effect in April 2007. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that while some progress has been made in meeting the gender equality duty for public authorities, there appears to be a need to set clearer objectives and establish appropriate monitoring mechanisms. The Committee further notes that the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published guidance materials and equal pay audit kits and that guidance material on job evaluation and the management of change in pay systems would be available in 2009. It is also developing its own enforcement strategy in respect of the gender equality duty. The Committee asks the Government to report on the results achieved with respect to the implementation of gender equality schemes by public authorities, and in particular with respect to the need to address the causes of the gender pay gap, as well as on the EHRC’s enforcement strategy for the gender equality duty.

Measures to address the gender pay gap in the private sector. The Committee recalls its previous comments concerning the need for more proactive measures to address the gender pay differentials in the private sector. The Committee notes that the Government continues to favour voluntary equal pay reviews (EPR) in the private sector and has undertaken a series of actions to address the gender pay gap. The Committee notes the promulgation of good practices by employers and the publication of a gender equality checklist. The Committee further notes the findings of the Equal Pay Reviews Survey 2008 carried out by the EHRC highlighting that EPR activity has increased since 2005. However, the survey also indicates that EPR activity remains low in the private sector (23 per cent as compared to 43 per cent in the public sector) and that more work is needed to convince employers that there may be unconscious or institutional bias in their pay structures. The Committee asks the Government to continue to report on trends with respect to the number and impact of equal pay reviews and on the measures taken to reduce the gender pay differentials in the private sector. Please also indicate any measures taken to raise awareness among employers of the need to address gender biases in their pay structures. The Committee asks the Government to continue to report on trends with respect to the number and impact of equal pay reviews and on the measures taken to reduce the gender pay differentials in the private sector. Please also indicate any measures taken to raise awareness among employers of the need to address gender biases in their pay structures.

Part-time and flexible work. The Committee recalls the high gender pay gap for part-time workers and the WWC’s recommendation for a UK-wide quality part-time work change initiative so that more skilled occupations and professions are open to part-time and flexible work. The Committee notes that notwithstanding the £500,000 quality part-time work initiative funded by the Government, the WWC, in its 2009 report, expressed disappointment about the progress made in the private sector (where the gender pay gap is still at 39.9 per cent). The WWC recommends that, by March 2010, the Government Equalities Office (GEO) should take the lead on developing a work programme to promote quality part-time and flexible work. Considering the continuing wide pay gap between part-time female workers and full-time male workers, the Committee asks the Government to step up its efforts in narrowing this gap, and to report on the progress made by the GEO in developing a work programme to promote quality part-time and flexible work, as well as its implementation.

Part IV of the report form. Equal pay claims. The Committee recalls the WWC’s recommendation (2006) to extend the legislation to introduce the concept of the hypothetical comparator and to introduce generic or representative equal pay claims. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that it remains unconvinced of the need for hypothetical comparators and considers that the current equal pay framework and remedies are appropriate for dealing with cases where work is acknowledged to be different and of different value. The Committee notes, however, from the Equal Pay Reviews Survey 2008 that it is still relatively uncommon for employees to seek to tackle employers over equal pay issues. In addition, the EHRC is of the view that the complaints-led model places undue burdens on individual women and on Employment Tribunals; and that there is a need for representative equal pay claims as well as for the concept of hypothetical comparator (Equal pay strategy and position paper, March 2009). The Committee asks the Government to consider extending the legislation to introduce the concept of hypothetical comparators in equal pay claims and introducing generic or representative equal pay claims. In the meantime, the Committee asks the Government to indicate any other measures taken to address the barriers faced by women bringing equal pay claims.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Measures to tackle the overall gender pay gap. The Committee notes with interest the adoption, in 2006, of the Government Action Plan for narrowing the gender pay gap. It also notes the adoption of the Work and Families Act 2006, which came into effect in April 2007. The Committee notes that the Action Plan was reviewed in 2008 and that according to the report entitled “Shaping a fairer future. A review of the recommendations of the Women and Work Commission three years on” (2009), reasonable progress has been made in the public sector and in supporting women to access skills and training. However, according to the report further action is needed to eradicate gender stereotypes in the education system and to support families to balance work and family life. With a view to making further progress in narrowing the gender pay gap, the Women and Work Commission (WWC) made detailed recommendations for government action in these areas, many to be achieved by March 2010. The Committee notes the Government’s continued commitment and efforts in addressing the causes of the gender pay gap and asks the Government to provide information on the progress made in implementing the 2009 recommendations of the WWC, and their impact on reducing the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors.

Equal remuneration in the public sector. The Committee notes with interest the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Public Authorities) (Statutory Duties) Order 2006 and the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Public Authorities) (Statutory Duties) (Scotland) Order 2007 which require public authorities to prepare and publish a gender equality scheme and to consider the need for objectives to address the causes of the gender pay gap; gender equality schemes are to be reviewed every three years. It also notes with interest the statutory Gender Equality Duty Code of Practice for England and Wales which came into effect in April 2007. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that while some progress has been made in meeting the gender equality duty for public authorities, there appears to be a need to set clearer objectives and establish appropriate monitoring mechanisms. The Committee further notes that the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published guidance materials and equal pay audit kits and that guidance material on job evaluation and the management of change in pay systems would be available in 2009. It is also developing its own enforcement strategy in respect of the gender equality duty. The Committee asks the Government to report on the results achieved with respect to the implementation of gender equality schemes by public authorities, and in particular with respect to the need to address the causes of the gender pay gap, as well as on the EHRC’s enforcement strategy for the gender equality duty.

Measures to address the gender pay gap in the private sector. The Committee recalls its previous comments concerning the need for more proactive measures to address the gender pay differentials in the private sector. The Committee notes that the Government continues to favour voluntary equal pay reviews (EPR) in the private sector and has undertaken a series of actions to address the gender pay gap. The Committee notes the promulgation of good practices by employers, the publication of a gender equality checklist and the proposed provisions in the Equality Bill providing greater transparency in respect of employers’ information on pay, enabling positive action and allowing for Employment Tribunals to make recommendations affecting the wider workforce. The Equality Bill as presently drafted also contains a reserve power to make regulations requiring mandatory reporting by non-public sector employers with 250 or more employees about their gender pay gap, if no progress on gender pay transparency is made by the end of a four-year period. The Committee further notes the findings of the Equal Pay Reviews Survey 2008 carried out by the EHRC highlighting that EPR activity has increased since 2005. However, the survey also indicates that EPR activity remains low in the private sector (23 per cent as compared to 43 per cent in the public sector) and that more work is needed to convince employers that there may be unconscious or institutional bias in their pay structures. The Committee notes the provisions on equal pay in the Equality Bill, which it hopes, will be adopted soon. In the meantime, the Committee asks the Government to continue to report on trends with respect to the number and impact of equal pay reviews and on the measures taken to reduce the gender pay differentials in the private sector. Please also indicate any measures taken to raise awareness among employers of the need to address gender biases in their pay structures.

Part-time and flexible work. The Committee recalls the high gender pay gap for part-time workers and the WWC’s recommendation for a UK-wide quality part-time work change initiative so that more skilled occupations and professions are open to part-time and flexible work. The Committee notes that notwithstanding the £500,000 quality part-time work initiative funded by the Government, the WWC, in its 2009 report, expressed disappointment about the progress made in the private sector (where the gender pay gap is still at 39.9 per cent). The WWC recommends that, by March 2010, the Government Equalities Office (GEO) should take the lead on developing a work programme to promote quality part-time and flexible work. Considering the continuing wide pay gap between part-time female workers and full-time male workers, the Committee asks the Government to step up its efforts in narrowing this gap, and to report on the progress made by the GEO in developing a work programme to promote quality part-time and flexible work, as well as its implementation.

Part IV of the report form. Equal pay claims. The Committee recalls the WWC’s recommendation (2006) to extend the legislation to introduce the concept of the hypothetical comparator and to introduce generic or representative equal pay claims. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that it remains unconvinced of the need for hypothetical comparators and considers that the current equal pay framework and remedies are appropriate for dealing with cases where work is acknowledged to be different and of different value. The Committee notes, however, from the Equal Pay Reviews Survey 2008 that it is still relatively uncommon for employees to seek to tackle employers over equal pay issues. In addition, the EHRC is of the view that the complaints-led model places undue burdens on individual women and on Employment Tribunals; and that there is a need for representative equal pay claims as well as for the concept of hypothetical comparator (Equal pay strategy and position paper, March 2009). The Committee asks the Government to consider extending the legislation to introduce the concept of hypothetical comparators in equal pay claims and introducing generic or representative equal pay claims. In the meantime, the Committee asks the Government to indicate any other measures taken to address the barriers faced by women bringing equal pay claims.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. Equal remuneration in the public sector. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Equality Act, 2006, establishing the Commission for Equality and Human Rights and introducing a “gender equality duty” for public authorities to eliminate sex discrimination and promote equality of opportunity between men and women. It notes that more specific duties are under consideration as part of a framework to achieve gender equality in the public sector. One of the proposals would oblige public authorities to develop and periodically review a policy on equal pay arrangements between men and women – including measures to ensure fair promotion and to tackle occupational segregation. Noting that the gender equality duty comes into force in April 2007, the Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the specific duties adopted to address the gender pay gap. Please also include information on the activities carried out by the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Commission for Equality and Human Rights to enforce and raise awareness about this gender equality duty on their impact in achieving equal pay between men and women throughout the public sector.

2. Part IV of the report form. The Committee welcomes the summaries of equal pay decisions included in the Government’s report and asks for similar information to be included in subsequent reports. The Committee notes from the case statistics for the Employment Tribunal (GB) that a total of 3,943 equal pay cases were filed in 2004–05 – more than twice the number of cases filed in the previous reporting year (1,563). Despite this dramatic rise in caseload, the Committee notes that there were in fact fewer successful cases at hearing (20) than in the previous reporting year (51). While recognizing that a significant number of cases in 2004–05 were settled or withdrawn and that each case must be decided separately on its own merits, the Committee recalls the reference by the Women and Work Commission to the barriers women face in bringing equal pay claims, referred to in its observation, and asks the Government to shed some light on this trend in equal pay cases before the Employment Tribunal (GB), both in terms of the number of cases filed and the number of cases successful at hearing.

3. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The Committee notes the legislative changes in Northern Ireland affecting the Equal Pay Act (NI), 1970, and the new rules governing the hearing of equal value cases by industrial tribunals to promote greater efficiency in the complaints process. It also notes the ongoing pay gap campaigns in both Wales and Scotland. The Committee asks the Government to continue to supply information on the practical application of the Convention in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report, along with its statement before the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2006, the ensuing discussion and the conclusions of the Conference Committee. It also notes the communication dated 31 August 2006 submitted by the Trades Union Congress (TUC) on the application of the Convention.

1. The Committee notes with interest the report prepared by the Women and Work Commission (WWC) entitled “Shaping a Fairer Future” which considers a diversity of factors that have contributed to the persistent pay gap between men and women along with a range of solutions towards narrowing this gap. The Committee notes that the solutions identified in the report address four key areas including: (1) informed choices for girls at school; (2) combining work and family life; (3) lifelong training and learning; and (4) improving workplace practice. It notes, in particular, the discussion relating to the barriers that women face in lodging equal pay claims. On this matter, the Commission recommended that consideration be given to extending the concept of the hypothetical comparator to equal pay claims – a mechanism already in place under the Sex Discrimination Act – allowing women to draw on other evidence showing what a man might be paid in order to bring a claim. The WWC also recommends that the introduction of generic or representative equal pay claims be considered as a way to enable women to bring joint claims. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that it is determined to address all the causes of the pay gap highlighted in the WWC’s report, and requests information on its plan of action for implementing the WWC’s recommendations and what impact the measures taken have had on addressing the root causes of pay inequality between men and women. The Committee also asks for a copy of the Commission’s follow-up report, once available, assessing the implementation of its recommendations. Please also provide information on the results of the Discrimination Law Review with respect to the Equal Pay Act 1970 and whether the Government intends to introduce additional procedural options for equal pay claimants such as those noted above.

2. Measures to address the wage gap between men and women in the private sector. With regard to the wage gap between men and women, the Government reports that, in 2005, it stood at 22.6 per cent in the private sector compared with 13.3 per cent in the public sector. The Committee notes that the Government and the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) continue to encourage private sector employers to carry out equal pay reviews (EPRs) on a voluntary basis. It notes from research conducted by the EOC in 2005, however, that only a third of large organizations in both the private and public sectors have completed an EPR, falling short of the EOC’s target of 50 per cent by the year 2003. The research also showed that, if the current rate continues, the Government will not meet its own EPR target for large public sector firms by 2008 (45 per cent). In light of this slow progress, the Committee recalls the conclusions of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in 2006 encouraging the Government to take more proactive measures to address the remaining gender pay differentials, particularly in the private sector. It also notes the TUC’s submission arguing for the introduction of mandatory pay reviews in the private sector in order to require employers to demonstrate that they respect the principle of equal remuneration and that their pay systems are not discriminatory. Given that the Government’s efforts to encourage employers to carry out voluntary equal pay reviews have not met expectations, and considering the Government’s indication that it is not convinced of the need for a gender equality duty in the private sector, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on what additional measures it is taking or considering to ensure the application of the principle of equal remuneration in the private sector, particularly in light of the recommendations of the WWC. The Government is also asked to keep the Committee informed of the progress made towards encouraging more private sector employers to conduct equal pay reviews, along with details on the contribution of the EOC and Equal Pay Panel of Experts in this regard. Please also indicate what further measures have been taken to engage with the social partners on this matter as encouraged by the Conference Committee in its conclusions.

3. Part-time and flexible work. The Committee notes that, in 2005, the average hourly pay for women working part time was 61.4 per cent of the average hourly pay of men working full time – a situation which the WWC considers unacceptable. According to the WWC, women returning to the labour market after time spent looking after children often encounter difficulty finding work that matches their skills. Those looking for part-time work crowd into a narrow range of lower-paying occupations due to a lack of quality part-time jobs. Often they have to change employer and occupation – and accept lower pay – to get part-time work. Furthermore, research by the EOC on flexible work showed that working part time has a detrimental and long-term impact on women’s earnings. The Government indicates that there has been a greater use of flexible work arrangements, which has significantly benefited women as well as men. It reports that the introduction of a right to request flexible work has seen 30 per cent more mothers and three times as many fathers working on a flexitime basis as compared to 2002. This in turn has enabled mothers in particular to stay with the same employer after returning to the labour market rather than having to look for lower-paid part-time work elsewhere. While acknowledging these positive developments, the Committee notes the WWC’s numerous recommendations touching on part-time and flexible work arrangements, including its recommendation that the Government establish a UK-wide quality part-time work change initiative to support new measures aimed at achieving a culture change, so that more senior jobs – particularly in the skilled occupations and the professions – are more open to part-time and flexible work. The Committee also notes in this regard the conclusion of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards that special attention should be given to the temporary and part-time work sector, having regard to both the gender pay gap and the concentration of women in that sector. The Government is asked, in light of the WWC’s recommendations, to indicate what measures it is adopting or considering to further address the significant pay disadvantages facing part-time women workers.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The remuneration gap and the minimum wage. Further to its observation, the Committee notes from the findings set out in the Low Pay Commission’s 2005 annual report that the minimum wage has exerted a major influence in narrowing the pay gap between men and women. It notes in particular that two-thirds of those benefiting from the increases in the minimum wage in 2004 were women, a large number of whom were part-time workers. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on its minimum wage policies and their effects on reducing the pay gap between men and women.

2. Flexible working time. Further to the above, the Committee notes that, although the minimum wage policy has had a positive effect at the lower end of the earnings distribution, it is at the highest levels of pay where women remain significantly disadvantaged in comparison with men. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the biggest pay gap between men and women continues to exist in the managers and administrators group where the gap actually widened by 2.1 per cent between 2001 and 2002. It notes the Government’s indication that increased provision of flexible working time should lead to a reduction in the remuneration gap by providing women with a greater choice of employment opportunities beyond low-paid and low-status work. Noting the right available to workers to request flexible working time under the Employment Act (2002), the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether this measure has helped women gain access to or retain managerial or administrator positions in both the public and private sectors. In this respect, it asks the Government to provide statistics where possible on the number of workers, disaggregated by sex, who benefit from flexible working arrangements and to state under what circumstances employers have refused to grant such requests and what sanctions are applied in the case of refusals.

3. Lower earnings limit. With respect to the national insurance lower earnings limit (LEL) the Committee notes that for 2004-05 contributions became payable on earnings from £91 per week whereas entitlement to national insurance benefits started accruing at £79 per week. Noting that 1.4 million women earn less than the lower limit as compared to 0.5 million men, the Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that it intends to continue to look at the effect of low pay on the ability of workers to accrue retirement benefits. Given that the segregation of women in some low-paid work, along with persistent pay gaps (particularly among part-time female workers), probably contributes to the greater inability of women as compared to men to meet the lower earnings limit, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the LEL and on any measures it is pursuing to ensure that women workers are not unfairly disadvantaged with respect to accruing retirement benefits.

4. Enforcement. The Committee notes the court cases on equal pay referred to in the Government’s report. It also notes, further to its observation, the measures adopted by the Government to streamline the procedures for equal value tribunal cases such as the appointment of specialist tribunal panels, the use of case management discussions, the provision of specialist legal training along with longer time limits for bringing cases under the Equal Pay Act. The Committee notes, however, that, in the opinion of the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), the current legislation places a burden on individuals to fight for equal pay in a manner that is costly for both employers and employees and that does not work. The Committee, therefore, asks the Government to indicate what impact these new streamlining measures have had on the number and outcome of equal pay complaints (including the time and cost involved) and what other measures it is pursuing or contemplating to assist workers seeking redress for discriminatory levels of pay. Please also continue to provide relevant judicial decisions, particularly concerning any recent cases dealing with the revised code of practice on equal pay.

5. Equal Opportunities Commission. The Committee notes that the EOC has identified addressing the existing remuneration gap as its top priority for 2005-08. In this regard, the Committee notes that the EOC is investigating three related causes, which together form the basis of its work on pay differentials - i.e. pregnancy discrimination, flexible working time and occupational segregation. It also notes from the EOC’s annual report (2005) the increased membership of the "equal pay forum" and the ongoing "close the pay gap" campaigns in Scotland and Wales. In this respect, the Committee invites the Government to continue to provide up-to-date information on the equal pay activities and outcomes of the EOC, including in Scotland and Wales. In particular, it asks the Government to provide information on the ongoing investigations of the EOC and, to summarize the key findings and recommendations relating to equal pay between men and women for work of equal value, along with an indication of the anticipated follow-up measures.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. Remuneration gap. The Committee notes from the 2005 annual earnings survey produced by the Office of National Statistics that women’s average hourly pay (excluding overtime) was 17.2 per cent less than men’s. The report also indicates that the pay gap between men and women remained smaller in the public sector than in the private sector (9.8 per cent and 22.5 per cent respectively in 2003). The Committee notes that since the Equal Pay Act became operational in 1975, the pay gap has only moderately declined by 10.7 per cent. It notes, in this regard, the concern expressed by the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) regarding the latest pay gap figures, which it considers to be grim. According to information provided by the EOC, the Act has now reached the limits of its usefulness and radical new action is required to protect another generation of women from the injustice of unequal pay.

2. Measures to address the existing remuneration gap. Further to the above, the Committee notes that the Government is of the opinion that new policies on shortening pay ranges, developing transparent pay progression systems and addressing pay issues in recruitment and promotion will have an immediate impact on further reducing the relatively small pay gap in the civil service. With regard to the private sector, the Committee notes that the Government continues to favour voluntary pay reviews and has taken measures aimed at further reducing the pay gap such as the development of an equal pay review kit for employers and an equal pay questionnaire procedure for employees, the creation of a statutory right to request flexible working time and the adoption of new regulations to streamline equal pay tribunal cases. However, the Committee understands from the EOC that two-thirds of employers have no plans to review their pay systems to see if they deliver equal pay. The EOC is of the view that the Government must take more proactive steps to address this persistent problem through the introduction of a duty on employers to promote gender equality and eliminate sex discrimination in the workplace. While welcoming the measures taken by the Government, the Committee nevertheless remains concerned about the slow progress in reducing the pay gap between men and women. It asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the measurable impact of these initiatives for reducing pay inequalities between men and women, particularly in the private sector, and whether, in light of the EOC’s conclusions, it is considering more proactive measures to address the persistent pay gap. Noting also that government departments and agencies expect the civil service policies to take between three and five years to mature fully, the Committee asks the Government to provide up-to-date information on the implementation and impact of these policies along with information on subsequent equal pay reviews undertaken in the public sector.

3. Part-time and flexible work. The Committee notes that the hourly wage gap between part-time female workers and full-time male workers remains significant (38.5 per cent in 2005). In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government commissioned a research project to look at the characteristics of the pay gap with respect to part-time work, comparing the characteristics of part-time work in the United Kingdom with other European Union countries. It also notes that the EOC published an interim report based on its own investigations into flexible and part-time work entitled "Part-time is no crime - so why the penalty?" The Committee notes from this report that over the past 30 years of equal pay legislation, the percentage by which part-time female workers earn less per hour than full-time working men has not meaningfully changed (from 41.6 per cent in 1975 to 38.5 per cent in 2005). The report points out that 78 per cent of part-time workers are women, who suffer the most in terms of the effect on earnings and earning power and that the unequal use of flexible work creates a two-tier system (the "mummy track"), which reinforces the pay gap between men and women. Noting the interim recommendations from the EOC investigation, the Committee asks the Government to indicate what additional measures it intends to take to address this persistent part-time pay gap. It further asks the Government to keep it informed as to the ongoing investigations of the EOC into part-time work, and to provide information on the key findings and follow-up measures from its research into the characteristics of the part-time pay gap in the context of the European Union.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report as well as the detailed additional documentation provided.

1. Further to its observation, with reference to its previous comments on the impact of the National Minimum Wage Act of 1998 on equal pay between men and women workers, the Committee notes that the third report from the Low Pay Commission concluded that the minimum wage had had the greatest effect on the gender pay gap since the 1970 Equal Pay Act. Noting that the Low Pay Commission will continue to monitor and evaluate the impact of the minimum wage and had to submit a report in 2003, the Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of it in its next report.

2. With regard to the National Insurance Lower Earnings Limit (LEL), the Committee notes that for 2002-03 the LEL has been set at £75 per week and the primary threshold at which national insurance contributions are to be paid at £89 per week. The Government states that those with earnings between the LEL and the primary threshold are treated as if they have paid contributions on their earnings to protect their contributory benefit position. Employees earning between the LEL and the primary threshold therefore do not pay any contributions but continue to build up entitlement to contributory benefits. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the LEL and the primary threshold and to indicate in its next report how they have helped in reducing the pay gap between men and women for work of equal value.

3. With regard to the Committee’s previous comments concerning amendments to speed up and simplify the tribunal procedures for equal pay claims, the Committee notes that the Sex Discrimination (Indirect Discrimination and Burden of Proof) Regulations of 2001 now provide that it will be for employers to prove that they have not discriminated against their employee and that the new Employment Act of 2002 introduces the equal pay questionnaire procedure which will make it easier for individuals to obtain information from employers regarding whether they are receiving equal pay. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on any other changes to the tribunal procedures proposed and to indicate the impact of these and other amendments on simplifying and speeding up tribunal procedures for equal pay claims. Noting that a new code of practice on equal pay has come into force in December 2003, which includes a model for carrying out voluntary equal pay reviews as well as information on grievance procedures and equal pay for pregnant women and women on maternity leave, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on practical use of the new code by employers. Noting also the court rulings concerning equal pay in the Government’s report, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on court cases dealing with equal pay claims, including cases where the code of practice on equal pay has been used as evidence.

4. The Committee notes the information referred to in the Government’s report on the action undertaken, in cooperation with the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), to further equal pay and to equip workers and employers to undertake equal pay reviews. It notes in particular the launching by the EOC and Opportunity Now (an employers’ organization committed to gender equality) of an equal pay forum, including in Northern Ireland, and asks the Government to continue to provide information on how it cooperates with the social partners in promoting the principle of the Convention as well as information on the results achieved in this regard by each equal pay forum.

5. The Committee notes that the Equal Opportunities Commission for Northern Ireland is developing an equal pay toolkit to assist employers in carrying out pay reviews and asks the Government to supply a copy of the kit, once completed.

6. With respect to tendering in the public sector, the Committee notes that the new Guidance on best value and procurement. Handling of workforce matters in contracting provides that best value authorities in England (and some in Wales) have to observe the requirements of existing equality legislation and recommends that in the procurement process they take account of the practices of potential service providers in respect of equal opportunities, where it is relevant to the delivery of the service under the contract. The Guidance also provides that contractors should be excluded from the tendering exercise if they have been convicted of a criminal offence, have committed an act of grave misconduct or have breached the requirements of discrimination legislation. Noting further the various legislative and other initiatives in England, Wales and Scotland to improve the treatment of employees working on local government contracts, including the proposed reform of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations, 1981 (TUPE), the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the impact of these initiatives on the application of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value in public tendering, and to provide copies of any relevant circulars, guidance or implementation orders adopted under section 19 of the Local Government Act of 1999.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report as well as the detailed additional documentation attached.

1. The Committee notes from the Government’s report and studies undertaken in 2002 by the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) on pay and income in Great Britain that there has been only limited progress in closing the gender gap. The Committee notes that in 2002 women’s average hourly earnings (excluding overtime) amounted to 81.6 per cent of men’s in Great Britain, which was an increase of only 0.7 per cent from 1999. The gender pay gap is smaller in the public (10 per cent) than in the private sector (28 per cent) and, amongst occupations, the hourly pay gap is particularly wide for administrators and managers (30 per cent) and in sales occupations (28 per cent). The gender pay gap is narrowest in clerical and secretarial occupations (2 per cent). In Northern Ireland, women’s average earnings (excluding overtime), after a slight increase in 2000 (87.6 per cent), reduced to 86.6 per cent of men’s in 2001. 

2. The Committee notes the various initiatives taken by the Government and the EOC to reduce the gender pay gap, including initiatives to promote good practice and encourage employers to undertake equal pay reviews (EPRs). The Government indicates that government departments are leading by reviewing their pay systems as part of the Modernizing Government Programme and that a target of April 2003 was set for all departments to prepare action plans for reviewing equal pay systems. The Committee notes that the Government continues to be in favour of a voluntary approach to pay reviews because many employers are currently not in a position to undertake them and adequate tools are needed to conduct reviews properly. It notes in this regard that the EOC has developed and tested the Equal Pay Review Kit for employers to carry out EPRs but that EOC research on "Monitoring Progress Towards Equal Pay" (March 2003) indicates that the majority (54 per cent of the large and 67 per cent of the medium-sized employers) do not plan to carry out a pay review; and that secrecy about pay is still widespread. According to the EOC, there is a need to continue to exert pressure on organizations to carry out EPRs, to ensure that their pay structures and practices are transparent and to reassess, at a future date, the impact reviews have on the pay of women and men. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on any action taken or envisaged, including action taken by the EOC, to ensure more transparency in pay structures and practices so as to be in a better position to assess existing pay inequalities. It also asks the Government to continue to provide information on any action taken or envisaged to narrow the pay gap between men and women, including measures to encourage employers to carry out equal pay reviews, and to indicate the impact of these reviews on the pay of women and men in both the private and public sectors.

3. Further to the above, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the relative position of women part-time workers has worsened in comparison with male full-time workers and that the average hourly wage for women working part time dropped to 58.6 per cent of the average hourly wage of male full-time workers in 2001. The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it had already noted that in 1999, of all part-time workers, 54.7 per cent women part-time workers earned £66 per week or less, compared to only 9.5 per cent of male workers. The Committee notes with interest that section 5(1) of the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations of 2000 prohibit employers from treating part-time workers less favourably than comparable full-time workers in terms of their conditions of employment, unless different treatment can be objectively justified. It also notes that the regulations were amended in 2002, allowing part-time workers to compare themselves with a full-time colleague, irrespective of whether either party’s contract is permanent or fixed-term, and removing the two-year limit to the period that an employment tribunal may take into consideration when making an award against an employer for having treated a part-time worker less favourably in terms of access to an occupational pension scheme. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application and enforcement of the part-time work regulations and their impact on the application of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value.

The Committee is raising related and other points in a request directly addressing the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report as well as the additional documentation provided. It also notes the comments of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), which had been forwarded to the Government on 30 November 2000 for any reply it may have wished to make.

1. The Committee notes from the statistical information provided by the Government that in 1999 women’s average hourly earnings (excluding overtime) amounted to 80.9 per cent of men’s earnings in Great Britain, an increase of only 0.9 per cent from 1998, while women’s average hourly earnings (excluding overtime) in Northern Ireland increased by 2.6 per cent to 86.9 per cent in 1999 compared with 1998. The Committee further notes from the Northern Ireland New Earnings Survey, April 1998 and 1999 that, among managers and administrators in Northern Ireland, women workers earned 34.61 per cent less than men in 1998. In comparison, in 1999, women workers earned 34.14 per cent less than men. Among the professional categories women workers earned 13.96 per cent less than men in 1998 but this gap fell to 10.75 per cent in 1999. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide statistical information in order to enable it to evaluate the implementation of the principle of equal remuneration of men and women workers for work of equal value. It also asks the Government to supply information on any promotional measures taken to narrow the wage gap between men and women workers.

2. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it intends to introduce changes to employment tribunal procedures to simplify and speed up equal pay claims. It notes that the Trades Union Congress (TUC) welcomes the Government’s plans to change the tribunal procedures, but that the TUC is of the opinion that these measures will not be enough to address the gender pay gap between men and women workers. The TUC refers to research undertaken by the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) which reveals that at the current rate of progress it would take another 20 years to close the gender pay gap. The TUC therefore states that consideration should be given to placing a statutory duty on employers to review pay systems and pay structures and to publish the results, a concept which it has elaborated in its response to the EOC publication Equality in the 21st Century. The Committee notes from the information attached to the Government’s report that it is proposed to merge the Sex Discrimination Act, 1975, and the Equal Pay Act, 1970. In this respect, the Committee notes the recommendations of the EOC proposing that employers should monitor their workers’ rates of pay on an annual basis. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on any developments in this respect and to supply a copy of the revised legislation when it has been adopted. Please also provide information on any amendments to the tribunal procedures for equal pay claims.

3. The Committee notes the adoption of a statutory minimum wage on 1 January 1999 by means of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 and the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999 (amended in 2000). It notes that the Act contains several sections dealing with enforcement and that promotional measures have been taken by the Government, such as publicizing the minimum wage, issuing guides and awareness raising campaigns. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s statement that, through the introduction of the minimum wage, an estimated 1.5 million workers have become entitled to higher pay and that about two-thirds of them are women workers. In this respect, the Committee notes the comments of the TUC that this measure has led to a rise in the incomes of some of the lowest paid workers and to the largest narrowing in a decade of the full-time and part-time gender hourly pay gap. It also notes that the Low Pay Commission Report (published on 15 February 2000) states that many enterprises are meeting their obligations to pay the minimum wage and that the Inland Revenue has made a successful start in ensuring enforcement. In addition, the Committee notes that a third report has been commissioned for July 2001 with a view to revising the minimum wage, and asks the Government to provide a copy of it with its next report.

4. With regard to the National Insurance Lower Earnings Limit (LEL), the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the introduction of the national minimum wage has no direct implication for the LEL. The Committee notes the introduction of the primary threshold in April 2000 (£76 per week for 2000/01) as the wage level at which national insurance contributions are to be paid. It also notes that the introduction of the minimum wage has resulted in a worker who works just over 18 hours earning more that the LEL and that this measure, combined with the introduction of the primary threshold, results in those workers earning between the LEL and the primary threshold being treated as if they are paying contributions on their earnings to protect their benefit position. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information respecting the LEL and the primary threshold and their effects on the application of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value. The Committee notes the statistical information provided by the Government in the Labour Force Survey, Winter 1999, which shows that of all part-time workers 83.29 per cent were women, and that of all part-time workers, 54.77 per cent women part-time workers earned £66 per week or less, while 9.5 per cent of male workers earned this level of wages. In this respect, the Committee notes that section 19 of the Employment Relations Act, 1999, provides that regulations shall be issued to ensure that part-time workers are not treated less favourably than persons in full-time employment, and that section 20 envisages that codes of practice may be issued. The Committee understands that regulations have now been brought into force and requests that information be provided on their content and impact. The Committee reiterates the importance of tackling any indirect discrimination against part-time workers, the majority of whom are women.

5. The Committee notes that the Government abolished compulsory competitive tendering (CCT) as from 2 January 2000, which had been criticized by the TUC as having a negative effect on women’s wages. It notes that, through the adoption of the Local Government Act, 1999, the principle of "best value" has been implemented for tendering in the public sector as from 1 April 2000. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that it intends to amend the legislation regarding the selection of tenderers with a view to complying with its obligations as a Member of the European Union, and it therefore requests the Government to provide information with its next report on the manner in which it ensures, when purchasing services, that the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value is applied. It also requests the Government to supply a copy of the consultation paper issued in April 2000 and a copy of the relevant legislation once it is adopted.

6. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that Northern Ireland adopted a Code of Practice on Equal Pay in 1999 and requests the Government to supply with its next report a copy of the Code, which the Government states that it has already provided, but which has not been received by the Office. The Committee recalls the adoption of the Code of Practice on Equal Pay by the Equal Opportunities Commission. It notes the Government’s statement that the Code of Practice has so far not been used as evidence in a tribunal and requests the Government to continue to provide information on cases relating to the principle of equal remuneration.

7. The Committee notes the court rulings concerning equal pay attached to the Government’s report and requests it to continue to provide information on court cases dealing with equal pay claims.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. The Committee notes the Government's reply concerning the previous comments of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) with regard to the wage gap in some occupational categories. The Government attributes this wage gap to the diversity of occupations within these occupational groupings and the differing distribution of males and females across these groups, suggesting that women tend to be employed more widely in the lower-paid jobs within these categories. The Committee, not being in a position to come to any conclusions on the basis of the information available to it, requests the Government to provide it with the more detailed statistics upon which the Government relies in making its statement. The Committee does note in this respect that, according to statistics provided by the Government, in 1997 women's average hourly earnings (excluding overtime), although having gradually increased over the past ten years, constituted only 80.2 per cent of men's earnings in Great Britain and 83.4 per cent of men's earnings in Northern Ireland, reflecting a decrease from 84.7 per cent in 1996.

2. The Committee notes the Government's indication that the findings of the 1995 Equal Opportunities Commission's (EOC) report on the effects of compulsory competitive tendering (CCT), on which the TUC bases its claim that this process had a negative impact on the wages of women, should be treated with caution since it is based on a relatively small sample which does not include all service sectors covered by the relevant CCT legislation. It also notes the Government's indication that it has made a commitment to abolish the CCT and replace it with a new duty on local authorities to secure "best value" across the range of their activities. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the Government's Best Value proposals take into account the findings of the 1995 Report of the Equal Opportunities Commission. It also requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the summary of the White Paper, Modern Local Government -- In Touch with the People, which contains the Government's Best Value proposals.

3. The Committee recalls the comments of the TUC that the application of the lower earnings limit (LEL) for national insurance contributions has a discriminatory effect and adverse impact on women's pay, in part because they constitute the large majority of part-time workers. It notes the Government's response that, if the LEL were set at a lower rate, it would be possible for people to gain entitlement to a pension which would be higher than their earnings during their working life in return for small payments in contributions, and that this would impose an unacceptable burden on other contributors. In order to ascertain whether the LEL might have an indirect discriminatory effect, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the total number and percentage of male and female part-time workers as well as on those whose earnings fall below the LEL. In this respect, the Committee would like to draw attention to Article 8 of the Part-Time Work Convention, 1994 (No. 175) which stipulates that part-time workers whose hours of work or earnings are below specified thresholds may only be excluded from certain statutory security schemes or measures taken in certain fields if these thresholds are sufficiently low as not to exclude an unduly large percentage of part-time workers.

4. The Committee notes the Government's indication that it is committed to the introduction of a statutory national minimum wage which will apply to all workers, whether full or part time, permanent, temporary or casual. It notes the Government's statement that a minimum wage would contribute to easing pay inequalities which still remain between men and women, especially for part-time workers. The Committee notes that the Independent Low Pay Commission, set up by the Government to advise it on an initial rate and other related issues, presented its report and recommendations in May 1998, and that enforcement mechanisms are currently being developed with the priority aim being to encourage self-compliance. Noting that the National Minimum Wage Act received Royal Assent on 31 July 1998 and will be put before Parliament at the end of 1998, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the Commission Report and the Act, as well as with information on the effectiveness of the new enforcement mechanisms. The Committee also requests the Government to clarify whether the introduction of a minimum wage will have implications for the application of the LEL.

5. The Committee notes with interest that the Code of Practice on Equal Pay, developed by the EOC, came into force in May 1997. It notes the Government's indication that the Code's goal is to serve as a tool to help employers bridge the pay gap by offering practical advice on ways to implement pay systems free of gender bias and that it can be quoted as evidence in any proceedings before industrial tribunals. It further notes that the Code provides information on the implications of the law for employers, and on some of the reasons and causes underlying sex discrimination in pay. Paragraph 21, for example, states that men and women tend to do different jobs or have different work patterns resulting in undervaluation of work performed by one sex, which, especially when reinforced by discriminatory recruitment, training, selection and promotion procedures, may restrict the range of work each sex performs, for example, by allocating the full-time, higher paid, bonus-earning jobs to men. The Code also contains recommendations for carrying out a review of pay systems on possible existing gender bias, as well as suggestions for employers with regard to the development of an equal pay policy. The Committee, considering that the Code seeks to reinforce the principle of equal pay for work of equal value contained in the relevant legislation, and noting the judicial decisions concerning equal pay attached to the Government's report, requests the Government to provide information on cases in which the Code has been used as evidence. It also requests the Government to provide it with other information illustrating the application of the Code.

6. The Committee notes from the EOC report "Equality in the 21st Century: a New Approach," which forms the basis for a consultation on proposed legislative amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act, 1975 and the Equal Pay Act, 1970, that the EOC's main proposal is to replace the current laws by a single statute based on the principle of a fundamental right to equal treatment between men and women. The new statute, which would bring together all the relevant laws (including equal pay) from various sources and present them in an integrated and coherent way, would guarantee an individual freedom from discrimination on the grounds of sex, pregnancy, marital or family status, gender reassignment and sexual orientation. The Committee notes with interest the emphasis placed in the EOC report on the principle of equal pay for work of equal value. In this regard, it notes the recommendation that a significant improvement on the present framework of litigation would be to empower employment tribunals not only to grant an individual remedy in an individual case, but also to make a general finding, and to order changes to a collective agreement or pay structure. It further notes that the EOC recommended that a legal obligation should be placed on employers to carry out a pay systems review and adopt an equal pay policy as described in the EOC's Code of Practice on Equal Pay, including an obligation to publish the outcome of the review to the workforce with a programme to achieve change. Noting that the EOC will submit its recommendations to the Secretary of State for Education and Employment at the end of 1998, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of these recommendations, as well as information on measures taken or envisaged to implement these recommendations.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report and the comments of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), dated 8 November 1996. The Committee also notes the Government's observations on the TUC's comments, received on the eve of the Committee's session.

1. Abolition of wages councils. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the TUC was concerned that the abolition of the wages councils (by the enactment of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act, 1993) would cause women's remuneration as a proportion of men's to decline. The Government states that, since the passage of the 1970 Equal Pay Act, women's average hourly earnings excluding overtime have risen steadily as a proportion of men's from 63 per cent to the highest ever figure of 79.9 per cent in April 1996. In Northern Ireland the same trend has been observed with women's earnings reaching 85.3 per cent as a proportion of men's in 1995. The Government stresses that it was the application of the Equal Pay Act which required wages councils, other statutory bodies and employers generally to ensure equality of pay between the sexes and that, previously, wages councils could, and did, set lower rates of pay for women. The Government also indicates that changes in the earnings of both men and women reflect varying conditions in the particular industries or companies concerned which can themselves be influenced by a range of factors such as structural and technological change or profitability. The Government considers it neither possible nor appropriate to attribute changes to one particular event such as the abolition of any wages council. The Government refers to an analysis of the New Earnings Survey (NES) for the period 1990 96 as an illustration that the rate of earnings movement in those industrial sectors where the main wages councils had operated was subject to fluctuation both before and after the abolition of those councils. It also refers to an analysis of the 1993 and 1994 NES undertaken by the former Employment Department in 1994 to compare the movement in earnings of those individual workers who had been covered by a wages council in April 1993 and who had not changed jobs in the seven months following abolition of the council. The Government states that this analysis, as well as a further one comparing 1994 and 1995 NES data, has confirmed its view that there had not been any general fall in earnings following abolition of the councils.

2. The TUC indicates that its own analysis shows a considerable fall in pay in many of the industries formerly covered by the wages councils and that women have suffered disproportionately from this downward pressure on pay, exacerbating the inequality of pay which affects low-paid women workers particularly. It observes that, in the hotel sector, the average earnings of all workers have fallen in real terms since 1993 and that even in those sectors where pay has risen in real terms, such as in food retailing and the clothing industry, the increases have been significantly lower than those for the service and manufacturing sectors more generally. While acknowledging the fluctuations in earnings in industries previously covered by wages councils, the TUC states that 1993 96 has been a period of continuous wage growth and the fact that those industries are falling behind the growth gives cause for concern about the implementation of the principle of equal pay. In this connection, the Government states that the TUC analysis fails to take into account the differing impact of the recession and recovery on different sectors of the economy. Moreover, the Government states that the period covered by the TUC analysis is too short a period to differentiate the cyclical, structural and institutional changes and their effect on employment and earnings.

3. The Committee notes that both the Government and the TUC based their analysis on the NES. As concerns the TUC's statement that the NES does not fully reflect the situation of low-paid workers, the Government states that, while the NES does measure the earnings of many workers paid below the tax and national insurance thresholds, the Office for National Statistics acknowledges that the NES does under-represent lower-paid workers who do not pay income tax. The Committee notes that while there has been a welcome narrowing of the earnings gap overall, there appear to be some occupational categories where there remains a wide differential in the earnings of men and women (for instance, in sales occupations, the average gross hourly earnings excluding overtime of full-time women was only 66.6 per cent of the corresponding figure for men in April 1995 and in craft and related occupations it was 67.7 per cent). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether any studies have been undertaken to discern more precisely the reasons for the existence of such a significant earnings differential in certain occupational categories.

4. Compulsory competitive tendering (CCT). The TUC refers to the publication in 1995 by the Equal Opportunities Commission of research on the effects of CCT in local government, which found that this process had a negative impact on the wages of women. According to the TUC, the research found that in female-dominated areas such as catering and cleaning the contractual hours fell by 16-25 per cent and the wages fell in some areas, whereas the pay levels increased and the contractual hours remained the same in male-dominated areas. Women part-time workers were shown to be the worst affected, with lower pay, fewer hours and worse terms and conditions of employment. The Committee requests the Government to comment on the 1995 study referred to by the TUC and to indicate whether any measures have been taken, or are contemplated, to redress any problems identified in the research which have an impact on the application of the Convention.

5. Part-time workers. The TUC considers that the application of the Lower Earnings Limit (LEL) for national insurance contributions has a discriminatory effect and an adverse impact on women's pay. It indicates that many now have earnings below the LEL and therefore fail to qualify for state benefits such as maternity and sick pay, unemployment benefit and state pensions. It states that most of those excluded from basic national insurance benefits are part-time workers of whom the large majority are women. The Government states that workers who earn less than the LEL are not excluded from the national insurance schemes altogether as they can choose to pay national insurance contributions on a voluntary basis so as to earn an entitlement to a retirement pension. Married women can also rely on their husbands' contribution records for pension purposes and are by far the larger group to benefit from Home Responsibilities Protection which acts to protect the basic retirement pension position of the individual. According to the Government, research shows that employers regard savings on national insurance contributions as a very minor reason for the employment of part-time workers: the main reason for the employment of part-timers (who comprise most of the low-paid workforce) was that this suited the work available. Even though many employers do not regard the LEL as an important determinant of wage levels, the Government considers that a requirement to pay contributions in respect of all employees could lead to a rise in non-wage costs and a possible reduction of work opportunities at lower wage levels, which would particularly affect women who often welcome the chance to combine paid employment with domestic responsibilities.

6. The Committee has taken note of the Government's information and explanations. It would point out, however, that the abolition of the wages councils, the application of the LEL and other measures have had deleterious effects on certain categories of women workers which are felt more particularly by those working part time. The Committee would welcome any indications from the Government as to the measures that might be taken to improve the situation of these women workers, especially as concerns their remuneration and entitlements.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the information in the Government's report and its reply to the Committee's previous comments concerning cooperation with workers' and employers' organizations for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee is pursuing developments concerning certain judicial decisions under the Equal Pay Act, 1970, in an observation.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the information in the Government's report and its observations on the comments of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) dated 20 December 1991, 13 January 1993 and 24 December 1993 concerning the application of the Convention.

1. The Committee recalls that the TUC, in its earlier communication, raised points concerning the inadequacy of procedures in equal pay claims (the complexity and lack of clarity in the legislation which resulted in long delays in the determination of workers' rights; the fact that an employer's existing job evaluation study could act as a bar to an equal value pay claim; the impossibility of extending an equal pay decision awarded to an individual applicant to all employees in the same employment who do the same or broadly similar work). The TUC, in its subsequent communications, expressed concern that the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill (now enacted as the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act, 1 July 1993), in abolishing wages councils, would remove this statutory protection (including enforcement by a wages inspectorate) from a great many women workers and consequently women's remuneration as a proportion of that of men would decline. The TUC considered that the remaining right to bring an individual complaint to an Industrial Tribunal under the Equal Pay Act is an insufficient remedy because of the long delays in that procedure. The TUC pointed out that the abolition of the wages councils led it also to lodge a complaint in August 1993 to the Commission of the European Communities alleging that the removal of these mechanisms has led to the non-application of European Community law.

The Government responds, firstly, that it is concerned that there should be as little delay as possible in equal value cases, but that the law in this area is inherently complex and procedures take some time; it points out, however, that it is examining ways of reducing the time delays and will dicuss procedural changes with the Equal Opportunities Commission shortly (some changes corresponding to recommendations made by the Commission to improve the equal pay laws are already under way, as explained below). Secondly, it rejects the TUC's claim that the abolition of the wages councils will hinder the Government's application of the principle of this Convention. The Government challenges the effectiveness of minimum wage fixing in this connection and the inference that employers will cut women's pay following abolition. It adds that women continue to be able to seek redress if they allege sex-based wage differences under the Equal Pay Act.

The Committee recalls that Article 2(2) of the Convention permits flexibility in the choice of methods for applying the principle of the Convention. It also recalls that, whatever the method chosen, its enforcement must have an impact. This was highlighted in paragraphs 102 to 131 and paragraphs 166 to 179 of the Committee's 1986 General Survey on Equal Remuneration, where it examined, respectively, the bodies to promote, enforce or supervise the principle of the Convention and the effectivenes of remedial action in ensuring its application. While aware that the impact of the abolition of the wages councils may not yet be felt, it draws the Government's attention to the importance of effective machinery to translate the principle into practice. Despite the Government's explanation of the current system, the Committee also must note the TUC's apprehensions for the implementation of the Convention in these circumstances.

It therefore asks the Government to supply information (including statistical data on actual wages paid to men and to women in the sectors previously covered by wages councils) showing the impact of the abolition of the previous system. It would also like to receive information on the numbers of equal pay claims brought since the change, the time taken to conclude them and indications of the awards made. In addition, the Committee asks the Government to inform it of the outcome of the TUC complaint to the Commission of the European Communities.

2. With reference to the Committee's previous comments on equal remuneration in the state pension and occupational pension schemes and harmonization of pensionable ages, the Government explains that Schedule 5 to the Social Security Act, 1989, has still not been brought into force following the 1990 ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange Group (which, by establishing that occupational pensions are "pay", allowed the equal pay principle to override an apparent exception for retirement occupational pensions contained in a Directive). It adds that it is awaiting the outcome of a series of cases referred to the ECJ, including Coloroll Pension Trustees Ltd. v. Russell, Mangham & Others, expected later in 1994, which will throw further light on the retroactive scope of the Barber decision. The Committee notes the Government's statement that it is committed to equalizing the state pension age and that, following debate of a background paper currently circulating, it plans to make detailed proposals in this direction in the near future. The Committee notes these developments and asks the Government to inform it of the ECJ decision in Coloroll and its decision on whether or not to bring the Schedule into force.

3. Regarding the Government's response to the Equal Opportunities Commission's 1990 review of the Equal Pay Act containing various recommendations to improve the legislation, the Committee notes that it refers to several initiatives: the 1991 meeting of the Employment Department's Advisory Committee on Women's Employment (on which the TUC and the Confederation of British Industry as well as concerned bodies such as the Equal Opportunities Commission itself are represented) which discussed the review; its acceptance of a number of the specific recommendations (specialized training for members of industrial tribunals, their availability to hear cases, common law changes to one aspect of the "material factor" defence, swifter production of experts' reports, scrutiny of collective agreements by individuals now allowed by section 32 of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act); and its ongoing correspondence with the Equal Opportunities Commission on ways of streamlining the procedures of the Industrial Tribunals in equal pay cases. The Government points out that certain other recommendations "merit further consideration" and that others cannot be commented on since they are sub judice. The Committee notes, however, the Government's explanations that it cannot accept the recommendations concerning removing the bar to claims represented by an employers' job evaluation study, class actions, access to employers' premises, using the Employment Appeals Tribunal as a court of first instance and repeal of the two-year limit on back pay awards.

Recalling its comments under point 1 above on the importance of effective procedures in practice to implement the principle of the Convention, the Committee asks the Government to inform it of developments concerning its acceptance of the Commission's recommendations, in particular any progress made in discussions with the Commission following the Government's letter to that body of 19 July 1993 explaining its stance.

4. The Committee recalls that, in its previous direct request, it had noted that the Equal Opportunities Commission for Northern Ireland had included in its comments on the equal pay legislation a recommendation for equal pay comparisons with a "notional" or "hypothetical" man. The Committee had asked the Government to inform it of any measures taken in response to this. As the Government's report states that detailed consideration of the Northern Ireland Equal Opportunities Commission's recommendations are under way and that a response will be available in the near future, the Committee asks the Government to inform it in its next report of developments in this area.

5. The Committee recalls that, in previous direct requests, it had asked for information on developments following the decision in Clark & Others v. Bexley Health Authority (where the employer successfully relied on the "material factor" defence that it had no choice in the matter of salary because it was obliged by an outside factor to pay staff certain authorized salaries and because of market forces), a decision which had been referred to the ECJ. It notes from the Government's report that the final decision in this case, now known as Enderby v. Frenchay Health Authority, was expected late in 1993. The Committee understands that the ECJ delivered its decision on 27 October 1993, holding, inter alia, that if there is a prima facie case of wage discrimination based on sex, the employer must show objective justification for the difference, that market forces may constitute an objectively justified ground and that it is for the national court to assess whether the statistics relied upon cover sufficient numbers, are not a short-term phenomenon and are generally of significance.

The Committee asks the Government to inform it of the impact of the Enderby decision on equal pay claims in the United Kingdom, supplying copies of any decisions at the national level which show application of the principle of equal pay contained in the Convention.

6. The Committee notes from the statistics supplied in the Government's report that, as of April 1993, women's average hourly earnings (excluding overtime) were 79.1 per cent of men's. This represents an increase over the 1970 figure of 63.1 per cent and the 1980 figure of 73.5 per cent. It also notes from documentation in the TUC's complaint to the ECJ that, according to the New Earnings Survey for 1992, women's average hourly earnings in manual trades were 71.5 per cent of men's, and in non-manual trades, 67.3 per cent of men's. Noting the Government's statement that the wages gap is steadily decreasing and that the remaining disparity exists for a variety of reasons such as the fact that many women work in lower-paying sectors, and have less work experience, seniority and training, the Committee would like to receive information on the measures taken or contemplated to study and remove the reasons underlying the continuing wage differences.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee takes note of the comments of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) dated 13 January 1993 concerning the application of the Convention, which have been transmitted to the Government. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide its comments on this communication so that the Committee will be in a position to examine the points raised at its next session.

It notes at the same time that earlier TUC comments, dated December 1991, are still awaiting a reply from the Government and that the outstanding observation on the application of this Convention, for which a government report will be requested for examination at the Committee's 1994 Session, concerned the following points: equal remuneration in the state pension scheme and occupational pension schemes and harmonization of pensionable ages; what government measures have been taken to respond to the proposals of the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) following its review of the Equal Pay Act of 1970; and statistical data illustrating current trends in the evolution of wage differentials between male and female earnings.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

1. The Committee has noted the information supplied by the Government concerning judicial decisions under the Equal Pay Act, 1970. It requests the Government to supply such information in its future reports, and in particular on the outcome of the case of Clark and others v. Bexley Heath Authority, which has been referred to the European Court of Justice.

2. The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government concerning the Committee's previous request for an indication of the extent to which job evaluation has been introduced. In this respect, the Committee notes that while official data is not available on this question, there appears to be a steady growth of interest in job evaluation arising from the need for organisations to rationalise their pay systems and to free them from sex discrimination.

3. Referring to its previous direct request, the Committee has noted that the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) intends to appoint several more experts, in addition to the 12 currently on its panel, because of the upsurge in the number of reports required. The Committee has also noted that, on average, the time taken from the tribunal issuing a requirement for an expert's report and the report's submission to the tribunal has reduced significantly in recent years.

4. Referring to its observation, the Committee has noted the information and explanations of the Government concerning other matters raised by the TUC in its communication of December 1990. The Government states that it recognises the TUC's concern that employees in all-female establishments should be permitted to compare their work with that of men notionally or actually employed at the same or unconnected establishments. It points out, however, that if an employer employs no men at all, then the only way of measuring what a "notional" man would be paid would be by reference to the wages paid by other unconnected employers to men doing the same type of work, quite possibly in different geographical areas. In such cases, it would be impossible to determine how much of any pay inequality resulted from different markets, efficiency, profitability, etc.; and accordingly, the Government cannot see why an employee in one firm should receive the same wage as an employee working in another unconnected firm, irrespective of the difference of sex. The Committee has also noted that while the proposals of the (Great Britain) Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) do not include any recommendations for equal pay comparisons with a "notional" or "hypothetical" man, the EOC for Northern Ireland has included such a recommendation in its comments on the operation of the equal pay legislation which, like all recommendations of the two EOCs, are being considered by the Government. As the Committee has stated in its observation, it hopes that the Government will provide information in its next report on the measures taken or envisaged to respond to the proposals of the EOCs.

5. Referring also to its observation, the Committee has noted the TUC's statement that the Government has been deficient in complying with Article 4 of the Convention, since there have been no further meetings with trade union and employers' representatives concerning ways to improve the application of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to indicate, in its next report, that further measures have been taken to cooperate with the employers' and workers' organisations concerned to give effect to the provisions of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report in reply to its previous comments and to the comments submitted by the Trades Union Congress (TUC) in 1990. It also notes that the TUC communicated further comments in December 1991, which were transmitted to the Government and that the Government intends to reply to those comments in its next report.

1. The Committee has noted with interest from the Government's report that following the ruling of the European Court of Justice on 17.5.90 in the case of Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group (in which the Court ruled that benefits paid from occupational pension schemes are "pay" within the meaning of Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome) the Government has announced its commitment to achieving equal treatment for women and men in the state pension scheme as well as in occupational pension schemes, in particular, as concerns unequal pension ages. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information on the matter, including any further court rulings, and that it will indicate the decisions taken or envisaged in this direction.

2. In recent years, the Committee has noted the measures being taken by the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) to review, in consultation with the Government, employers' organisations, trade unions and other interested bodies, the application of the Equal Pay Act, 1970, as amended. The Committee's observation of 1990 had noted that the EOC presented its considerations in its 1989 consultative document "Equal Pay ... Making it Work". The Committee notes that the EOC's formal proposals were submitted to the Government, in November 1990, in a document entitled "Equal Pay for Men and Women: Strengthening the Acts". The EOC has concluded in that document that "the present legislation is ineffective for dealing with pay inequalities deeply rooted, often unconsciously, in pay structures and collective agreements ..." and calls for the "establishment of a legal framework and procedures which facilitate rather than impede an individual's access to judicial determination", makes recommendations for dealing with the wider implications of individual cases and for effectively tackling sources of inequality in pay structures and collective agreements and reaffirms its previous proposal for the enactment of a single consolidated equal treatment statute.

In its comments of December 1991, the TUC has pointed to the EOC's support for the concerns previously expressed by the TUC and, in particular, the TUC's proposals that an employer's existing job evaluation study should not operate as a bar to an equal value claim, and that an equal pay award to an individual applicant should be extended to all employees in the same employment who do the same or broadly similar work. The TUC has also reiterated its concern that the complexity and lack of clarity of the present legislation result in long delays in the determination of workers' rights.

The Committee notes from the report of the Government that the TUC and the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) had the opportunity to convey their views on the EOC's proposals and that these proposals, as well as similar proposals put forward by the EOC for Northern Ireland, are under active consideration by the Government. The Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken or envisaged to respond to these proposals.

3. The Committee notes from the report of the Government that in Great Britain women's average earnings (excluding overtime) in relation to men's have continued to rise over the last four years and increased appreciably from 76 per cent in 1989 to 78.2 per cent in 1991. In Northern Ireland, women's average hourly earnings (excluding overtime) rose from 78.6 per cent of men's in 1989 to 80 per cent in 1990. The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply statistical data illustrating the evolution of the wage differential.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report on the points raised in the previous direct request.

1. The Committee notes a number of relevant judgements transmitted by the Government with its report. As concerns the case of Clark and others v. Bexley Health Authority, in which the employers relied on the "material factor" that they had no choice in the matter of salary, because they were obliged to pay their staff neither more nor less than the salaries authorised by the Secretary of State for Health, the Committee notes that on 29 October 1987 the High Court reversed the tribunal's decision and referred the cases back to the industrial tribunal for them to be argued on their merits.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply relevant judicial decisions on the Equal Pay Act, and in particular on the developments in the case of Clark and others v. Bexley Health Authority.

2. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Government did not envisage any further measures to encourage the spread of job evaluation schemes. It notes from the Government's latest report that the Government believes that pay is essentially a matter for the parties concerned, but that the legislation requiring equal pay for work of equal value itself provides an important incentive to employers to operate job evaluation schemes, and that in practice there seems to be a steady growth of interest in job evaluation arising from the need for organisations to rationalise payment systems and free them of sex discrimination.

The Committee requests the Government to include with its next report information on the number and type of organisations that have introduced job evaluation systems in recent years. In this respect, the Committee refers to the data made available through the yearly New Earnings Surveys, which show that the average wage differential between men and women has remained constant since 1975, and requests the Government to indicate whether the review of the legislation carried out by the Equal Opportunities Commission has led to the adoption of measures to promote the application to all workers of the principle of equal remuneration, through the improvement and further development of job evaluation schemes or otherwise.

3. In its previous comments the Committee requested information on the number of experts on the panel for the Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS), which examines complaints on job evaluations and on the average time from submission of complaints to their completion. It notes from the report that there are 15 experts on the panel, and that the average time between a tribunal asking ACAS to nominate an expert to submission of his or her report is ten months. In Northern Ireland, it notes that there are six experts on the Labour Relations Agency Panel, and that in the four cases so far carried out the time has varied from 12 to 41 months. The Committee also notes the comments by the TUC that this information confirms that this system introduces inordinate delays into equal value proceedings. Please continue to provide information on the workings of this system.

4. The Committee notes from the Government's report that a further tripartite meeting on equal pay matters, following the one held in May 1987, would not be useful at this stage, but that employers' and workers' representatives will have an opportunity to convey their views on the Equal Opportunities Commission's report. Please supply further information in the next report on measures taken, in pursuance of Article 4 of the Convention, in co-operation with the employers' and workers' organisations concerned for the purpose of giving effect to the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Further to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report and the comments submitted by the Trades Union Congress (TUC).

1. The Committee notes with interest that the Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay (Offshore Employment) Order 1987, brings within the scope of the Equal Pay Act 1970 employment concerned with the exploration of the sea bed or subsoil or the exploitation of their natural resources. The Committee also notes with interest that in December 1988 the Government introduced new legislation into Parliament with a view to making it unlawful for employers to discriminate directly or indirectly on grounds of sex in connection with employment-related occupational pension schemes. It requests the Government to keep it informed of further developments in this connection.

2. The Committee notes from the Government's report that the Equal Opportunities Commission, which under section 53(1)(c) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 is required to keep under review the working of the Equal Pay Act 1970, and which may submit to the Secretary of State proposals for amending it, has issued a consultative document on the working of the Equal Pay Act 1970, entitled "Equal pay: Making it work", putting forward a range of options for improving the procedures for determining individual complaints in the industrial tribunal.

The Committee notes that the consultative document focuses on three broad issues: (i) the inadequacy of the Equal Pay Act to deal with discrimination against groups of workers, (ii) the procedures for determining individual complaints in the industrial tribunals, and (iii) matters arising with regard to substantive law. It makes proposals for changes with respect to multiple claims by groups of workers, individual claims, discriminatory terms in collective agreements, jurisdiction of tribunals, the role of independent experts in equal value claims, and the "material difference" defence under section 1(3) of the Equal Pay Act.

The Committee further notes the comments by the Trades Union Congress in a letter dated 29 January 1990 on the application of the Convention, and relating to the role of independent experts in equal value cases, the material difference defence under section 1(3) of the Act, the issues of class action and collective pay discrimination, discriminatory terms in collective agreements, and the question of finding male comparators for employees in totally female establishments. The TUC states that the comments and proposals put forward by the Equal Opportunities Commission in its consultative document accord very closely with the TUC's own views.

The Committee takes note of the Government's statement that it will consider carefully any firm recommendations that the Equal Opportunities Commission may make following consultations. It requests the Government to include in its next report detailed information on the results of the consultative process carried out by the Commission, on any recommendations it may make, and on the action taken or envisaged thereon by the Government.

3. The Committee recalls the earlier comments by the TUC that the Sex Discrimination Act, 1986, is deficient because it provides no collective means of challenging a discriminatory provision in a collective agreement, no enforcement machinery and no third party to decide on conflicts. It notes the Government's statement at the Conference Committee in 1988 that it sees major problems of principle and practice in providing for "class actions" such as those suggested, and believes that the traditional, established "test case" procedure is best, as employers would not refuse to apply more widely a decision taken on an individual case. This point of view is repeated in the Government's report, which notes that the Equal Opportunities Commission's report addresses the matter. In its most recent comments, the TUC points out the strong criticism by the Commission of the present legislation, noting that it has said that discriminatory terms usually affect groups, but only rarely affect individual women. It also indicates that the pressure that can be exercised by individual cases is not great, and does not provide an incentive to renegotiate discriminatory terms in collective agreements.

The Committee notes the concerns expressed by the TUC and the Equal Opportunities Commission, as well as the difficulties pointed out by the Government in changing fundamental principles of law. It hopes that the Government will be able to indicate in its next report whether, in fact, individual claims successfully brought against provisions of collective agreements have resulted in wider changes being implemented.

4. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government has maintained its position that it sees no way in which employees in totally female establishments can compare themselves with men, either notionally employed at the same establishment or actually employed at other non-connected establishments. It notes the comments by the TUC that this should be possible, and that the problem has been solved in other countries. Noting that the Equal Opportunities Commission has also addressed this question, the Committee looks forward to receiving further information in the Government's next report.

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