Summary
This paper seeks to identify whether the ratification of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) equal pay for an equal value of work Convention by New Zealand delivered social justice to the women in the New Zealand society. It has been shown that before the ratification of the ILO convention, there were various instances in the history of the country attempts had been made to eliminate the gender-based pay gap. The first Act to show a serious intention towards eliminating pay discrimination against women was the Equal Pay Act 1972. The Act achieved considerable gains in reducing the percentage points in the gap between what women and men earned. This was achieved through the combined efforts of the Department of Labour and the Human Rights Commission. Most of the challenges were from the arbitration court that still utilized conservative methods in the interpretation of equal pay thus systematically oppressing women.
The ILO Equal Remuneration Convention 100 was finally ratified in 1983. The few years that followed were marked with limited activities in regard to the implementation of equal pay in the labor market. This revival of efforts was triggered by Clerical Workers Union which took a case to the arbitration Court in 1985. Though the Court failed to rule in the favour of women, the activities to push for equality were carried on. Subsequent campaigns culminated in the creation of the Coalition for Equal Value for Equal Pay (CEVEP). The CEVEP was instrumental in creating awareness and negotiating with politicians until the government decided to take major steps that culminated in the Employment Equity Act 1990. The act was short-lived as it was repealed by the new National party government.
New Zealand would remain conspicuously silent on equal pay matters for the next 12 years. Major efforts to reduce equal pay were only revived in 2003, following pressure from the ILO to which New Zealand is a signatory.
Different policy frameworks have been advanced to address gender pay but little progress has been made. The gender pay gap has stubbornly refused to go away in spite of all the efforts put in place by the concerned ministries. And thus in this respect, social justice is yet to be done or delivered to women.
Introduction
The term social justice is used to refer to the idea of ensuring that a society is founded on the “principles of equality and solidarity that takes into account the implementation of justice for every member of the society through; understanding and valuing human rights and the recognition of dignity” of each and every human. Several studies provide literature on ever present inequalities that are seen in the New Zealand society and other countries. These are often tight to individuals or groups’ experiences in regard to economic, social and cultural rights. They also show how the denial of one right goes further to mean denial of other rights as well. For instance, the attainment of good health and housing is related to the economic rights. Thus any form of denying economic rights affects an individual’s right to proper health and this constitutes a social in justice.
In New Zealand and most other countries across the globe, societies have shifted from the traditional model where a woman’s place was at home to look after the children. Women are now competing for jobs that were previously dominated by males. In face of the changing circumstances, different societies have adopted mechanisms through which equality can be reflected between men and women. Countries that are signatories of international bodies such as the United Nations and International Labour organisation (ILO) have been forced to formulate policies to reflect the changing roles of women in the society. Thus any form of discrimination against women now constitutes an injustice. The clamour for equal pay has a long history in New Zealand and other countries. Equal pay is one from through which social justice can be delivered.
Equal pay is basically used to refer to equal remuneration for an equal amount of work for the different members of the society. The term is however most often used to refer to equality as it pertains to women and men in the labour market. Most countries around the world have formulated laws that require both women and men working in the public and private sectors to be paid equally for equal work. New Zealand has had a long history of advocating for women’s rights, for instance, it was the first country in the world to allow women to vote. The issue of equal pay in New Zealand has been around since 1950s.
The period has been marked by inquiries, formulation of laws and attempts to ensure that equal remunerations is fully adopted in New Zealand. The primary purpose of this paper is to establish whether the equal pay convention that was ratified by New Zealand in 1983 went on to ensure the delivery of social justice to women in the New Zealand Society. The paper will trace all the major events in regard to the employment opportunities and pay equity from the earliest time as possible, through history in order to get a clear picture as to whether the ratification of the ILO convention on equal pay for work of equal value by New Zealand has delivered social justice to women.
Definition of Terms
- Equal pay- Equal pay is generally understood to mean a rate of remuneration for work in which there is no element of differentiation between male and female employees based on sex—where the work of male and female employees is substantially similar and calls for the same or substantially similar degrees of skill, effort and responsibility and is done under similar conditions.
- The Equal Pay Act 1972, the Employment Relations Act 2000 and the Human Rights Act 1993 all contain provisions relating to gender pay discrimination and provide complaints-based mechanisms for employees to seek redress for gender pay discrimination claims. The Equal Pay Act applies to employees in both the both private and public sectors. Public sector employees are also covered by the Government Service Equal Pay Act 1960.
- Pay equity- Pay equity means gender doesn’t affect what people are paid. It means women receive the same pay as men for doing the same work and for doing work that is different, but of equal value. The value of work is assessed is assessed in terms of skills, knowledge, responsibility, effort and working conditions. Other considerations in setting remuneration can include market rates, productivity and performance.
- Employment equity- Employment equity is about fairness at work. It means identifying and removing the barriers that prevent women from fully participating at work. Almost half the women workers in New Zealand are in occupations that are more than 80% female, and the female-dominated occupations tend to be lower paid. Women are still under-represented in higher-level jobs.
- Equity and equality- Equality refers to being equal or the same; equity refers to being just, fair or impartial. In the employment equity context, equity refers to proportionality between differences in relevant characteristics of people and jobs and how they are treated.
- Job evaluation- Job evaluation is a systematic process to establish the ‘size’ of a job relative to others.
Source: Department of Labour, International Labour Conventions Ratified by New Zealand, International Services and Legal Group, Wellington 200.
Equal pay in New Zealand prior to the ratification of the 1951 ILO convention
The idea of equal pay first propped up in New Zealand in the 1890s following the successful campaigning for universal suffrage by women. In September 1893, the women scored a first major by gaining the right to vote, however, attainment of equal pay for them was still a mirage away. The society was then deeply engrossed in the belief that woman had no real role in any working; their place in the society was to stay at home and tend to children; and even if they could work, there productivity was never to be compared to that of men. Thus in those days women were employed for less, offering cheap labour which in turn offered a considerable threat to men who were competing for the same jobs.
Earlier statistics carried out in 1893 showed more than half of students in the New Zealand universities were female. More than 45,000 women were employed representing a significant proportion of the adult women population. Due to the increasing concerns about the exploitation of women in the female dominated professions such as teaching and dressmaking, earlier calls for equal pay were spearheaded by women organisations such as the National Council of Women (NCW).
The New Zealand Public Service Association (NPSA) was established in 1913. In the following year, the association passed and adopted a rule requiring that females with equal competence and who are doing similar work to their male counterparts be offered similar benefits in terms of pay and privileges.
This was not implemented in the service sector in the years that followed. Infarct in 1919, arbitration was passed in the court setting the minimum wage for men only.
The great depression that was witnessed in the 1920s did away with any achievements through increased wage cuts, skyrocketing levels of unemployment and even the abandonment of women’s employment in the public and private sectors of New Zealand. In 1927, the labour party included the search for equal for women as one of its major policies. In 1936 an industrial arbitration and amendment act set the first initial minimum wage for women, though it was at 47% of their male counterparts. In the same year conventional belief with an award decision was held to enable male breadwinners to offer support for their wife and up to three children in reasonably standard of comfort.
Vast opportunities for women in the work force were created following the outbreak of the Second World War. In 1942, single women were directed into the essential professions. By the year 1944, every woman who was able bodied was required to be employed somewhere. The Second World War played a major role in ensuring that women got social approval to take part in the essential occupations. Even married women in New Zealand were actively taking part in the workforce. A survey conducted in 1944 indicated that up to 228,000 women were part of the workforce, with additional 8,000 working in the armed forces.
This saw the creation of a sub-committee which was tasked with delivering questionnaires to their members. A minimum wage act in 1945 did not change the pay rates for women and men in New Zealand. However, it also did not have any provisions for the protection of the roles played by males as breadwinners. The clamour for equal pay was boosted by international agencies, for instance, the United Nations charter of 1945, the declaration of human rights in 1949 and the international labour organization (ILO) convention of 1951 which all recognized the principles of equal pay for women and men for equal work. The arbitration court of “New Zealand set a new minimum wage for women at 70% that of males in 1949. In 1953, new wage increases saw the court setting lower limits for women as compared to their male counterparts”.
The equal remuneration convention, 1951
This convention was meant to establish the principle of equal pay for equal work for men and women. A few terms are defined in the first article of the equal pay convention:
- Remuneration- the term remuneration was used to refer to the basic, ordinary or minimum wage or “salary or any additional emoluments whatsoever payable directly or indirectly, whether in cash or in kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of the workers’ employment”.
- “Equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value refers to rates of remuneration established without discrimination based on the sex of an individual”.
The second article of the convention stipulated that appropriate techniques should be used to determine the correct rates of pay which must then be applied to males and females in a way that it is consistent with the principles of equal pay. The principles of equal pay may be implemented via the following means: the laws and regulations of a country; structures that are legally established to determine the wages; all inclusive agreements by all stake holders, for instance, between employers and employees; and lastly through the combination of the above different mechanisms.
The third article of the convention stipulated that if actions are taken by a nation to implement the provisions in the Convention then the required measures will taken to ensure the evaluation of jobs based on the activities to be accomplished. The techniques to be used in the job evaluations will be selected by the bodies that have been established to determine the rates of pay, or, in case the rates are decided upon by an agreement between the different parties then all the parties should be involved. Thus the differences in the rates of pay should hence be based on the different responsibilities of a given job as determined by the evaluation and not with regard to the sex of the employee. If all this is undertaken then the principles of equal pay will have been implemented by the given country.
The fourth article of the convention stipulated that every member should appropriately cooperate with the organisations of employees and workers to ensure that the provisions of the convention are implemented.
A defining moment came in 1956 during the test case of Jean Parker who was employed at the Inland Revenue Department. The case created a widespread interest to the issue of equal pay and the employment conditions for women, particularly in the public sector. The rates for men were much higher as compared to those of the women. However, women were less qualified even when compared to junior males. Jean Parker’s case attracted such attention because the PSC had directed the IRD to cut down her responsibilities and salary. This saw the PSC taking a lot of criticism from women workers who campaigned vigorously for the PSC to reverse its decision. A provisional agreement was reached later that same year which led to the freezing of the PSC decision and reinstating the previous position held by the complainant.
In the year 1957, the two major parties, the Labour part and the National party included equal pay as one of their major campaign platforms for the elections. A council for equal pay involving the different stakeholders was created to address the equal pay issues. The labour party won the elections and in 1958 established the equal pay implementation committee. Following the completion of the working party report by the government service equal pay act was thus passed in 1960.
The National Advisory Council on the Employment of Women (NACEW) was established in 1967under the labour department Act 1954. One of the major responsibilities of the NACEW was to establish a committee to inquire how equal pay is being implemented both in the public and private sector in New Zealand. A report completed by the “committee in 1971 that equal pay should be extended to apply to all rates of remuneration through an equal pay Act, which was expected to go further in preventing gender based pay rate discrimination”. The report also raised concerns about the few professions under which the female sex worked. The women in New Zealand mainly worked as nurses, teachers, secretaries, domestic workers or sales personnel. The committee’s report suggested that the narrow range of professions within which women worked was mainly due to societal prejudices that underestimated the value of a woman’s labour.
New equal pay legislation was formulated and enacted in the year 1972. The implementation of the new act was to be done over the next few years. A series of reports were produced by the Government to monitor equal pay in New Zealand. Such reports included: “Progress for Equal pay in New Zealand (1975) and Equal pay implementation in New Zealand (1979)”. The reports, especially the Equal pay and implementation in New Zealand (1979), applauded the role played by the Human Rights Commission in ensuring that public awareness on equal pay.
By the year 1978, the minimum rates for both men and women had been standardised to for all to be paid a minimum of 1.62 US dollars an hour. Considerations for unemployment and sickness were brought on board in the year 1979.
In spite of all this efforts, there were increasing frustrations in the implementation of some principles of the Equal Pay Act 1972. Part of the difficulties was blamed on the Arbitration Court that had a conservative way of interpreting equal pay. This coupled with limited scrutiny by the Labour Department ensured that women in the New Zealand society did not reap all the benefits of the equal pay legislation that had been passed in 1972.
Ratification of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Equal Remuneration Convention 100 and its implementation by New Zealand
The ratification of the equal pay ILO convention by New Zealand was done in 1983. The terms of the ILO convention 1951 stipulated that equal work should be paid equally regardless of the gender. New Zealand as a signatory of the ILO was thus required to ensure that the ILO equal pay convention was fully adopted. The few years that followed were silent but it was clear that equal pay for equal value of work for both sexes had not been implemented fully. This was mainly blamed on the laxity of the department of labour and the complacence of the Arbitration court which was seen to maintain the status quo in the interpretation of the 1972 Act.
The increased frustration prompted the Clerical Workers Union (CWA) to take the initial measures to demand for the rectification of the situation. The CWA took a case to the court to ensure that employers are forced to negotiate equal pay with employees and other stake holders. In response, “the court stated that the awards referred to in this case have been implemented following the 1972 Act and” since then a satisfactory level of compliance had been achieved. The case was thus dismissed on these grounds.
The court’s action did not deter women’s effort to achieve equal pay to their male counterparts. For instance, in 1985 it was common knowledge that women were being offered 22% less pay for equal work performed by men. Employees of “different motor companies took an industrial action after the court’s ruling and this was followed by a seminar on equal pay that was held at the Victoria University of Wellington in April 1986”. The seminar marked the beginning of the nation wide campaign for the realisation of pay equity. A subsequent meeting held on 28th May of the same year resulted in the establishment of an organisation referred to as Coalition for Equal Value for Equal Pay (CEVEP). The CEVEP moved fast to consolidate support from support from the grassroots in the New Zealand community. The intended support mainly from unionists, academic circles and bureaucrats was meant to pressure the government to find ways in which the ineffective equal pays law could be modified to address the challenges that were being faced.
The CEVEP was undertaking various measures such as the production of newsletters, meetings with politicians, media releases and later the strong relationship with organizations working for human rights ensured that the awareness for equal pay reached as far as possible to different interested groups.
The nation wide campaigns saw the labour government respond by establishing a survey of equal pay in New Zealand. The study was conducted in three phases and was started by reviewing of the existing literature on equal pay. The report on the first phase was tabled in March 1987, and the second phase report was produced six months later.
During the celebrations of the International Women’s Day in March 1988, the Government of New Zealand announced the creation of a Working group that would conduct further research on the equal pay and equal employment issue. In the third phase, the working group produced a report that was titled Towards Employment Equity. The report was instrumental in the establishment of a provisional statutory framework.
The equity employment Act was intended to provide a solution to the past and present discrimination challenges that were being experienced by women in the workforce. The Act became effective two months after being passed. However, celebrations for the Act was short lived as it was soon repealed by the National party Government that was elected in December 1990. The pay equity provisions were later included as part of the Employment Contracts Act legislation of 1991.
The 1991 ECA legislation saw the Equal Pay legislation of 1972 being relegated to being a section in the minimum code. The ECA greatly constrained the link between unions and their members, as a result, the clamour for equal pay lost momentum and the unions now concentrated on minor cases. This kind of scenario persisted for more than 12 years. As it is said the equal pay agenda was tucked at the back of party policies after the controversial ECA legislation.
Failure of pay equity policies and the subsequent renewal of the efforts
The ministry of women affairs released a discussion document in 2002 that was meant to revive the momentum towards the achievement of pay equity. This saw the appointment of an additional commissioner in the Human rights organisation to spearhead the implementation of equal employment opportunities which had a pay equity subsection. In the year 2003 a task force was established with the sole role of ensuring that an action plan is determined to ensure equal pay and employment is achieved in all the areas of the public sector. The renewed push for pay equity by the New Zealand Government was most probably as a result of international pressure. New Zealand as a country is actively involved in international affairs; the country has taken steps in the ratification of conventions regarding equal opportunities for women that are stipulated by international organizations. The various legislative pieces undertaken by the country strongly prohibit the gender based discrimination in employment and stipulate that both men and women who are employed in the same jobs should be paid equally.
In the few past years, New Zealand has taken in a lot of criticism for not complying with the ILO convention that demands men and women be paid equally for equal work. This principle takes into account the societal fact that leads men and women to be employed in different occupations, with tasks accomplished by women being rewarded at lower rates in comparison to tasks performed by men.
Since the last attempt by the labour government to ensure equal pay through the passing of the Employment Equity Act was short lived, there have been efforts to carry out the same in recent years. This is however against the back drop of a changed employment relations systems and various modifications in the existing legislative frameworks.
Existing gaps in pay equity
Evaluations conducted in the year 1977 showed that the gender gap had reduced by 6 percentage points. However, for the 25 years that followed the gap has only narrowed by a small 9% points.
A “survey carried out in June 2003 showed that the average hourly earnings by women were at 87.1% those of men”. The yearly figures that have been established since the year 1997 showed that gender and ethnicity earnings gap are still very much present. The Maori women earnings stood at 89.2% of their Maori male counterparts, while the pacific women earned 99.2% of the pacific men’s average.
A study carried out by the department of labour identified four factors that may be contributing to the prevailing gender pay gap. The identified factors include:
The first factor was the children who depend on their parents in the households.
This factor was estimated to be responsible for 10% of the gender pay gap The second contributing factor was identified as the parity in the education level between males and females. This factor contributed between 0-10 percent of the gender pay gap. The third factor identified was the differences in the number of years spend in the workforce. The factor was thought to contribute to between 15 and 50% of the gender pay gap. The last factor identified by the department of labour was occupational segregation between the sexes. This was estimate to contribute to between 20-40% of the gender pay gap.
These findings do not explain the entire gender pay gap. Since then, there have been some achievements in reducing the gap as it pertains to the first three contributing factors. However, there is a policy vacuum that can enable that can effectively address occupational segregation.
Policies that have been enacted in the new millennium such as enhanced childcare provision and the legislation on payment on parental leave are expected to reduce the gender pay gap by some points. As much as there are children who depend on their parents in the household, the sharing of responsibilities in the house may also reduce the percentage of the gap contributed by this factor.
The achievements attained by women in education since the 1980s has also steadily contributed to the reduction in the gender pay gap in this respect. This not withstanding, the results of the 2001 census showed that there was parity in the earnings between women and men at all levels of education. The women earned less than their male counterparts even though they had same educational qualification. After leaving learning centres and spending approximately five years in the work environment, the gender pay gap across all fields was seen to average approximately $10,000 every year. This gap was attributed to the factor that most women graduates are usually young and therefore the childbearing breaks significantly affect them. It was further established that the investment in education by women was not profitable as compared to their male counterparts. This was due to the fact that women were likely to pay their education debts more slowly from their lesser earnings.
In New Zealand there are small wage differences for men and women in similar work groups. Thus the gap can be closed as the women gain more years of work experience. However, this is not true for other countries. Researches contacted in other countries indicate that this gap usually lessens to stabilize at the middle age, and this is often seen at various levels of education.
Studies indicate that educational attainment levels continue to be a major “contributing factor in the wage gaps seen among the Maori and Pacific populations, however, in both groups their are no visible differences in the educational attainment between men and women”. Uniformity is seen in the Maori and pacific genders up to the tertiary level of education. However, as soon as the males and females in the two groups join the labour market, the gender and ethnic disparities begin to emerge. Among workers who are employed on full time basis, it is seen that women in the Maori and Pekeha communities who have attained tertiary education earn significantly less than the males who are working on full time basis and have attained tertiary education.
It has also been established that the Maori men are seen to earn lesser than their Pekeha counterparts. The Maori women also earn significantly less than their Pekeha counterparts. This finding was attributed to the fact that the Maori women have a tendency to be concentrated in the female occupations that are paid less. This is also true for the males, whereby the Maori men are mainly concentrated in the lower paying but nevertheless male occupations.
Most existing policies are aimed at addressing the work-related differences that are seen between men and women. The formulated policies are slowly showing some gains by narrowing gap between female and male pay rates. A study carried back in 1998 “showed that equal distribution between males and female in the labour market may be achieved in approximately 75 years”. The studies carried out by the Labour Department and graduate studies indicate that there exist lower earnings in the occupations, professions and the labour sectors that are dominated by women. This is partly explained by the subject choice by women in schools which often lead them into lower earning careers. However, recent theories have tended to focus on the work and family balance factors but do not offer an explanation as to why it’s only the female dominated professions that are found to be worth less than those that are male dominated. For a long there has not been a policy in place to address the association between professional differences and lesser pay for women.
A recent survey conducted showed that the gender pay gap is still a thorny issue in New Zealand. The government of New Zealand through the ministry of women affairs recognizes that the causes of the gender gap are so complex and there seems to be no simple remedies to the problem. In 2009, it was established that the medially hourly earning for women were at 88.7% those of men. This represented a gender pay gap of 11.3% since 1998 when the first gap was determined by the income survey. This shows that there has been a very small progress in the past decade. When the measurement is conducted through the full-time median hourly earnings, the result shows that the pay gap remains firmly at 12%. A world wide survey conducted in 2008 placed New Zealand among the countries with the lowest pay gap values. New Zealand’s 8% was the third lowest among the 26 OECD countries that were included in the survey.
The Department of Labour’s pay and Employment Equity Unit (PEEU) took major steps to design and produce toolkits and a range of other practical methods through which the sate and other employers can effectively monitor employment equity in the labour market. All pay surveys carried out between 2005 and 2009 identified pay gaps that varied between 3 and 35%. The functions of the “PEEU were discontinued in 2009. However, the pay and employment equity toolkits are still available for employers who access them” through the Department of labour website.
The New Zealand Government is on the forefront to ensure that equal pay is implemented through various planning processes. In May 2009, the ministry of woman affairs budget was boosted by 12% to carry out a comprehensive study on the issues that relate and contribute to the gender pay gap.
Challenges on the achievement of equal pay for equal value of work in New Zealand
Research studies carried out by the ILO and other agencies show that segregation at the place of work along sex is a factor that is deeply entrenched in the labour markets, and a leading source of market inflexibility and economic ineffectiveness. Studies indicate that if a given industry is characterised by higher concentration of women or a certain ethnic minority, a lower average pay must always come up.
Data collected over a period of time has shown that “women in New Zealand are commonly employed as sales assistants, secretaries, primary school teachers, general clerks, registered nurses, receptionists, caregivers, retail managers and general cleaners”. The ten most common “employments for men include sales assistants, slaughterer, general managers, labourers, dairy farmers, builders/contractors, retail managers and truck drivers”. The census results for the 2001 showed that there were higher concentrations of the Maori and pacific males and females in some of the most common jobs for both sexes.
The policies formulated to address the issue of job preference by men or women or members of certain ethnic groups do not take into account the nature of the jobs.
For instance, the jobs that are undertaken by women are always considered to be of lower value than those done by men. It has been shown that many professions in which women are crowded in can be related to the traditional roles that were or are still being play by women. Some scholars say that due to the fact that the traditional roles of women are often unpaid, there efforts may always be viewed as some of their natural traits rather than professional skills relevant for the different types of work they perform.
Furthermore, the recognition of a work skill often depends on the social power of the members of the society who perform the work and this includes the strength of their unions. The principle of “equal pay for work of equal value addresses the occupational differences factor of the gender pay gap at which it’s seen to occur”. The objective is usually to evaluate how a skill is valued, the required responsibilities, the effort required and other requirements of the job to ensure that the resulting gender pay differentials can be justified and not to rely on the underlying social assumptions. Gender neutral analysis conducted in other countries has shown that there is a tendency to under value many jobs performed by women. Lower pay in the occupations that are dominated by women or individuals from an ethnic minority can thus be considered to be a form structural discrimination.
Cases involving equal pay or equal employment opportunity are often used to refer to a direct case of discrimination of a certain individual by his/her employer.
Equal pay for work performed of equal value addresses a different concept all together. The segregation of jobs in the labour market according to gender, and the subsequent lower pay for jobs that are regarded as female jobs is a structural feature that works against women. Historically, the social patterns have moulded the market dynamics for the “different types of jobs to put women or ethnic minorities to a disadvantage”. It is usually observed that when women invade a male dominated occupation the higher pay that characterises the job is often degraded.
In other countries, various policies that address human rights or employment issues have impacted differently on the gender related pay differentials. The common observation is that a policy that is designed to address work place issues is not always effective when it comes to addressing gender based pay differentials that are linked to occupational preferences according to sex. Equal pay for work of equal value demands that the skills, responsibilities and required efforts for a given work together with the working conditions are critically evaluated. This way comparison can be done between jobs that are typically done by men and those that are typically done by women to see whether there are any inconsistencies based on the skills, efforts and levels of responsibility. Thus an effective policy must take into account the comparison across-firms and across-occupations to see whether there is any form of structural discrimination.
Identification of differences between discrimination arising directly and that which is structure based is also vital if wage adjustment is to be undertaken.
Correction of individual’s pay discrimination ensures that his/her wage is harmonised with that of other employees and thus eliminates the disadvantage for that particular individual in comparison to other employees. However, if the employer is offering a wage that is undervaluing the skills and responsibilities in jobs performed by women, then the female workers are clearly at a disadvantage.
The huge number of small companies in New Zealand has also contributed to the prevailing design of pay equity in the country. In a study carried out in 2002, it was established that approximately 92% of companies had less that 10 staff members but accounted for more than a third of New Zealand’s workforce.
New Zealand has also failed in the by the way it has approached the issue of pay equity in the past. For instance, the country has not considered the equal rights or the employment rights as part of the larger human rights. The policies that have been formulated to safeguard human rights and employment rights operate in a parallel manner. The two systems are seen offer some form of redress to complainants and an individual is obliged to decide whether to use the human rights channel or the employment systems channel. They are currently more focused on solving personal complaints rather than make decisions that are far reaching in the society. Thus as argued earlier, they have failed to offer social justice against the structural discrimination earnings that affects women. Employment conditions and “human rights aspects are important in addressing the equity pay through policy framework”. Human rights philosophies take into account the necessity of respect and dignity for all members of the society, but have in most cases focused on the individual rather than address issues facing various groups in the society.
Currently, the international concerns on human rights have included policies that not only focus on the rights aspects but also on economic development. The argument is now that women as a social group are entitled to the basis human right to achieve what they desire to achieve. This view also “takes into account individual factors such as safety and health care but also advocates the provision of external conditions that are relevant for an individual to fully realize their capabilities”.
This argument makes sense to the human capabilities framework that is currently being utilized to look into the how the skills of the New Zealand work force can be enhanced. Under such framework, there needs to be an evaluation as to whether the current skills in the careers fields that a peculiar to women are being under-evaluated and thus not rewarded fully.
Current efforts to address pay Equity in New Zealand
There are several mechanisms put in place by the Department of labour and the Ministry of Women affairs to address the issue of gender pay equity in New Zealand.
The pay and employment equity review process
The department of labour has designed a four step review process that is intended to help organisations to determine if the reward and the undertakings in the different categories jobs are susceptible to gender influence, and to identify whether there are any inconsistencies between the treatment of men and women in regard to respect and fairness.
The review process is designed to gather both qualitative and quantitative data to determine how a given organisation is performing as far as equal pay is concerned.
The review process is also designed to identify opportunities through which the pay for women can be progressed and employment equity achieved in various firms. The process is transparent and includes the efforts of various stakeholders such as unions, employers and employees.
The review process is outlined as follows: The first stage is the preparation. In this stage, a project manager is identified and the process set in motion by the formation of a representative committee. The manager in charge of the project is tasked with preparing the base data that is needed to role out the first meeting of the committee. The “base data is built by analysing and distributing the staff surveys and running the Pay and Employment Equity Analysis Tool (PEEAT) that makes use of the pay role data”. Members of the committee are trained under the supervision of the project manager using the provided training packages. The staffs of the firm under review are adequately informed about the need for the review and why they should participate.
The second stage consists of four steps that are followed to produce the report. Each of the steps followed makes up a chapter in the report that will be produced. The first step or chapter one expounds on the gender situation of the organisation under review and highlights major gender issues. The second chapter mainly offers an explanation on the major gender differences observed. The third chapter takes the route of moving towards gender equity by designing a solution for the problems that have been revealed. The last chapter or step four describes and analyses the process that was followed to conduct the review.
The third stage of the review process is the implementation. This takes place after the firm has produced the review report and formulated a strategic plan to oversee the implementation of employment and equity pay for women. The momentum of implementation is maintained by regular reporting to the CEO and the employees.
Equitable Job Evaluation Systems
As defined earlier job evaluation can be regarded a systematic process that is employed to determine the size of a job in relation to other jobs. The current systems utilized by the department of labour can be used to identify disparities in the remuneration rates within and between organisations. Job evaluation is recognised internationally as an important tool for the determination of gender disparities that exist between jobs.
The equitable job evaluation systems was designed and developed by the department of labour using a qualified team that is conversant with matters regarding job evaluations and gender equity. It was specifically designed to address the factors that are likely to give rise to gender discrimination in the workplace.
The equitable job “evaluation system is composed of: A factor plan together with the weightings; a fully explained user’s guide that that is required to help in the implementation, application and administration of the system”. The system also includes a questionnaire that is utilised in the collection of the data needed to address all the inequality factors. Finally, the equitable job evaluation systems provide education and training modules that give the necessary skill to those who collect and evaluate data. It enables them to be adequately informed of what constitutes gender discrimination.
Working partnerships
Partnerships of employers, employees and unions are thought to bring together comprehensive views that are necessary in the realisation of gender based pay and employment equity.
The group always identifies ways through which comfortable interactions are maintained in order to develop and achieve common understanding on the issues regarding pay equity. The aim is to create a conducive environment through which members can freely air their views in order to pin point areas where there are problems.
The group is thus required to agree on a joint purpose in order to formalise the reasons as to why the partnership meetings are being held or carried out. They group should then develop a clear “understanding about the parameters, uses of the information, the communication strategies, constituencies and mandates”.
Some of the roles of the groups need to be discussed and agreed upon by the members. The group needs to appoint a facilitator of meetings who member the project manager or any other suitable person.
Conclusion
The primary purpose of this paper was to establish whether the equal pay convention that was ratified by New Zealand in 1983 went on to ensure the delivery of social justice to women in the New Zealand Society. The paper has traced all the major events in regard to the employment opportunities and pay equity from the time before and after the ratification of the equal pay convention in order to get a clear picture as to whether the ratification of the ILO convention on equal pay for work of equal value by New Zealand has delivered social justice to women.
It has been established the issue of equal pay for equal value of work remains a thorny issue in the New Zealand society up to date. Women still earn less than their male counterparts irrespective of the fact that they are equally qualified and produce work of similar value.
The government of New Zealand through the Department of labour and the ministry of women affairs has really put in a great deal of effort to address the equal pay for work of equal value. However, the efforts have yielded very little in a very long time.
There still needs more policy actions to effectively address the gender based pay gaps in New Zealand. It cannot be assumed that the established structural inequalities will resolve themselves. The current efforts will go a long way in addressing the issue but the policy gap needs to be filled to have a long lasting solution to the occupational discrimination faced by women in New Zealand. However, if comprehensive overhaul of the existing policies is not undertaken then it will take a long time for the desired outcomes to be realized.
This paper has indeed shown that the ratification of the ILO equal pay for work of equal value convention by New Zealand has not fully addressed the issue of equal pay for women and thus it can be said that social justice has not been fully achieved by Women of New Zealand in this aspects
Bibliography
Books
Baker, M, & F Nicole, Does comparable worth work in a decentralised labour market? Working Paper No.7937, National Bureau of Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Toronto, Toronto, 2000.
Burns, J, & M Coleman, Equity at Work: An Approach to Gender Neutral Job Evaluation, State Services Commission and Department of Labour, Wellington, 1991.
Burton, C, R Hag, & G Thompson, Pay Equity and Job Evaluation in Australia, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1987.
Figart, D, & P Kahn, Contesting the Market: Pay Equity and the Politics of Economic Restructuring, Wayne State University, Detroit, 1997.
Gordon, L, & M Morton, Women: Well educated and poorly paid: Gender pay discrimination in the Public Service, Women’s Studies Conference, Christchurch, 2000.
Kristin H, Devising an Adequate System of Minority Protection: Individual Human Rights, Minority Rights, and the Right to Self-Determination, Brook house, Wellington, 2000.
Maani, S, Secondary and tertiary educational attainment and income levels for Maori and non-Maori over time, Department of Economics, University of Auckland, Auckland, 2000.
McCann, M, Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1994.
Journal Articles
Anker, R, ‘Theories of occupational segregation by sex: An overview’ International Labour Review, vol. 136, no. 3, 1997, pp. 315-339.
Anderson, G, ‘The role of international labour standards’ Employment Law Bulletin, vol.2, 2002, pp.21-23.
Blackburn, R, J. Browne, B Brooks & J Jarman, ‘Explaining gender segregation’ British Journal of Sociology, vol. 53, no. 4, 2002, pp. 513-536
Fellmeth, A, ‘State regulation of sexuality in international human rights law and theory’ William and Mary Law Review, vol. 50, no.3, 2008, pp. 797.
Hakim, C, ‘Lifestyle preferences as determinants of women’s differentiated labour market careers’ Work and Occupations, vol.29, no. 4, 2002, pp. 428-459.
Hartmann, H, & S Aaronson, ‘Pay equity and women’s wage increases: Success in the States, a model for the nation’ Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy, vol. 1, 1994, pp. 69-87.
Hill, L, ‘The politics of pay equity’ Women’s Studies Journal, vol. 9, no.2, 1993, pp. 87-113.
Jivan, V, & C Forster, ‘Challenging conventions: in pursuit of greater legislative compliance with CEDAW in the Pacific.’ Melbourne Journal of International Law, vol.10, no.2, 2009, pp.655.
Kellerson, H, ‘The ILO Declaration of 1998 on fundamental principles and rights: A challenge for the future’ International Labour Review, vol. 137, no. 2, 1998, pp. 223-227.
Kidd, M, & T Goninon, ‘Female concentration and the gender wage differential in the UK’ Applied Economic Letters, vol.7, 2000, pp. 337-340.
Kovach, K, ‘An overview and assessment of comparable worth based on a large scale implementation’ Public Personnel Management, vol. 26, no. 1, 1997, pp. 109-122.
Liu, D, & E Boyle, ‘Making the case: The women’s convention and equal employment opportunity in Japan’ International Journal of Comparative Sociology, vol. 42, no.4, 2001, pp. 389-404.
NeJaime, D, ‘Winning through losing.’ Iowa Law Review, vol. 96, no. 3, 2011, pp. 941.
Phillips, A, & B Taylor, ‘Sex and skill: Notes towards a feminist economics’ Feminist Review, vol. 6, 1980, pp. 79-88.
Trachtman, J, ‘The WTO cathedral’ Stanford Journal of International Law, 43.1 (2007): 127+. LegalTrac.
Westbrook, J, ‘A global solution to multinational default.’ Michigan Law Review, vol.98, no. 7, 2000, pp. 2276.
Wilson, M, ‘Contractualism and the Employment Contracts Act 1991: Can they deliver equality for women?’ New Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 19 no. 3, 2003, pp. 256-274.
Wilson, M, ‘Making and repeal of the Employment Equity Act’ Women’s Studies Journal, vol. 9, no. 2, 1993, pp. 68-87.
Reports
Barnett, J, & P Briggs, Occupational Sex Segregation: A New Zealand Investigation, Report for the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Wellington, 1998.
Department of Labour, Human Capability: A Framework for Analysis, Wellington, 1999.
Department of Labour, International Labour Conventions Ratified by New Zealand, International Services and Legal Group, Wellington, 2008.
Department of Labour, New Zealand Report on ILO Convention 100: Equal Remuneration, 2000-2002, Department of Labour, Wellington, 2002.
Gosse, M, The gender pay gap in the New Zealand public service, Working.
Griffin, K, & T McKinley, Towards a human development strategy, Occasional Paper 6, UN Development Programme, Geneva, 1992.
Gunderson, M, ‘The evolution and mechanics of pay equity in Ontario’ Canadian Public Policy, 37, 2002, pp. 117-131.
Human Rights Commission, New Zealand Action Plan for Human Rights: Priorities for Action 2005-2010. Human Rights Commission, Wellington, 2005.
ILO Committee of Experts, CEACR: Individual observation and specific request on Convention No.100, Equal Remuneration, 1951: New Zealan,d ILO Committee of Experts, Geneva, 2001.
Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Next steps towards pay equity: A background paper, Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Wellington, 2002.
Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Next steps towards pay equity: A discussion document, Ministry of Women’s Affairs, Wellington, 2002.
Moyle, j, & C Henry, Research on the wages and Costs of Education and Training, Ministry of Women affairs, Wellington, 2006.
Paper No.15, State Services Commission, Wellington, 2002.
Internet Sources
CEDAW Committee, Statement to Commemorate the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Adoption of CEDAW: the failure of CEDAW to achieve even de jure equality was due to ‘discriminatory social norms, cultural practices, traditions, customs and stereotypical roles of men and women. CEDAW, 2004. Web.
NZ Council of Trade Unions, Submission on ‘Next steps toward pay equity. NZ Council of Trade Unions 2002. Web.