ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Page d'accueil > Profils par pays >  > Commentaires

Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2020, publiée 109ème session CIT (2021)

Convention (n° 100) sur l'égalité de rémunération, 1951 - Japon (Ratification: 1967)

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the observations of the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC–RENGO) communicated with the Government’s report. It further notes the observations of the Japan Business Federation (NIPPON KEIDANREN) received on 29 August 2019.
Article 1 of the Convention. Gender pay gap. In reply to the Committee’s request for statistical information on the gender wage gap in both the public and private sectors, including statistics covering non-wage workers, the Government indicates in its report that in 2017 women’s average earnings were 74.7 per cent of those of men (a wage gap of 25.3 per cent), compared with 73.6 per cent in 2015 (a wage gap of 26.4 per cent). The disparity of scheduled cash earnings for men and women workers (per hour) varies by industry: for example, women’s average earnings in finance and insurance were 62.7 per cent of those of men (a gap of 37.3 per cent), 81.7 per cent in transport and postal services (a gap of 18.3 per cent) and 88.7 per cent for high school teachers (a gap of 11.3 per cent). Further, the proportion of women senior executives in private enterprises was 8.5 per cent in 2015 and 9.9 per cent in 2018. The Government adds that there are no statistics on wage disparities between men and women in the public sector. The Committee observes that, although the gender pay gap is steadily decreasing, it still remains significant and that the share of women in leadership positions has remained very low despite the rising education level of women, the implementation of gender equality laws and the increasing participation of women in the labour market. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), women only held 13 per cent of managerial positions in Japan in 2019 and accounted for only 4.9 per cent of senior management positions in the central government in 2018, and 10.9 per cent in the private sector in 2017. Moreover, women occupied only 5.3 per cent of the seats on the boards of listed companies in 2017. The Committee asks the Government to provide: (i) information on the measures taken to promote women’s access to a wider range of jobs with career prospects and higher pay by addressing the underlying causes of the existing vertical and horizontal occupational gender segregation (such as stereotypes regarding women’s professional aspirations, preferences and capabilities, their role in the family, their concentration in low-paid sectors and part-time work, or a reward system based on uninterrupted tenure); and (ii) updated statistical information on the gender pay gap disaggregated by economic activity and occupation, and the gender distribution by job category in the public sector.
Articles 1 and 2. Indirect discrimination based on sex. Legislation. Following the 2006 amendments to the Equal Employment Opportunities Law (EEOL), the Committee noted that section 7 adopts a restrictive approach by authorizing the authorities to identify only three circumstances, which could amount to indirect discrimination, rather than by introducing a general definition of indirect discrimination that could be applied to a variety of situations. It noted the Government’s statement that indirect discrimination is too broad a concept that could be used in almost all cases, hence the decision to adopt a Ministerial Ordinance to specify the elements that could potentially be considered indirect discrimination. The Government indicates that, following discussions held from August to December 2018 in the Subcommittee on Employment, Environment and Equal Opportunities of the Labour Policy Council, no conclusions were reached on the expansion of the definition of indirect discrimination as there have been no new court rulings. In this regard, the Committee wishes to emphasize once again that the concept of indirect discrimination is imperative to identify and address situations in which certain treatment is extended equally to everybody, but leads to discriminatory results for one particular group protected by the Convention, such as women, ethnic and religious groups, or persons of a certain social origin. In practice, such discrimination is subtle and less visible, making it even more important to ensure there is a clear framework for addressing it, and proactive measures are required to eliminate it. Further, the Committee wishes to point out that, where no cases or complaints, or very few, are being lodged, this is likely to indicate a lack of an appropriate legal framework, lack of awareness of rights, lack of confidence in or absence of practical access to procedures, or fear of reprisals. The lack of complaints or cases could also indicate that the system of recording violations is insufficiently developed (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 746 and 870). The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on any further discussions, decisions or actions taken to address indirect discrimination related to all the components of remuneration received by men and women, and not only wages.
Fixed-term employment. Recalling that the Convention applies to both regular and non-regular employment, including fixed-term contract workers, and taking into account the gender dimension of the employment structure, the Committee previously asked the Government to provide information on: (1) the measures taken to address the undervaluation of female dominated occupations and adjust remuneration levels across regular and non-regular employment classifications in both the public and private sectors; (2) the measures taken to improve women’s opportunities to enter and re-enter regular employment; and (3) the progress made in the adoption of guidelines on the employment of regular and non-regular workers.
With regard to the measures taken to adjust remuneration levels across regular and non-regular employment classifications in both the public and private sectors, the Government recalls that the remuneration of national public service employees is determined according to the principle of remuneration based on the duties prescribed in section 62 of the National Public Service Act, as well as in section 2 of the Law on Remuneration for National Public Employees in Regular Service. Gender discrimination in remuneration is also prohibited under section 27 of the National Public Service Act. The remuneration of local public service employees is based on the duties prescribed in sections 24 and 26 of the Local Public Service Act, and section 13 of the Act prohibits discrimination based on sex in deciding the amount of remuneration. Concerning the measures taken to eliminate wage disparities between part-time, fixed-term and dispatched workers and regular workers in the private sector, the Government refers to the development in 2018 of the Guidelines on the prohibition of irrational treatment for part-time, fixed-term and dispatched workers, also known as the Guidelines on Equal Pay for Equal Work (thereinafter he Guidelines). According to the 2017 Action Plan for the Realization of Work Style Reform, these Guidelines identify three areas where wage disparities are prevalent: (1) basic salaries, pay rises and bonuses; (2) various kinds of allowances; and (3) education, training and welfare. Regarding the measures taken to improve women's opportunities to enter and re-enter regular employment, the Committee refers to its comments on the application of the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156). Recalling that women workers in Japan are highly concentrated in non-regular employment, the Committee asks the Government to provide further information on the application of the Guidelines on Equal Pay for Equal Work, indicating the manner in which they contribute to the reduction of wage disparities between fixed-term and regular workers, in both the public and private sectors.
Part-time work. The Committee previously asked the Government to provide information on: (1) the application in practice of section 8 of the Part-time Workers Act; (2) the conversions requested, including from part-time to full-time, and from fixed-term to indefinite positions; and (3) the measures taken to address the issues raised by JTUC–RENGO with respect to part-time workers who are subject to different criteria for appointment in each workplace, even where the job types and work duties are the same, particularly in the local public service.
The Committee notes the Government’s statement that, according to the General Fact-finding Survey on Part-time Workers of 2016, the replies from 39.4 per cent of workplaces indicated that a readjustment of salaries was ensured following the revision of the Part-time Workers Act. The Government also indicates that there are no statistics, disaggregated by sex, on conversions from part-time to full-time and from fixed-term to indefinite positions. With regard to the issues raised by JTUC-RENGO concerning the criteria for appointment of part-time workers, and therefore their job classification in the local public service, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Local Public Service Act and the Local Autonomy Act were partially revised in 2017. The Committee asks the Government to continue providing information on the measures taken to contribute to closing the gender pay gap between part-time workers and regular workers. Following the revision of the Local Public Service Act and the Local Autonomy Act, the Committee also asks the Government to indicate the measures taken to extend the protection provided to part-time workers in the private sector to part-time workers in local government.
Career-track systems. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the application of the two-career track system, one for women and one for men as an employment management system, has led in practice to lower levels of women in management positions and has therefore caused wage disparity. Consequently, it urged the Government to step up its efforts to increase the percentage of women in the integrated career track and to provide information on any measures taken to promote actively objective job evaluations across the tracks. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, according to a survey conducted in 2017, only 6.5 per cent of employers with 10 or more employees have introduced the career-track system, covering 15.1 per cent women workers. With regard to the measures taken to promote objective job evaluations across the two tracks, the Government considers that an objective job evaluation method under which wages are decided according to the content of duties at one stage is not compatible with the salary system in Japan. The Committee notes that ,even though implemented by only 6.5 per cent of companies, the double/separate career-track system as it is devised is gender-based because it leads to significantly lower levels of women in management positions and is therefore bound to cause wage disparity between men and women workers. In this regard, the Committee encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that career-track systems are not either directly or indirectly discriminatory in relation to women. It also asks the Government to provide updated statistical information on the distribution of men and women in the different tracks, as well as the impact of the career track system in force on the level of earnings of women, with a view to addressing wage discrimination.
Articles 3 and 4. Objective job evaluation and cooperation with the social partners. The Committee previously requested the Government to: (1) provide information on the measures taken to promote and develop ways in which the salary setting system can incorporate objective job evaluation methodologies, in both the private and public sectors; (2) report on the awareness raising and educational measures taken to better inform employers, employees and supervisors of objective job evaluation and the importance of ensuring that gender bias does not enter into the remuneration system; and (3) specify the status of the guidelines on support for initiatives taken by employers and employees to solve the wage disparity between men and women and to provide information on the manner in which they are recognized, promoted and applied. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that few enterprises adopt the complete job-based salary system, even if the system is introduced by combining job-based and performance-based salaries. It also states that job evaluation criteria do not necessarily facilitate the implementation of the Convention, since human resources development is based on categories of job type and employment status, rather than job requirements. The Government refers to a number of guidelines/manuals that have been elaborated to encourage companies to design clear, fair and objective salary and employment management systems, including: (1) “Guidelines for Support for Initiatives taken by Employers and Employees to Solve the Wage Disparity between Men and Women"; and (2) “Guidelines for Job Evaluation through the Grading Method by Element" revised in 2019 and currently entitled “Manual for inspection and consideration of basic salary using job evaluation” (Manual). In its observations, the JTUC–RENGO indicates that this Manual applies to part-time and fixed-term workers without taking into account the issue of wage disparities between men and women. In addition, the Manual still does not include criteria related to the workload and working environment of workers, making such evaluation disadvantageous for workers.
The Committee notes the Government’s acknowledgement that job evaluation in the country is based on workers’ individual characteristics rather than the value of the positions held. Recalling the importance of implementing objective evaluation methods that measure and compare the relative value of different jobs, the Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the “Guidelines for Job Evaluation through the Grading Method by Element" revised in 2019 in order to assess whether the criteria used are free from gender bias.
Enforcement. The Government indicates that in 2017, a total of 135,785 regular inspections were conducted at the national level and five violations were found of section 4 of the Labour Standards Act due to gender pay disparity. With regard to the seafarers, no violation of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value was found among the 9,518 inspections conducted from April 2017 to March 2018 by mariners labour inspectors. The Government also states that the Employment Environment and Equal Employment Departments (Offices) of the Prefectural Labour Bureaus, as well as the Maritime Safety and Environment Department and Maritime Promotion Department for seafarers provide services such as consultation, guidance and support for the settlement of disputes. Recognizing the difficulties faced by labour inspectors in identifying cases of pay discrimination, or of determining whether equal remuneration is being provided for work of equal value, particularly where men and women do not perform the same work, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the development of specific training programmes to enhance the capacity of labour inspector capacity to deal with wage discrimination cases. In addition, the Committee asks the Government to continue providing detailed information on the number of inspections conducted, the nature of the violations detected, the content of the guidance provided and the correctional action ordered by labour inspectors or the courts, in cases of violations of section 4 of the Labour Standards Law. Noting the absence of information on wage disparities in the public sector, the Committee also asks the Government to take the necessary measures to develop the collection of such data.
© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer