Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

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

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

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

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Comparing work of equal value. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that under Dutch law the comparison of wages is based on the wage received by an employee of the opposite sex for work of equal value in the company that employs the employee in whose interest the wage comparison is being made, or in the absence of such basis for comparison, on the wage earned by someone of the opposite sex for work of virtually equal value in said company. The Committee recalls that the application of the Convention’s principle is not limited to comparisons between men and women in the same establishment or enterprise. The Committee therefore asks the Government to indicate the measures taken to enable the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value to be implemented beyond the level of the same company or enterprise.

Promotion of the principle through objective job evaluation. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the use and promotion of the various tools, such as Quickscan equal pay, the Management Tool on Equal Remuneration and the Gender-Neutral Job Evaluation Manual, developed with a view to assisting employers to carry out objective job evaluation. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that the Gender-Neutral Job Evaluation Manual is based on a comparison of “male positions” and “female positions” which are “more or less comparable”. The Committee recalls its 2006 general observation and points out that the concept of equal value permits a broad scope of comparison, and “also encompasses work that is of an entirely different nature, which is nevertheless of equal value …”. The Committee asks the Government to clarify whether the meaning of “more or less comparable” would allow a comparison of jobs which involve entirely different types of qualifications, skills, responsibilities or working conditions, but which are nevertheless of equal value. The Committee also reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that companies that do not have a job evaluation system use objective criteria for determining pay free from gender bias.

Equal remuneration with respect to pension schemes.  The Committee recalls its previous comments concerning the need for corrective action to compensate women who had previously been excluded from participating in pension schemes, and to address the limited participation of women in supplementary pension schemes due to exclusion of certain job categories (so-called white spots). Noting that the research on the number of employees without occupational pension provision in 2006, as well as on the so-called white spots in occupational pensions, has been delayed, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to provide the results of the studies in its next report, as well as on the measures taken to address these issues.

Pay structures. Flexible pay systems, performance pay and long pay scales. With regard to measures taken to follow-up on the recommendations made by the study group “Equal Pay Works!” to reduce remuneration differences between men and women due to flexible pay systems and long pay scales, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that the Labour Foundation and the Council for Public Sector Personnel Policy have been asked to report on their achievements in this regard in October 2008, and to indicate how the problem should be addressed. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the progress made with respect to the measures taken to avoid flexible pay systems and long pay scales resulting in pay inequalities between men and women, and the efforts made to ensure that performance-related pay systems are based on objective criteria free from gender bias.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

General measures to address the gender wage gap and differences in remuneration of part-time workers. The Committee notes the communication from the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), received on 29 August 2008, which was sent to the Government for its comments thereon. In its communication, the FNV, referring to an average wage gap between men and women of 18 per cent, calls upon the Government to formulate concrete and specific objectives, targets and timetables to narrow this gap. According to FNV, such specific targeted action is necessary, given that men are usually working full time whereas many women are working part time (an average of 23 hours per week). Surveys show that women working part time are often not getting the extra earnings and bonuses received by their male counterparts working full time in the same job. Furthermore, most of the jobs in which women are employed are paid less (i.e. governmental departments, non-profit sector and social service sector) than jobs in which men are employed.

The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it noted that in 2005 49.8 per cent of women and 17.4 per cent of men working in the Netherlands were employed half time, and that certain provisions in collective agreements, such as those excluding part-time workers from bonuses relating to overtime, lead to pay inequalities between men and women. The Committee also recalls that research was continuing into distinctions in working hours, and that the study group “Equal Pay Works!” had recommended that equal pay should be addressed in a wider context, by giving additional attention to combining work and family life, greater involvement of employees in more flexible working-time arrangements, and breaking the glass ceiling by encouraging diversity policies in companies and encouraging career ambitions of women. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that a Task Force Part-Time Plus was established in 2008 which has the aim of making it easier for employees to combine work and care duties and to encourage women who wish to work more hours to do so. The increase in labour participation is expected to lead indirectly to narrower differences in remuneration. The Committee further notes that various studies and surveys have been undertaken with a view to determining differences in remuneration and their underlying causes. A report from the CLOSE (Correction of Wage Gap in Sectors) project was presented to Parliament in December 2007 covering research on differences in remuneration in seven sectors (i.e. food and luxury industry, retail industry, financial institutions, cleaning industry, public administration, hospitals and other health care and welfare care) for which the uncorrected difference in remuneration remained relatively high. The Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment is also analysing the extent to which differences in remuneration can be traced back to emancipation, discrimination, sociological or economic factors. The results of the study were to be finalized by October 2008 and were expected to help focus solutions addressing remuneration differences. The Committee further notes that the report of the Labour Inspectorate on differences in remuneration in 2006, which has not yet been finalized, will devote attention to distinctions based on working hours in the various sectors. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the impact of the Task Force Part-Time Plus on reducing differences in remuneration between men and women, including differences relating to part-time work. The Committee also hopes that results of the research undertaken by the CLOSE Project and on the causes of the wage gap will permit the Government to take more targeted action to reduce the wage gap between men and women, taking into account the high number of women engaged in part-time work and their concentration in jobs that are generally lower paid.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

1. Measures to address the wage gap. With respect to differences in remuneration in the private and public sectors due to certain factors such as the type of contract and occupational gender segregation, as well as those remuneration differentials between men and women that could not be explained, the Committee notes the findings of the final report “Equal Pay – Now or Never” of February 2007 of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” confirming an unexplained pay difference between men and women of 7 per cent. The Committee notes that the study group has looked into pay differences that find their origin in exclusion from collective agreements of certain employees, in scaling and valuation of jobs, in part-time work, in specific contracts or in discrimination, and that it has made a number of recommendations to address these issues (see also points 3, 4 and 5 of this direct request). The Committee notes in particular that, with a view to detecting more effectively unjust pay inequalities, the study group recommends, among other things, that the use by companies as well as the Government and civil service of control tools such as Quick Scan equal pay and the Management Tool on Equal Remuneration should be stimulated, and that their effects should be monitored during 2007. The study group also recommends that equal pay should be addressed in a wider context by given additional attention to combining work and family life, greater involvement of employees in working-time arrangements, and breaking the glass ceiling by stimulating diversification policies in companies and stimulating career ambitions of women. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on: any follow-up given to the recommendations made by the study group “Equal Pay Works to address equal pay in wider context, and the results achieved. Noting further that the labour inspectorate will publish its 2006 survey on remuneration, the Committee asks the Government to forward a copy once it has become available”.

2. Equal remuneration with respect to pension schemes. The Committee refers to its previous comments regarding the need for corrective action to be taken to compensate women who had previously been excluded from participating in those schemes, and the limited participation of women in supplementary pension schemes due to exclusion of certain job categories (so-called white spots). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that now that the costs for reparation of pension schemes have to be paid by employer and employee, it is stimulating the social partners to make agreements for occupational pension provision by fiscal incentives. The Government further states that, together with the social partners, it is studying the number of employees without occupational pension provision in 2006, the results of which will be available in 2007. With respect to the so-called white spots in occupational pensions, the Government states that once the data on the progress in the reduction of these “white spots” are available, it will be in a position to provide information on the job categories that are excluded from the pension schemes and on the number of men and women employed in these categories. The Committee hopes that the Government will be able to provide further details in its next report on the results of the study on occupational pension provision and on the job categories that are excluded from the pension schemes, as well as on the measures taken to address these issues with a view to ensuring the application of the principle of equal remuneration between men and women to pension schemes.

3. Collective agreements. Application of the principle of equal remuneration to part-time workers. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the 2007 report of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” that 49.8 per cent of the women working in the Netherlands in 2005 were employed half time. The study group concludes that there are still certain provisions in collective agreements that directly or indirectly lead to pay inequalities due to the exclusion of certain groups of employees, including part-time workers, from certain provisions (e.g. exclusion of part-time workers from overtime bonuses if overtime hours do not exceed the normal 40-hour working week). The Committee notes that the study group recommends to the social partners that, in order to avoid pay differences in collective agreements, a critical review in terms of equal pay is necessary so that exclusions can be objectively justified. The Committee further notes from the Government’s report that the 2006 survey on distinctions in working hours in collective agreements has not been published yet but that it is expected that the percentage of agreements that make distinctions will have decreased. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the outcome of the survey on distinctions in working hours and on the follow-up given to the recommendations of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” to address pay inequalities resulting from exclusions in collective agreements, in particular with respect to part-time workers.

4. Pay structures: Flexible pay systems, performance pay and long pay scales. With regard to measures to reduce apparent pay differences between men and women in flexible pay systems, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the study group “Equal Pay Works!” was to hold several activities on flexible pay systems and on their consequences for gender neutral job evaluation. The Committee notes the findings of the study group “Equal Pay Works!” that performance-related pay will increase in the coming years. Therefore, using gender-neutral criteria when judging performance will be important as well as to monitor who in the organization are profiting the most or the least from this type of pay. However, the report of the study group does not contain any information on the results achieved in reducing pay differences in flexible pay systems. In addition, the Committee notes that the study group indicates that long pay scales may result in pay inequalities since many female employees – who often have shorter working careers – will never reach the top within their bracket. In order to help diminish pay inequalities, policies should take into account personal development of female employees and their promotion into new jobs in new scales in their own or in a new company. The duration of pay scales should be reduced and scaling women that return to the labour market in scale zero should be avoided. The Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report: (1) on the measures taken or envisaged, including cooperation with the social partners, to avoid that pay structures, including long pay scales, result in pay inequalities between men and women; (2) on the specific impact of certain measures, such as the equal pay control tools, on reducing pay inequalities between men and women resulting from flexible pay systems; and (3) the efforts made to ensure that performance-related pay systems are based on objective criteria free from gender bias.

5. Article 3. Promotion of the principle and tools for objective job evaluation. The Committee notes that the report on the evaluation of the gender-neutral job evaluation manual was not annexed to the Government’s report. It further notes the information in the Government’s report that the study group “Equal Pay Works!”, which comprises representatives from the social partners and the Equal Treatment Commission was set up to raise awareness on equal pay in companies, trade unions and in collective bargaining and to promote the instruments on equal pay. The Committee notes various activities of the study group to develop quick equal pay tests and to disseminate existing control tools on equal pay. With a view to detecting more effectively unjust pay inequalities, the study group recommends, among other things, that the use by companies as well as the Government and civil service of control tools such as Quick Scan equal pay and the Management Tool on Equal Remuneration should be stimulated, and that their effects should be monitored during 2007. It further highlights that, in situations where no job evaluation system is in place, criteria for scaling should be transparent and open for checks. Some collective agreements feature only a small number of job descriptions with few indications of qualification levels and entail the risk of non-meticulous scaling. Also, many companies still use random pay criteria such as “last pay” and “negotiation skills” which may lead to unequal pay. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken, in cooperation with the social partners, to ensure that companies who do not have a job evaluation system use objective criteria for determining pay free from gender bias. Please also indicate how the use of the equal pay control tools on reducing the unexplained differentials in remuneration between men and women in both the public and private sectors, including in the health sector. Please also provide a copy of the evaluation report of the gender-neutral job evaluation manual.

6. Part III of the report form. Enforcement. The Committee notes the summary provided by the Government of the decision of the High Court of 30 January 2004 concluding that not every violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work had to lead to pay adjustments for the workers who were paid less than they should have been. The main objective was to test fairness and reasonableness and the principle of equal pay for equal work in equal circumstances had to be taken into consideration but other circumstances could also be taken into account. The Committee refers to its 2006 general observation and draws the attention of the Government to the fact that the High Court’s interpretation of equal remuneration appears to give a more restrictive interpretation of the principle embodied in the Convention and in the national legislation which refers to equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. Moreover, by indicating that not all pay differences found in violation of that principle have to lead to pay adjustments, the effective enforcement of the principle of equal pay might be at stake. In order to assure itself that the Convention is being effectively applied, the Committee asks the Government to clarify in its next report whether the High Court’s decision indeed only concerns equal pay for men and women for equal work, and to specify what would be other circumstances that could be taken into account when deciding whether or not pay adjustments in equal pay cases are justified. Please also provide a copy of the High Court’s decision as well as copies of any other decisions involving questions of principles relating to Convention No. 100.

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

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and the extensive documentation attached. It also notes the comments and additional information supplied by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) in its communication dated 25 November 2004.

1. Wage gap. The Committee notes from the 2004 survey of the labour inspectorate that the remuneration gap between men and women slightly decreased from 23 per cent in 2000 to 22 per cent in 2002 in the private sector and from 15 per cent to 14 per cent in the public sector. Remuneration differentials between full-timers and part-timers who work 12 hours or more a week amount to 22 per cent, and 43 per cent for those who work less than 12 hours a week in the private sector; in the public sector wage differentials between full-timers and part-timers represent 6 per cent and 10 per cent, respectively. The survey explains that gender differences in remuneration may be partially ascribed to the fact that women workers are generally younger, less highly educated and often work part time. Women are more often than men employed in administrative or caring jobs and low-level jobs, have more often flexible or fixed-term contracts, and are employed in the health and welfare sector rather than the building or industry sector. A similar trend is noted with respect to wage differentials between full-timers and part-timers. When taking into account these individual and job-related facts, the survey shows that there is still an unexplained wage gap in the private sector of 7 per cent (5 per cent in 2000) and 3 per cent in the public sector (3 per cent in 2000). The unexplained remuneration gap between full-timers and part-timers amounts to 5 per cent in the private sector (11 per cent in 2000) but has almost disappeared in the public sector. Information provided by the FNV further indicates that research undertaken with the Wage Indicator, a tool allowing detailed research on the gender wage gap, reveals that pay inequalities also continue to exist with respect to the same jobs performed by men and women working in the same enterprise. Noting further that the unexplained remuneration gap between men and women has not really decreased and that the Government had previously indicated that it would undertake micro-level research to determine the exact causes of this gap, the Committee hopes that the Government’s next report will include information on the outcome of this research, including the measures taken to address the causes identified. It also asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to address some of the other underlying reasons for remuneration differentials between men and women, such as those relating to the type of contracts under which women are employed, and their occupational segregation into lower paying jobs or occupations and lower positions without many promotion opportunities.

2. Equal remuneration with respect to pension schemes. In previous comments, the Committee had noted that following EC jurisprudence, the reparation of pensions had become partially mandatory and that a large number of pension funds had begun correcting the pension provision for those women who had been excluded from pensions in the past. It had also noted that the Government had called upon the social partners to investigate whether they could offer financial support for correcting pension provision for (older) women. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it will no longer take further corrective action in this regard and that the social partners are also responsible for providing compensation for these former exclusions. It also notes the view of the FNV that the social partners should not be responsible for providing compensation, which is the responsibility of the Government and the employers in conformity with the EC law and jurisprudence. The Committee recalls that the principle of equal remuneration between men and women also applies to pension schemes, and hopes that the Government will continue its efforts, in cooperation with the social partners, to ensure that women who have been excluded in the past from participating in pension arrangements benefit from the protection provided by the Convention, and that further corrective action will be taken for them. With respect to the limited participation of women in supplementary pension schemes due to the exclusion of certain job categories (so-called white spots), the Committee notes that with the adoption of the new Pensions Act, which will replace the Pension and Saving Funds Act, it is expected that the number of "white spots" will be reduced to 3.5 per cent in 2006. If this fails, the Government will introduce a formal obligation not to exclude employees from pension schemes. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the progress made in the adoption of the Pensions Act and the achievement of this goal. Please also indicate the job categories that will still be excluded from the pension schemes and the number of men and women employed in these job categories.

3. Application of the principle of equal remuneration to part-time workers. The Committee notes the results of the survey conducted by the Equal Treatment Commission (ETC) in the 2002 Survey on the application of the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act concluding that while a number of problems of non-compliance had been identified, employers, government authorities or parties to a collective agreement had in most cases followed the ETC’s opinion to comply with the provisions of the Act. Yet, the Committee notes that the 2003 Survey of the labour inspectorate on distinctions between working hours in collective agreements shows that while the percentage of part-time workers who were fully excluded from collective labour agreements decreased to 2 per cent in 2003; still 45 per cent of the agreements, either fully or partially, exclude part-timers or make distinctions between part-timers and full-timers. The FNV raises in this regard the point that although the ETC had determined that some of the distinctions made were not permitted under the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act, this had not led to the abolition of these distinctions. The Committee notes that the Government nevertheless continues to cooperate with the social partners to reduce the number of distinctions in collective agreements, and asks the Government to keep it informed on the progress made in this regard. Considering the high number of women employed in part-time work, please also provide information on the impact of these efforts on the wage differentials between men and women.

4. Flexible pay systems. The Committee notes that a workshop, involving equal remuneration experts and job evaluation experts, has been held to develop a tool to ensure equal remuneration in the context of flexible pay systems. It notes that following proposals by the workshop, special attention is now being given to the flexible pay systems in the information provided by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, and that flexible pay systems form part of the equal remuneration checklist developed by the Labour Foundation. The equal remuneration quick scan and the equal remuneration management tool also relate to flexible pay systems. The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report whether these measures have had any impact as to the reduction of the apparent differences between men and women in flexible pay systems.

5. Article 3. Promotion of the principle and tools for objective job evaluation. With reference to its previous comments relating to the implementation of the action plan on equal remuneration, the Committee welcomes the activities carried out to promote equal remuneration in small and medium-sized enterprises, and the campaigns to raise awareness among the general public and the works councils. It also notes with interest that the equal remuneration quick scan, which aimed at rapidly assessing job evaluation systems and structures in organizations and ministries, has now been completed. In addition, a complementary management tool is being developed to enable the user to verify the causes of the remuneration differences established by quick scan and to verify whether these differences are in contravention with the law. The Committee further notes from the Government’s report that the tool "Weighing the balance: A gender-neutral job evaluation manual" still has to be evaluated and that a copy of the evaluation report will be forwarded to the Committee, once completed. The Committee encourages the Government to continue to provide information on the implementation of the equal remuneration action plan and the measures taken to promote the use of gender-neutral job evaluation systems and to indicate how they have impacted on the wage gap between men and women in the public and private sectors. Please also provide information on the use of the abovementioned manual in the health-care sector, including information on its impact.

6. Part III of the report form. Enforcement. The Committee notes the information provided by the FNV concerning the nature and number of cases dealt with and opinions expressed by the ETC relating to gender discrimination, including remuneration. The FNV also indicates that the High Court has issued a decision on the general principle of equal remuneration, which may have an impact on the future jurisprudence involving questions of principle relating to Convention No. 100. The Committee asks the Government to provide in its next report the details relating to this High Court decision as well as general information concerning the enforcement of the equal remuneration legislation by the courts, the labour inspectorate and the ETC.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report and the attached documentation and legislative texts.

1. The Committee notes the legislative developments with respect to equal remuneration of men and women, including the adoption of the Act of 21 December 2000 amending the Pensions and Savings Funds Act (and certain other Acts) and the Decree of 5 February 2002 providing for additional protection with respect to equal treatment of men and women in pensions in all respects, including benefits, modules and contributory arrangements. With respect to the comments previously raised by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) concerning the application of EC jurisprudence with respect to access of women and part-timers to pension schemes, and the limited participation of women in pension schemes due to the exclusion of certain job categories (merely administrative jobs and temporary work), the Committee notes the information on the cases handed down by the Equal Treatment Commission, with respect to the exclusion of part-timers and women from pension schemes, that provide more than the statutory requirements. It invites the Government to continue providing information on the practical application of the amendments of the Pensions and Savings Funds Act, the Equal Opportunities Act and the Civil Code, which guarantee equality of treatment between men and women with respect to pension schemes, as well as on the decisions handed down by the Equal Treatment Commission. Further, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that, due to the European jurisprudence, the voluntary reparations of the pensions have become partially obligatory and that since the mid-1990s a large number of pension funds have begun correcting the pensions of women who were excluded in the past from pension arrangements. Noting that the State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment, in June 2002, has called upon the social partners to investigate whether they could offer financial support for correcting the pensions of (older) women, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the corrective action taken with respect to women that have been excluded from participating in pension schemes.

2. Further with regard to the limited participation of women in pension schemes due to the exclusion of certain job categories (the so-called "white spots"), the Committee notes that the social partners have set the goal that all employees should have access to supplementary pension schemes and that the achievement of this goal will be evaluated in 2006. The Government indicates that, based on the outcome of this evaluation, it will decide whether, in order to combat exclusion from participating in pension schemes, there is a need to adopt legislation on the general operation of pension allocation. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the categories of jobs currently excluded from the pension schemes and to provide information on the progress made in achieving the goal set by the social partners. Please also supply a copy of the new Pensions Act, once adopted.

3. The Committee notes that the Commission on Equal Treatment is currently drawing up an inventory of the judicial decisions on the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act and that the Labour Inspectorate is undertaking further research into the distinctions made between full-time and part-time workers in collective agreements. Noting that both studies will be completed at the end of 2002, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply, with its next report, copies of the research. Noting also that, following the recommendations made by the Labour Foundation collective agreements that made distinctions between full-time and part-time workers are being revised, the Committee asks the Government to keep it informed of the progress made in this regard, and its impact on women’s and men’s average hourly wage differential.

4. The Committee notes that the Government completed its research concerning the requirement for equal remuneration in flexible pay systems, which consisted of: (i) a quantitative research component; and (ii) the development of a specific instrument to ensure equal remuneration. It notes from the information provided that these flexible remuneration systems are widely used and that some vigilance is needed because of apparent differences between men and women in flexible pay systems (for example, 9 per cent more men than women receive an individual bonus) and because certain job categories appear to have less access to variable pay systems; flexible pay appears to apply mostly to higher level posts and external or production-related functions, in which women are often under-represented. Noting that the new instrument, which is still being developed, aims to assist employers in assessing how equal remuneration is applied in flexible pay systems used in their organization, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on how equal remuneration is being ensured in the context of flexible pay systems and to provide a copy of the new instrument once developed.

5. In relation to job classification in the health sector, the Committee takes note of the Government’s statement that, with respect to the job evaluation system used in the health sector (Function Evaluation Health-care II System or FWG-II), the system has been amended and changed into a new system (FGW-III) that is owned by the Joint Employers’ Association for Health Care. It notes that the FGW-III is currently being introduced and that the Ministry for Health, Well-being and Sport has not received any complaints to date. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the new system with its next report.

6. Further to its observation, the Committee invites the Government to continue to provide data on the wage differentials between men and women in the public and private sectors and on the implementation of the measures taken or envisaged in the Action Plan on Equal Remuneration. Please also provide copies of any future labour inspectorate surveys as well as Circulars by the State Secretary of Social Affairs and Employment with respect to equal remuneration policy.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

1. The Committee welcomes and takes note of the periodical Evaluation of the Equal Treatment Act and related legislation (1994-2000), the Action Plan on Equal Remuneration of 2000 as well as the Circulars by the State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment on the implementation of the Plan. It notes that the Plan includes measures to promote the use of gender-neutral job evaluation systems and to ensure equal remuneration for men and women in new flexible wage systems, as well as measures to raise awareness on equal pay amongst the general public and the social partners and to stimulate the social partners to promote equal pay. The Committee notes with interest the series of ongoing activities to implement these policy measures, including the legislative developments with respect to equal remuneration in pensions, the dissemination of information on equal pay through the Internet and the development by the Commission on Equal Treatment of a "quickscan" aimed at rapidly assessing job evaluation systems and structures in organizations and ministries. It notes in particular the report "Weighing the balance: Towards an instrument for gender-neutral job evaluation" providing a legal analysis of the requirements of job evaluation systems which resulted in the development of an instrument to assess the gender neutrality of job evaluation systems ("Weighing the balance: A gender-neutral job evaluation manual"). The Committee notes that the manual has been widely disseminated and promoted by the social partners and that the Labour Foundation has developed a checklist for employers based on the manual to evaluate their remuneration systems. Noting that the manual and the checklist are currently being used and tested by a number of system users and will be evaluated in early 2004, the Committee asks the Government to keep it informed of the progress made and to supply a copy of the evaluation report, when completed.

2. The Committee notes from the latest survey conducted by the Labour Inspectorate (2000) that the wage gap between men and women remained stable at 23 per cent in the private sector and 15 per cent in the public sector. However, taking into account individual and job-related factors, the wage gap between men and women reduced to 5 per cent (7 per cent in 1998) in the private sector and to 3 per cent in the public sector (4 per cent in 1998); it amounted, however, to 11 per cent when comparisons were made between full-time and part-time workers. The survey results further show that wage differentials between men and women increase with age and that in the private sector wage differentials increase when women get into higher level posts. The Committee notes that, in order to determine the exact reasons of these wage differentials, micro-level research into wage differentials has started. Noting that the impact of this research as well as that of the other abovementioned measures on the current wage gap can only be measured in 2004, the Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to report that these activities have further reduced the existing remuneration gap between men and women in the private and public sectors.

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

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and attached documentation as well as the report submitted in relation to Convention No. 111. The Committee also notes the comments and additional information supplied by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV).

1. The Committee notes the legislative developments concerning sex discrimination. It notes that in order to implement the Council Directive 98/52/EC of the Council of the European Union on the implementation of the burden of proof in cases of sexual discrimination, the Equal Opportunities Act and the Civil Code were amended. Under the new article 6a of the Equal Opportunities Act and article 7:646(8) of the Civil Code the burden of proof shifts to the defendant in cases of alleged discrimination. In this regard, the Committee notes that the study on the possibility of streamlining regulations regarding equal treatment was presented to Parliament in 1999 as part of the evaluation of the Equal Treatment Act (see paragraph 6) and it concluded that streamlining is not desirable in every case, but as far as the burden of proof was concerned the EU system could be applied in all cases. The Committee further notes that on 1 October 2000 the two year limit for equal pay claims established under section 11 of the Equal Opportunities Act was abolished and replaced with the customary time limit for pay-related claims of five years. The Committee notes with regret that the bill to amend section 7 of the Act, which provides that a woman can submit a claim for equal pay on the basis of a comparison of the salary a man earns for the work of equal or almost equal value performed "within the same enterprise", was discarded. The amendment was aimed at widening the scope for establishing a benchmark salary but was put aside on the basis that the Equal Treatment Commission gives a broad interpretation of the term "same enterprise". The Committee draws the attention of the Government to the fact that even though the Equal Treatment Commission interprets the notion of "same enterprise" in a wide manner, the explicit inclusion in the text of the law of a broader benchmark would have been a guarantee against future possible narrow reading of the existing provision. Finally, the Committee notes that on 1 January 2001 a new Act entered into force amending the Pension and Saving Funds Act, among other laws. Noting with interest that the Act, in application of the principle of equal treatment of men and women, requires equal benefits for men and women in all respects, including option modules and contributory arrangements, the Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the Act with its next report.

2. The Committee notes that according to the survey conducted by the Labour Inspectorate on the position of men and women in the private and public sectors in 1998, the wage gap did not decrease between 1996 and 1998. As in 1996, women working in the private sector earned on average 23 per cent less than men, while in the public sector the wage gap amounted to 15 per cent. Taking into consideration individual and job-related factors, in the private sector there was still an unexplained gap of 7 per cent and, in the public sector, a gap of 4 per cent, which could therefore be attributed, at least partly, to sex discrimination. The Committee invites the Government to continue providing data on the wage differentials between men and women in the private and public sector.

3. The Committee notes with interest that the Government adopted in May 2000 an Equal Remuneration Plan of Action. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the Action Plan and information on the implementation activities and measures put in place or contemplated and on their impact. The Committee notes the indication of the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) that in the annex to the Action Plan a legal analysis of requirements of job evaluation schemes with regard to equal remuneration was published. Noting that this report is part of a three-stage study commissioned by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment aimed at developing an instrument to screen job evaluation systems for gender neutrality, the Committee asks the Government to send a copy of the report already published as well as the report on the other two stages of the study as soon as available. In relation to job classification, the Committee also notes that on 28 May 1998 the Equal Treatment Commission handed down a decision on the basic job evaluation system in the health-care sector, according to which the application of this system can lead to indirect discrimination on grounds of gender and thus contravenes equal treatment legislation. Noting that, following the Commission’s recommendations, a revised job evaluation system is now in place, the Committee asks the Government to provide a copy.

4. The Committee notes that between 1 June 1998 and 13 April 2000 the Equal Treatment Commission handed down seven decisions on discrimination between men and women in relation to pensions schemes which provide more than the statutory minimum requirements. In four cases the Commission found that the relevant schemes were discriminatory. According to the observations of the FNV at least one of these decisions was not endorsed by the Court and female categories of workers were excluded from the pension schemes. The Committee invites the Government to continue providing information on the practical application of the amendments to the Equal Opportunities Act and the Civil Code, which guarantee equality of treatment between men and women in respect to pension schemes, as well as on decisions handed down by the Equal Treatment Commission. Information should also be provided on any other relevant judicial rulings. The Committee notes the FNV’s observation that, although direct discrimination against women and discrimination against part-timers, who are predominantly women, in pension schemes have to a large extent disappeared thanks to legal restrictions and European jurisprudence, two major problems still exist. The first is that employers and pension schemes are resisting the application of the EC Court of Justice’s ruling of 1994 according to which women and part-timers ought to have had access to pension schemes since April 1976. In this respect, it has to be taken into account that in December 1999 the High Court/Supreme Court ruled that the term of limitation was 30 years under the old Civil Code with the effect that reparation had to go back to April 1976. In addition, on 6 November 1998 the Supreme Court handed down a ruling admitting with retrospective force a retired stewardess to a more favourable occupational pension scheme, which was open only to pursers and assistant pursers, jobs for which women were not eligible at the time. The Committee asks the Government to supply information on any initiatives taken to guarantee women access to pension schemes according to this jurisprudence. The second problem pointed out by the FNV is that one out of five female workers does not participate in pension schemes compared to one out of 20 male workers. According to the FNV the reason for the limited participation of women is that they work in jobs which are excluded, such as administrative ones, or because temporary workers are excluded. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the categories of jobs which are excluded from pension schemes and statistical data on the numbers of men and women employed.

5. The Committee notes the information on the decisions handed down by the Equal Treatment Commission between 1998 and 2000 concerning the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act. The Committee invites the Government to continue to provide information on the decisions of the Commission as well as on any relevant judicial rulings. The Committee further notes the information on the study of the Labour Inspectorate on the distinctions made, as at 31 December 1998, between full-time and part-time workers in 118 collective agreements covering around 3.8 million employees. The study found that 17 agreements, mainly in the commercial sector, apply only partially or not at all to part-time workers who work only 12-13 hours. This figure was approximately the same in 1991. However, the proportion of agreements providing that that the agreement will be applied proportionally increased from 21 per cent in 1991 to 32 per cent in 1998. The Committee notes that women are the most affected by these agreements because they are over represented among part-timers. Noting that the Government has decided to repeat the study on collective agreements, the Committee asks the Government to provide it as soon as completed. Please, also provide a copy of the report. The Committee also notes that following the Labour Inspectorate’s study, the Labour Foundation evaluated collective agreements in the light of the entry into force of the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act and social partners agreed that threshold provisions for part-timers were inappropriate given the trend towards more variation in working patterns. They repeated the recommendation of 1993 that bargaining parties should reconsider and change most of the provisions which made a distinction between full- and part-timers. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the follow up of this recommendation.

6. The Committee notes the information concerning the evaluation of the Equal Treatment Act presented in 1999. In particular it notes that the evaluation recognized that the "restrictive system" based on the provision according to which "the prohibition on discrimination shall not apply to indirect discrimination which is objectively justified" has given rise to problems, but that it did not advocate amending the Act. Moreover, the evaluation found that in some sectors the application of the Act was made difficult by the existence of accepted ideas and behaviour and, in some cases, was even resisted. Moreover, it found that the Act is an unexplored territory for many people to whom its provisions may apply and, in particular, few persons were found to be aware of the ban on discrimination against part-time workers. The difference between direct and indirect discrimination as well as the Commission and its work were also found to be unfamiliar. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide the recommendations included in the evaluation with its next report as well as information on the measures taken or envisaged to implement them. It also asks the Government to indicate the measures taken to promote awareness of measures that need to be taken to promote equal remuneration for work of equal value.

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

1. The Committee notes the entry into force of the "Barber Directive" (96/97/EC of the Council of the European Union), which amends Directive 86/378/EEC of the Council of the European Communities on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes. Following the enactment of the Barber Directive, the Committee notes with interest the amendment of the Equal Opportunities Act in March 1998 which prohibited discrimination between men and women in regard to the categories of persons eligible for pension provisions, the details of such provisions, and the implementation of pension schemes (section 12(b)). The Committee further notes the amendment of section 7:646 of the Civil Code which includes payments and entitlements under pension schemes as terms of employment. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of these amendments, including any decisions handed down by the Equal Treatment Commission.

2. With reference to the entry into force on 1 November 1996 of the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act, the Committee notes that, since then, the Equal Treatment Commission has ruled on 13 petitions. The Committee requests the Government to provide information as to any violations and to continue providing information on the practical application of the Act. The Committee also notes that the Labour Inspectorate is preparing a study on the terms of employment of part-time workers in collective agreements. Noting that this is a repeat of a study undertaken in 1991, which showed that the legal status of part-time workers was not always equal to that of full-time workers, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with the findings and recommendations contained in the study.

3. With reference to the entry into force on 1 September 1994 of the Equal Treatment Act, the Committee notes the large rise in the number of petitions submitted to the Equal Treatment Commission (from 29 in 1994 to 509 in 1997) and that a significant percentage of the petitions claimed sex discrimination. It further notes from the Government's report the slight decline in 1997 (from 40.7 per cent in 1996 to 35.2 per cent in 1997) which, according to the Equal Treatment Commission's 1997 annual report, could probably be attributed to the enactment of legislation which enables claims to be based directly on new grounds (working hours, marital status) rather than on grounds of indirect discrimination under the Equal Treatment Act of 1994. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed on the number and types of petitions submitted and their outcome. The Committee notes with interest the information on Equal Treatment Commission Case 97-54, in which it found that a salary-scale system applied by the Minister of Education, which was based only on paid working experience and the last salary earned, while ignoring criteria such as education and unpaid experience relevant to the job, amounted to a form of indirect discrimination against women. It also notes that this decision has been taken into consideration in the regular talks between the Minister of Education and the unions representing teachers on the criteria to be used in determining the salaries of women returning to work. In this regard, it requests the Government to provide information on any agreements reached between the Minister and the unions on criteria to be applied in establishing salary scales and on any measures taken or envisaged to implement the agreement.

4. Further to its previous direct request, the Committee notes that, in December 1995, a study was completed on the effectiveness of the Equal Opportunities Act. It notes that, on the basis of the findings of the study, a further study is to be conducted in 1998 to investigate the possibilities of streamlining regulations regarding equal treatment which are presently contained in a number of different Acts. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of the findings and recommendations of the study.

5. The Committee notes with interest that sections 7 and 11 of the Equal Opportunities Act are to be amended so as to broaden the criteria on which the comparison is to be based for determining "work of equal value" (i.e. "someone working in the same undertaking", whereby "undertaking" is defined and interpreted narrowly), and that the limitation period for equal pay claims, which now stands at two years, will be brought in line with the generally applicable limitation period for pay claims laid down in the Civil Code. Noting that an amendment to widen the basis of comparison beyond the enterprise would promote the application of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with copies of the amendments, once adopted. Furthermore, the Committee notes that additional legislative amendments will be examined upon completion of the evaluation of the Equal Treatment Act planned for 1999. The Committee requests the Government to provide it with the findings and recommendations of the evaluation, including information on measures taken or envisaged to implement the recommendations.

6. The Committee notes the Government's statement that, so far, the Equal Treatment Commission has not handed down any decisions on the question of whether the job evaluation system employed in the health-care sector is in accordance with the equality legislation, and requests the Government to provide it with relevant information once it becomes available.

7. Further to its previous direct request, the Committee notes with interest the continued initiative by the Inspectorate of the Ministry of Social Affairs to examine regularly the extent to which the wage gap between men and women can be explained by differences in personal circumstances and jobs. It notes that the 1996 study showed that the average gross hourly pay rate for women aged 23 and over was 24 per cent lower than for men. The study showed that, after a regression analysis was undertaken taking into account individual and job-related factors, there was still a difference of 7 per cent in pay that could not be accounted for and could therefore, at least partly, be ascribed to sex discrimination. The Committee, noting that the unadjusted difference in pay between men and women aged 23 and over was 26 per cent in 1993 as compared to 24 per cent in 1996, while the adjusted difference fell from 9 per cent in 1993 to 7 per cent in 1996, requests the Government to continue, in future reports, to indicate the results of such reviews. Furthermore, noting the Government's statement that the adjusted 7 per cent difference in pay between men and women may partly be due to the fact that job evaluation systems are not gender-neutral, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with information on the findings and recommendations arising from the study on job evaluation schemes undertaken in 1998.

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

1. Further to its observation, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the entry into force on 1 September 1994 of the Equal Treatment Act, which prohibits direct and indirect discrimination on the basis of, inter alia, sex in the fields of employment, school and career guidance and commercial and other goods and services. It also notes that the Equal Opportunities Act 1989 and section 1637ij of the Civil Code, including the specific rules on equal pay, have remained in force, so that the general rules on sex discrimination contained in the new legislation apply only to cases not covered by the earlier legislation. The Committee also notes that a new Equal Opportunities Commission (set up in September 1994 to deal with cases covered by all of the aforementioned legislation) has more extensive powers than the previous Commission and may, when giving its opinion, make recommendations to the person who is discriminating and ask the courts to give a binding judgement as to whether a particular action conflicts with the legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the legislation and on the activities of the Commission, as these relate to the scope of the Convention. Please provide information on any measures taken to improve the effectiveness of the equality legislation which emanate from the evaluation concluded in December 1995. The Committee would also be grateful for information on the Commission's opinion as to whether the job evaluation system employed in the health care sector is in accordance with the equality legislation.

2. The Committee notes with interest the initiative taken by the inspectorate of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment to examine regularly the extent to which the wage gap between men and women can be explained by differences in personal circumstances and jobs. It notes that the survey based on the situation as at October 1993 disclosed that, after adjusting for these differences, the wage gap of 26 per cent was reduced to 9 per cent. Please continue, in future reports, to indicate the results of these reviews.

3. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes that an information booklet was published by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment in 1995 to encourage works councils to examine whether the principle of equal pay is being applied in their companies and to raise the issue, if necessary, in consultations with the employer or with the Equal Opportunities Commission. Please indicate, in future reports, any further action taken to promote the application of equal pay in collective labour agreements.

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

The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in its report and in the attached documentation.

1. In a previous comment, the Committee noted comments by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) stating that the various forms of flexible employment relationships, which were undertaken mainly by women, were a primary source of pay inequality. The Committee notes with interest that the issue of the lower pay received by women employed on a flexible basis (temporary contract and an hourly wage) in relation to the pay received by full-time employees on permanent contract led to a case before the Supreme Court (Agfa judgement, 8 April 1994, Case No. 15 292). The district court had upheld the plaintiff's claim for equal pay on the grounds that the employment relationship between the plaintiff and her employer was virtually the same as that between full-time employees and the employer (in terms of the long duration and permanent character of her activities) deciding that, accordingly, the original character of the employment relationship had disappeared. The district court took into account the generally accepted principle that employees are entitled to fair pay, which means, inter alia, that equal work performed in the same conditions should receive equal pay, unless there are objective grounds that justify otherwise and held that under section 1638z of the Civil Code - which requires acting as a good employer - that the employer was obliged to remunerate the plaintiff in the same manner as her colleagues on permanent contracts. The Supreme Court upheld this judgement.

2. In this connection, the Committee also notes with interest that the Parliament enacted legislation (with effect as from 1 November 1996), which prohibits discrimination between employees on the basis of their working hours, and as regards the conditions under which an employment contract is entered into, extended or terminated. According to the Government, this means that action against unequal treatment on the grounds of working part time can be taken by means of a less complicated procedure than invoking the ban on indirect sex discrimination. The Government also considers this improvement in the legal status of part-time workers might encourage more men to undertake part-time jobs, thereby promoting a more equal distribution of paid and unpaid work between men and women. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of this legislation and to furnish information on its application in practice.

3. The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain other points.

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

With reference to its previous direct requests, the Committee notes the Government's report.

1. The Committee notes from the report that a survey was carried out by the Wages Department (LTD) in 1991 on equal remuneration between the sexes in all branches of the Industry. The study showed that, although there were no cases of direct discrimination, there were cases of indirect discrimination in 78 out of the 635 companies covered by the survey. The findings were communicated back to all the employers so as to raise their attention to the problem of indirect pay discrimination. The Government points out, however, that under section 21 of the 1989 Equal Treatment Act the Minister of Social Affairs was not obliged to take action against the employers since such cases are linked to the objective justification of the discrimination in the particular situation and thus fall outside of the scope of such follow-up action.

The Committee requests the Government to explain in its next report how employers guilty of indirect pay discrimination between men and women are sanctioned, bearing in mind that section 1 of the 1989 Act defines indirect discrimination as "discrimination based on characteristics other than sex which result in discrimination on grounds of sex, unless such discrimination is justified objectively". For instance, are there any court cases showing how the phrase "justified objectively" is to be applied?

2. Regarding its previous comments on "breadwinner premiums" which were found to be a form of indirect discrimination under the 1989 Act, the Committee notes that the LTD's 1991 survey did not encounter any such discrimination. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the outcome of the new survey mentioned in the report which is presently being undertaken by the Collective Employment Conditions Department (CAO) concerning possible remunerative preference given to "breadwinners" in collective agreements.

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

With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes the Government's report.

1. Regarding the problem of applying the equal pay principle in flexible labour relations, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the manner in which legislation is interpreted so as to apply to workers in flexible employment relationships, such as flexible hours of work. It notes the information in the Government's report on the situation of workers with flexible employment relationships and its statements according to which (1) no cases of unequal remuneration related to flexible labour relationships have been submitted to a committee or court; (2) flexible employment relations in the central Government and the other levels of public employment are relatively rare; and (3) these relationships, when they exist, are subject to the relevant public service regulations. Noting the Government's statement that a survey is currently under way into the effectiveness of equal treatment legislation, the Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report any cases of workers with flexible employment relationships suffering unequal pay. It would also appreciate receiving a copy of the findings of the said survey.

2. The Committee had previously commented on the possibility of extending the comparison between wages of women in undertakings where there was no possibility for comparison between women and men doing work of equal value, with wages of men in similar undertakings. The Committee notes from the Government's report that the provision in the Equal Treatment Act, 1989, prescribing equal pay for men and women doing almost the same work, allows for such a comparison and that the Supreme Court, in a 1987 decision, had relied on this. It also notes with interest the Government's statement that its policy is to reduce situations where there are no possibilities for comparison by promoting the removal of barriers between male and female occupations and posts, as well as its investigations into whether the job ranking systems used in hospitals and the commercial services sector are free from sex discrimination elements (which showed that features of male posts are more and better represented than those of womens' posts and that women are rarely involved in the introduction and implementation of job ranking). It also notes that, according to the Government, the necessity of promoting comparisons between similar undertakings does not occur in the central Government as the same job ranking system applies across the board there.

The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on how the possibility of promoting equal remuneration by comparing men's and women's wages in similar undertakings is ensured under the present legislation (for example, in decisions of the Commission for Equal Treatment of Men and Women in Employment or of the courts) and on any steps taken to encourage the use of the said comparisons to promote equal remuneration between the sexes. It would also like to receive information on the outcome of the joint follow-up study for eliminating possible elements of sexual discrimination in hospitals, which the parties to the collective labour agreements in this sector intend to carry out.

3. The Committee is addressing a direct request to the Government on certain other points.

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

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

1. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in response to the Committee's previous comment regarding the surveys undertaken by the Wages Inspection Department (LTD), which disclosed some cases of non-conformity with the 1975 equal pay legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made to overcome the problems identified by the LTD, as a result of the role taken by the Minister of Social Affairs and Employment under the new legislation.

2. The Committee notes with interest the 1988 study undertaken by the LTD concerning equal pay in the retail trade sector, which noted that the "breadwinner premiums" (which appear to be paid only to the person designated as the sole breadwinner in the family) are a form of indirect discrimination, in contravention of the Equal Treatment Act, 1989. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply further information concerning the allocation of these premiums in general and would indicate whether, in the light of this study, consideration is being given to reviewing the basis on which they are awarded.

3. The Committee also notes with interest the information concerning the activities of the Equal Rights Commission, including the cases on equal pay dealt with by the Commission. The Committee requests the Government to continue to furnish such information, which indicates how the Convention is applied in practice, in its future reports.

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

1. The Committee notes that, commenting on the application of the Convention, the Netherlands Trade Union Federation (FNV) has stated that the various forms of flexible employment relationships (viz. homework, tele-work, freelance and stand-by work) which are undertaken mostly by women, are the primary source of pay inequality. Women who carry out these forms of employment are unable to invoke any or most of the legislation proscribing discrimination because of the type of contract under which they are employed. According to the FNV, the choice of contract is mainly, if not entirely, determined by the employer (even though the employee does not object or personally opts for various elements of flexible employment). The FNV calls upon the Government to adopt a more energetic policy, including taking legislative measures, to ensure that the majority of workers engaged in these forms of employment do not remain outside the scope of legal protection. The FNV considers that such action would facilitate the elimination of large-scale inequalities in remuneration.

The Committee notes that, in responding to the above comment, the Government has stated that the problem of so-called flexible labour relations is considered to be an important policy issue in the country. The Government also states that Convention No. 100 does not specifically oblige governments to take the action requested by the FNV.

The Committee notes from the Government's report that all categories of workers are covered by the equal pay provisions of the Equal Treatment for Men and Women Act, 1989, the only condition under section 1(b) of the Act being that the work be performed under the authority of an employer (an individual, a body corporate or other competent authority). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report concerning the manner in which the legislation in force is interpreted by the relevant authorities and tribunals to apply to those workers about whom the FNV has expressed concern.

2. In its previous direct request, the Committee had noted that pursuant to the above-mentioned 1989 Act, the basis for comparing remuneration is restricted to the wage normally received by a worker of the other sex in the same undertaking for work of equal value or, failing that, for work of virtually equal value (section 7(1)), whereas section 3(2) of the 1975 equal pay legislation also allowed for the possibility, in cases where no work of equal or approximately equal value was done by a worker of the other sex in the undertaking where the worker concerned was employed, of extending the comparison to the wage normally received by a worker of the other sex in an undertaking of as nearly as possible the same kind in the same sector for work of equal value or, in the absence of such work, for work of approximately equal value. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate the means by which women workers who are heavily concentrated in certain sectors of activity, where the possibilities of comparison may be insufficient at the level of the enterprise, may seek to have their claims for equal pay determined. The Committee notes from the report of the Government that the possibility for extending the scope of comparison to another undertaking, as provided for under the 1975 Act, was never used in practice for the reason that it is very hard to prove that differences in wages between employees in different companies are based on sex discrimination, as this can easily be countered by stating that one company just pays better for work of the same value than another company. As the provision in question was never used, the Government did not include it in the new legislation.

The Committee recognises that the question of determining how broadly comparisons between the jobs performed by men and women should be permitted is a particularly difficult aspect of applying the Convention. Nevertheless, it is evident that adequate possibilities for comparison must be available if the principle of equal pay is to have any application in a sex-segregated labour market. As the Committee stated in its 1986 General Survey, it is essential, in order to ensure equal remuneration in an industry employing mostly women, that there be a basis of comparison outside the limits of the establishment or enterprise concerned. This is not to say that factors affecting wage levels which are outside the scope of the Convention (such as geographical location, surplus or scarcity of particular skills or the pay policies of individual enterprises) are to be excluded from consideration. It is true that differences in remuneration for women employed in different enterprises but engaged in work of equal value may be due to the fact that one company pays its workers at a higher rate. However, there may be a basis for inferring discrimination on the basis of sex if, in examining the total wage structure of the enterprises in question, it becomes apparent that in one company, there is a consistently wider differential between female and male employees than in another comparable enterprise. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the 1975 equal pay legislation also provided that where comparisons were made outside the undertaking (pursuant to section 3(2)), account was to be taken of "general differences in the wage structures of the undertakings concerned" (section 5(3)). While acknowledging the difficulties involved in broadening the scope of comparison, the Committee requests the Government to further consider how, in practice, women workers who find their possibilities for comparison insufficient at the level of the enterprise may seek to enforce their right to equal pay for work of equal value.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

Further to its previous comments the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report and in the documentation made available subsequently.

1. The Committee notes the entry into force on 1 July 1989 of the Equal Treatment for Men and Women Act ("Reparation Act") which consolidates earlier equality legislation (the Equal Wages for Women and Men Act, 1975, and the Men and Women (Equal Treatment) Act, 1980). The Committee notes with interest the amendments made in the 1989 Act which are aimed at achieving more effective operation of the principle of equal treatment, including (i) the extension of the scope of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value from work situations where there was a contract of employment or an official appointment to almost any work situation where one person is in a position of authority over another, whether in the public or private sector; (ii) removal of the obligation to seek advice from the Equal Treatment Commission before presenting a claim in court; (iii) enabling representative advisory bodies (such as works councils) and interest groups (e.g. trade unions and employers), as well as individual employees, to request the Equal Treatment Commission to investigate alleged discriminations; and (iv) the possibility of group action. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether all categories of workers are now covered by the equal pay provisions as amended. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government would provide information concerning any measures to publicise and promote the provisions of this legislation, together with details concerning its enforcement by the Commission on Equal Treatment for Men and Women in Employment or the courts.

2. The Committee notes that pursuant to the 1989 amendment, the basis for comparing remuneration is restricted to the wage normally received by a worker of the other sex in the same undertaking for work of equal value, or failing that for work of virtually equal value (section 7(1)), whereas the 1975 equal pay legislation also allowed for the possibility, in cases where no work of equal or approximately equal value was done by a worker of the other sex in the undertaking where the worker concerned was employed, of extending the comparison to the wage normally received by a worker of the other sex in an undertaking of as nearly as possible the same kind in the same sector for work of equal value or, in the absence of such work, for work of approximately equal value (section 3(2)). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the means by which women workers who are heavily concentrated in certain sectors of activity, where the possibilities of comparison may be insufficient at the level of the enterprise, may seek to have their claims for equal pay determined.

3. The Committee notes from the surveys undertaken by the Wages Department (LTD) that some cases of non-conformity with the 1975 equal pay legislation were disclosed (viz. Reports concerning application of the Act in Dutch Trade and Industry (1985), the Insurance Trade (1988) and the Retail Trade (1989)). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on any action taken or considered to bring about wage equality in those cases.