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

Convention (n° 100) sur l'égalité de rémunération, 1951 - Lituanie (Ratification: 1994)

Autre commentaire sur C100

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. Legislation. The Committee previously noted that: (1) section 26(2)(4) of the Labour Code provides that an employer shall ensure equal pay for work of equal value; and (2) section 140(5) provides that men and women shall receive equal pay for the same or equivalent work. It noted that “equivalent work” means that, based on objective criteria, the work does not require lower qualifications and is not less significant for the employer’s objectives than other comparable work. The Committee notes with regret the lack of information provided by the Government on the application of these provisions in practice. It recalls that, even where the term “work of equal value” is provided for in the legislation, its scope may be narrower than the principle enshrined in the Convention as a result of too restrictive formulations that require work to be an equal level of complexity, responsibility and difficulty, or the same qualifications (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 677). In light of the persistent gender pay gap, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 26(2)(4) and 140(5) of the Labour Code, including by providing examples of the manner in which the terms “work of equal value” and “equivalent work” have been interpreted in administrative or judicial decisions.

Article 2. Minimum wages. The Committee previously noted that, under the terms of section 141 of the Labour Code, monthly and hourly minimum wages are determined by the Government upon the recommendation of the Tripartite Council, and can only be paid for unskilled jobs which do not require any specific qualifications or professional skills. Collective agreements may set higher amounts for minimum wages. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that in 2020 the net minimum monthly wage was increased from EUR395 to EUR425, which represents 53 per cent of the amount of the net average wage. It further notes from the statistical information provided by the Government that 10.9 per cent of all workers received the minimum monthly wage in 2018, representing a 2.7 per cent decrease compared with 2017. With regard to collective agreements, the Committee takes note of a national collective agreement signed on 10 July 2020 between the Government and several trade unions providing for wage increases in the public sector. The Committee once again asks the Government to: (i) indicate how it is ensured that, in defining minimum wages through collective agreements, rates are fixed on the basis of objective criteria, free from gender bias, and that female-dominated occupations are not undervalued in comparison with those in which men predominate; (ii) provide relevant extracts from collective agreements fixing minimum wages; and (iii) provide statistical information on the percentage of women and men who are paid the statutory minimum wage.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. Public sector. The Committee previously noted that the remuneration of workers in the public sector is determined on the basis of the complexity of work, responsibility, working conditions and workers’ qualifications and performance, and that a draft Law on the remuneration of workers in state and municipal institutions was under consideration in order to establish basic wage coefficients. The Committee takes note of the adoption of the Law on Remuneration of Employees and Members of Commissions of State and Municipal Institutions (hereinafter, the Law on Remuneration), which entered into force on 1 February 2017. It notes that the Law on Remuneration classifies jobs in four levels, based on the level of education required, in order to provide equal opportunities for equally educated employees in public institutions to receive fair pay for their work. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to the Law, each institution shall approve its own remuneration system, as each institution is different in the nature of its functions and the number of staff and it would not be appropriate to have the same methodology for different institutions. The remuneration system shall specify employee categories based on position and qualifications, as well as the salary range (minimum and maximum) and the forms of payment for each of them, the grounds and procedures for allocating additional payments (bonuses and allowances) and the procedure for wage indexation. The Government adds that the labour inspectorate provides advice to help institutions develop their own remuneration system. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that the 2005 methodology for the assessment of jobs and positions implemented by the Tripartite Council has not been reviewed. Such criteria as job difficulty, responsibilities, working conditions and the qualifications of employees are reflected in their job descriptions. The Committee however notes that, according to the 2019 European country report on gender equality in the public sector, even with rigid regulation of wage policies, employers are given broad discretion (pay brackets or a non-transparent system of performance rewards) to decide individually on the exact level of remuneration of individual employees (p. 18). The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the methodology used in the civil service and for state and municipal employees to classify and rank different jobs and positions on the basis of the above criteria, such as complexity of work, responsibility, working conditions and workers’ qualifications and performance, and to indicate how it is ensured that this classification does not result in an undervaluation of jobs traditionally held by women. It further asks the Government to provide statistical information on the distribution of men and women in the civil service and in state and municipal institutions, disaggregated by category, and their respective levels of remuneration.

Awareness-raising. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that during the implementation of the Action Plan for the Promotion of Non-discrimination 2017-19, several education, information and training activities were carried out addressing the gender pay gap. The Government adds that in 2018 the Office of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman carried out public awareness-raising activities on gender inequality in the public sector. The Committee recalls in this regard that the persistence of significant gender pay gaps requires governments, along with employers’ and workers’ organizations, to take more proactive measures to raise awareness, make assessments, and promote and enforce the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. The Committee therefore asks the Government to continue providing information on the concrete measures taken, including by the Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson, to promote public awareness regarding the persistent underlying causes of pay inequality and the relevant legislative provisions adopted to promote the effective application of the principle of the Convention.

Enforcement. The Committee previously noted that, despite the preparation of a checklist for labour inspectors to ensure equal rights for women and men at work, no case relating to unequal remuneration has been detected by the labour inspectorate or dealt with by the courts. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in 2018 the State Labour Inspectorate conducted more than 60 inspections in the area of the implementation of equal treatment for women and men in labour relations, of which only one case of wage differentials for the same work or work of equal value was detected. Furthermore, the Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson received only one complaint on unequal remuneration between men and women in 2018, as well as one complaint in 2019. In both cases, the Ombudsperson found that the complaints were unfounded. The Committee wishes to recall 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 (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 870). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken to strengthen the capacity of labour inspectors to detect and address unequal remuneration between men and women, as well as to assist workers with the procedures and remedies available. It further asks the Government to continue providing information on any cases or complaints concerning inequality of remuneration detected by or dealt with by labour inspectors, Labour Dispute Committees, the Equal Opportunities Ombudsperson or the courts, as well as the penalties imposed and remedies provided.