Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - Norway (Ratification: 1959)

Other comments on C100

Observation

Direct Request

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO), the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) and the Norwegian Confederation of Unions for Professionals (UNIO), which were submitted with the Government’s report.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government and the social partners this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. The Committee notes, from the statistical information provided by the Government, that the gender pay gap (full-time equivalent of monthly average earnings) slightly decreased from 2015 to 2019 (women’s earnings as a ratio of men’s going from 85.3 to 87.6 per cent). In terms of occupation, the gap is highest for managers, managing directors and chief executives, professionals, and technicians and associate professionals, where the above-mentioned ratio ranged from 81.2 to 82.2 per cent in 2019. As noted by the Government, it is in the financial and insurance sector that the gap is the largest, with women’s earnings being, on average, 72.2 per cent that of men’s. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to reduce the gender pay gap, and to continue to provide statistical information on the evolution of the gender pay gap in the public and private sectors.

Principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value. Legislation. In its previous comment, the Committee asked the Government to: (1) indicate the specific policy and programmes developed to explicitly tackle the gender pay gap and promote equal pay for work of equal value; and (2) provide information on the types of measures that have been taken to target and address pay inequalities in the workplace reported by employers, as well as information on the implementation of the duty to disclose wage information; and information on any impact the new law would have on the legal protections and the practical implementation of equal pay for work of equal value. Referring to its comments under the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), the Committee notes the information provided by the Government and the adoption of the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Act (EADA), which entered into force on 1 January 2018, replacing the four previous acts on gender equality and anti-discrimination, as well as the further amendments to the EADA, entered into force on 1 January 2020. More specifically, it notes that the amended version of Section 26 of the EADA provides that all public undertakings, regardless of size, and private undertakings that ordinarily employ more than 50 persons shall, in the context of their operations, investigate whether there is a risk of discrimination or other barriers to equality, “including by reviewing pay conditions by reference to gender and the use of involuntary part-time work”, every two years. The same shall apply to private undertakings that ordinarily employ between 20 and 50 persons if that is requested by workers’ or employers’ representatives. In this regard, the Committee notes that, in its 2020 concluding observations, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) stated its concerns about: (1) the effectiveness of this provision, as private employers with fewer than 50 employees, which is the case for over 97 per cent of private employers, are fully or conditionally exempted from this duty to report; and (2) the reportedly low level of compliance with the duties to take action and to report. It recommended strengthening penalties for non-compliance with such duties (E/C.12/NOR/CO/6, 2 April 2020, paragraphs 16 and 17). The Committee also notes that Section 34 of the EADA provides that “Women and men in the same undertaking shall receive equal pay for the same work or work of equal value. Pay shall be set in the same way, without regard to gender.” It recalls that: (1) the application of the Convention’s principle is not limited to comparisons between men and women in the same establishment or enterprise, as it allows for a much broader comparison to be made between jobs performed by men and women in different places or enterprises, or between different employers; and that (2) ensuring a broad scope of comparison is essential for the application of the principle of equal remuneration given the continued prevalence of occupational sex segregation (see 2012 General Survey on the Fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 697–699). In view of the above, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on: (i) the measured impact of the new legislation and its implementation in practice, including the types of measures taken when employers report pay inequalities in the workplace, as well as specific policies and programmes developed to explicitly tackle the gender pay gap and promote equal pay for work of equal value; and (ii) any measures taken or envisaged to amend the legislation so that the scope of application of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value goes beyond the same establishment or enterprise.

Articles 2 and 4. Collective agreements and cooperation with workers’ and employers’ organizations. Previously, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the specific measures taken by the social partners to achieve equal pay between men and women in both the private and public sectors, including any agreements reached to address pay inequalities, and any activities undertaken to raise awareness of the principle of the Convention among workers, employers and their representatives. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the social partners are responsible for conducting wage negotiations, the authorities acting as legislator and facilitator, and its reference to the Norwegian Technical Calculation Committee for Wage Settlements as well as to the Council for Working Life and Pensions Policy and its working group on equality in working life. In this regard, the Committee also notes UNIO’s observations that the basic equal pay issue is not going to be resolved as long as the responsibility for wage determination rests solely on the social partners. It further notes that the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), in its 2017 concluding observations, underlined that the wage gap, in a horizontally and vertically gender-segregated employment market, had only slightly narrowed (and increased as the level of education rose) and that collective wage negotiations by social partners may have led to collective bargaining agreements that include gender discriminatory wages. It recommended that the Government establish a structure to monitor collective bargaining agreements to ensure that they are not gender discriminatory (CEDAW/C/NOR/CO/9, 22 November 2017, paras. 36 and 37). The Committee notes that the Government did not provide any examples of specific measures taken, or agreements reached, by the social partners to address pay inequalities and achieve equal pay between men and women, nor of any activities undertaken to raise awareness of the principle of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government, once again, to provide information on any specific measures taken by the social partners and through tripartite cooperation, to address pay inequalities and achieve equal pay between men and women in both the public and private sectors; as well as on any activities undertaken to raise awareness of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value among social partners and the general public.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comment on the issue, the Government reiterates that objective job evaluation is not used in Norway and that there has been no review of this position since the last report. It also notes UNIO’s observation that there has been a hearing in Parliament taking as an example the Icelandic equal pay standard and certification system and that objective job evaluation is a relevant method for considering wage inequalities, provided users are trained to provide relevant data. In view of the persistent gender pay gap, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to introduce objective job evaluation measures. Please also provide information on any action taken to address pay differentials between female- and male-dominated occupations so as to determine whether the work is of equal value, based on objective criteria free from gender bias.

Enforcement. The Committee previously requested information on the number and outcome of equal pay cases addressed by the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud and the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal. In this regard, it notes that amendments to the Act relating to the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud and the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal (Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud Act, EAOA) were adopted by Parliament on 11 June 2019 and entered into force on 1 January 2020. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the activities of the Tribunal, including a recent case where the Tribunal concluded that there had been a violation of the law by a university offering a significantly higher salary to a male candidate for a position of associate professor than what it paid a woman recently hired for the same position. It also notes UNIO’s observation that the very few complaints on this matter and the even fewer decisions in favour of the complainant, clearly show that women have little protection against individual pay discrimination and no protection against structural pay discrimination. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to raise awareness on the available means of redress. It also asks the Government to continue to provide information on the number and outcome of equal pay cases addressed by the Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud and the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal.