Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1999, publiée 88ème session CIT (2000)

1. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government's report in reply to its previous direct request, in particular, the fact that the Labour Code has not yet been adopted and is currently under consideration in the National Assembly of Transition. In this respect, it hopes that the text finally adopted will take into account the suggestions made in its previous comments, namely: (a) amendment of the former section 82 so that the principle of equal remuneration laid down in the new Labour Code is in line with that set out in the Convention, namely that the comparison will go beyond "identical or similar" work to cover work "of equal value"; and (b) the introduction of specific sanctions for any violation by the employer of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

2. With regard to the Presidential Circular warning employers who treat women in a discriminatory manner, particularly with regard to the payment of certain allowances, the Committee notes the Government's indication that this text does not exist for the simple reason that the situation has not yet been observed and that the information should be considered to have been communicated in error. Re-examination of the report submitted by the Government in 1994 on the present Convention shows that it refers in fact to a circular of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs subsequent to noting that "certain enterprises do not respect the principle of equality of treatment towards women in regard to the granting of certain allowances. This is the case for allowances made for reimbursement of expenditure on telephone, electricity and water incurred by workers at their homes. Certain private enterprises in Rwanda exclude women workers from this advantage". The Committee therefore reiterates its request for information on the role played by the labour inspection services and by the courts in regard to application of the principle of equality of remuneration between men and women. The Committee takes this opportunity to recall what it has already affirmed on many occasions (see paragraph 253 of its 1986 General Survey), that it is hard to accept statements suggesting that the application of the Convention has not given rise to difficulties or that full effect is given to the Convention, without further details being provided. By its nature, by the way in which it develops, and as a result of the equivocal character of discrimination with regard to remuneration, the application of the principle will necessarily unearth difficulties. For example, one of the difficulties inherent in application of the principle is lack of knowledge of the facts, since inequality of remuneration, in all countries, is almost always poorly identified and observed statistically. The Committee notes in this context that, in its report, the Government requests the technical assistance of the ILO in establishing a system of labour statistics disaggregated by sex and indicates that it has forwarded this request to the competent service. The Committee therefore requests the Government to keep it informed in its next report of measures taken to obtain a compilation, disaggregated by sex, of statistical labour data and results obtained, followig technical assistance from the Office. The Committee takes due note of the table of scales for central administration officials for the years 1974 to 1996 communicated by the Government. This table is not disaggregated by sex and the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate in which categories there are more women and what is the percentage of women in category I.

3. Taking due note of the Government's statement that the results of the study on the post assessment system in the public sector are expected by the end of 1999, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in its next report of the conclusions of this study and measures taken or envisaged in response.