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

1. In its previous direct request, the Committee asked the Government to supply information on the effect given in practice to article 14bis of the Constitution and section 172 of the Contracts of Employment Act, in which the principle of equal remuneration is set forth. It also requested the Government to transmit copies of relevant judicial rulings that illustrate the scope currently given to the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value contained in the Convention and in national legislation. The Committee notes the Government's statement that the rulings of the Supreme Court of Justice are consistent in affirming that arbitrary discrimination, such as that based on sex, race or religion, must not be admitted, although discrimination based on greater efficiency and hard work would not violate the principle of equal remuneration. The Committee also notes the summaries of the judicial rulings supplied with the report which illustrate the application that is being given to the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value. In this connection, the Committee refers to the comments that it made in paragraphs 44 to 65 of its 1986 General Survey on Equal Remuneration, in which it indicated that the principle of equal remuneration contained in the Convention does not apply only to identical or similar work performed by men and women workers, but also to work of a different nature but of equal value, and that its application cannot be confined to an evaluation of output but should also be based on the application of other criteria. The Committee requests the Government to supply the full texts of the rulings in each of the above-mentioned decisions.

2. In its previous comments, the Committee also requested the Government to indicate whether the employer participates in the financing of the spouse's allowance provided for in section 7 of Legislative Decree No. 18017/68, which establishes the allowances for employees in commerce, industry and dock work. The Committee notes the Government's statement that, as regards Legislative Decree No. 18017/68, and in accordance with the current legal system, family allowances are not considered to be a component of wages or remuneration and, consequently, are not taken into account for the payment of the annual supplementary wage nor for compensation for arbitrary dismissal (section 12 of Act No. 18037). These allowances are social security benefits and not benefits arising out of the work performed, and therefore do not violate either the Convention or the National Constitution as regards the principle of equal remuneration. Futhermore, under the scheme established by Legislative Decree No. 18017/68, employers contribute to the financing of the family allowances system through the payment of contributions that are set at a percentage of the remuneration paid to their employees. In this connection, the Committee wishes to refer to the explanations given in paragraphs 15 to 17 and 88 and 89 of its 1986 General Survey in which the Committee indicates that "the Convention covers all components of remuneration - direct and indirect - which arise out of the employment relationship" and that "allowances paid under social security schemes financed by the undertaking or industry concerned were part of the system of remuneration ... in respect of which there should be no discrimination based on sex". The Committee therefore requests the Government to take appropriate steps to give full effect to the Convention and to supply relevant information in this respect.