Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2001, publiée 90ème session CIT (2002)

The Committee notes the extensive information provided by the Government in its report and attached documentation. It also notes the comments of the New Zealand Employers’ Federation (NZEF) and the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU), as well as the Government’s response to those comments.

1. Legislative framework. With reference to previous comments concerning the negative impact of the Employment Contracts Act, 1991 (ECA) on the application of the Convention, the Committee notes with interest the repeal of the ECA and its replacement by the Employment Relations Act, 2000 (ERA), which came into effect on 2 October 2000.

2. In its comments, the New Zealand Employers’ Federation (NZEF) notes that, for more than 20 years, it has been unlawful in New Zealand to pay individuals differently on the basis of their sex. In the view of the NZEF apparent payment disparities are due to factors other than sex.

3. The New Zealand Congress of Trade Unions (NZCTU) welcomes the enactment of the Employment Relations Act, 2000, noting that the new employment relations framework established by the Act could serve as a foundation for subsequent measures to improve the effective application of the Convention. In this regard, the NZCTU points to the important role that collective bargaining can play in reducing the male-female wage gap. The NZCTU nevertheless indicates its concern that existing legislation has not been effective in promoting equal pay and equal employment opportunities. The NZCTU reiterates that there is no legislation recognizing the concept of equal pay for work of equal value, there is no provision for bringing cross contractual equal pay complaints and the application of equal pay legislation is limited to situations where employees work for the same employer.

4. With regard to national legislation, the Government indicates that equal remuneration for workers performing the same or similar jobs is required by several Acts which provide a range of overlapping protection against gender-based salary discrimination, including the ERA, the Human Rights Act, 1993 (HRA), and the Equal Pay Act, 1972 (EPA). Referring to its previous comments regarding the scope of the protection against sex-based pay discrimination provided by national legislation, the Committee notes that the ERA retains the "substantially similar" employment requirement reflected in earlier legislation and its definition of employment discrimination appears to be restricted to cases where employees work for the same employer (see ERA, section 104(1)).

5. The Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the principle of equal remuneration within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention refers to equal remuneration for "work of equal value", a reference that goes beyond the concept of the "same" or "similar" work, choosing instead the "value" of the work as the point of comparison. With respect to the scope of comparison, the Committee recalls once again that the reach of the comparison should be as wide as allowed by the level at which wage policies, systems and structures are set. The Committee once again asks the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure the observance of the Convention and its application in practice, such as the revision of legislation, or the issue of guidelines for use in job evaluations and contract negotiations.

6. Complaint procedures and enforcement mechanisms. Referring to its previous comments on the low number of equal pay complaints brought in New Zealand during the reporting period, the Committee notes that no equal pay complaints were heard by the Employment Tribunal or the Employment Court during the reporting period, nor were any equal pay cases brought under the EPA. The report indicates that 52 complaints of sex discrimination were brought under the HRA, four of which involved complaints of sex-based salary discrimination. In this context, the Committee notes the NZCTU’s statements pointing to structural and financial impediments to monitoring compliance with existing legislation. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken or are contemplated to disseminate information to the public regarding the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value and to inform the public of the right to bring a complaint of pay discrimination.

7. The Committee notes the activities being carried out by the Labour Inspectorate of the Department of Labour to disseminate employment information to the public. In light of the low number of equal pay complaints, however, it is bound to stress also the importance of effective enforcement mechanisms, including the investigative function of the Labour Inspectorate. It asks the Government to continue to supply information regarding the number of equal pay complaints brought under the national legislation, the action taken and the outcomes, as well as to provide information regarding the activities of the Labour Inspectorate - in addition to information dissemination - to ensure observance of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value.

8. The male-female earnings differential. The Government indicates that it continues to be fully committed to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers, but recognizes that further progress remains to be made in eliminating sex-based pay differentials in the New Zealand labour market. According to the report, recent surveys from Statistics New Zealand show a further reduction in the pay gap between women and men during the reporting period. Figures from the firm-based Quarterly Employment Survey show an increase in the ratio of women’s to men’s earnings from 82.1 per cent in June 1997 to 83.9 per cent in June 1999. The household-based Household Labour Force Survey Income Supplement shows an increase of 0.16 points in the female to-male ratio of average hourly earnings, from 0.818 in June 1997 to 0.835 in June 1999. The Government suggests that this shift reflects a longer term and gradual change in the labour market.

9. The Government indicates that a research project analysing the components of the male-female earnings gap is being carried out by the Department of Labour. According to the report, the evidence collected by the project so far indicates that a range of social and economic trends contributed to the reduction of the gender pay gap between 1984 and 1999, including: a narrowing of the male-female gap in educational attainment; a reduction of the male-female gap in terms of work experience; a decrease in the number of employed women responsible for the care of dependent children; convergence in the industrial and occupational composition of male and female employment; and shifts in the relative demand for differently skilled labour.

10. The NZCTU indicates that the statistical evidence contained in the report is insufficient to support the Government’s statement that there is a gradual long term closing of the gender earnings gap. It notes that the 1999 Diversity Index of the EEO Trust does not share the Government’s confidence in a closing gender earnings gap, finding instead that the gap has not closed since the previous index. Noting the short-term nature of recorded changes in the gender earnings gap, the NZCTU cautions against concluding prematurely that the gap is closing. Instead, the NZCTU indicates that it would be beneficial to carry out more in depth research to enable the social partners to identify those areas of the labour market where work is most needed to ensure effective application of the principle of the Convention. The Committee trusts the Government will take the necessary measures to continue to reduce the remuneration gap between men and women in coordination with the social partners.