Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2016, publiée 106ème session CIT (2017)

Convention (n° 100) sur l'égalité de rémunération, 1951 - Cameroun (Ratification: 1970)

Autre commentaire sur C100

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. The Committee notes that the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), in its concluding observations, expressed concern at the persistent gender pay gap in Cameroon (CEDAW/C/CMR/CO/4-5, 28 February 2014, paragraph 28). In view of the lack of information on this matter in the Government’s report and so that it may determine the extent to which the Convention is applied, the Committee requests the Government to provide all available data on the distribution of men and women and their respective levels of remuneration, at least by sector of activity and, if possible, by occupational category, in the private and public sectors. It further requests the Government to provide information on pay gaps, particularly any collected during the formulation and adoption of the National Gender Policy in 2014, and also information on any corrective measures envisaged.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. The Committee recalls that, owing to historical attitudes and stereotypes regarding women’s aspirations, preferences and capabilities, certain jobs are held predominantly or exclusively by women (for example, in the caring professions) and others by men (for example, in the construction industry) and that the concept of “equal value” implies the adoption of a method for measuring and comparing the relative values of different jobs or posts. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the General Civil Service Regulations of 9 October 1994 and the Labour Code of 14 August 1992, including their implementing regulations, specify methods for the evaluation of jobs and that these methods are usually based on diligence, skills and punctuality. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the apparent confusion between the concept of evaluation of professional conduct – which aims to evaluate the way in which a worker performs his/her duties – and the concept of the objective evaluation of jobs, namely measurement of the relative values of jobs not having the same content, on the basis of an examination of the tasks to be accomplished. The Committee emphasizes that objective job evaluation must enable evaluation of the job, not of the individual worker. Although the Convention does not determine any particular method for undertaking such an evaluation, Article 3 presupposes the use of appropriate techniques for objective job evaluation, comparing factors such as the skills required to accomplish the tasks concerned, the effort involved, and responsibilities and working conditions in the post or job in question. The Committee, therefore, requests the Government once again to indicate the measures taken to promote, especially vis-à-vis the social partners, the use of objective job evaluation methods, as provided for in Article 3 of the Convention, with a view to ensuring that the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value is reflected in any methods for determining or revising job or post classifications and consequently pay scales.