European Law Report - Equal pay for equal work
The European Court of Justice has once again added a new dimension to the concept of equal pay for men and women for work of equal value. National legislation that permits part-time workers to be paid less than full-time workers for the same number of...
The European Court of Justice has once again added a new dimension to the concept of equal pay for men and women for work of equal value. National legislation that permits part-time workers to be paid less than full-time workers for the same number of hours worked breaches the principle of equal pay where it affects a considerably higher percentage of women than men and is not objectively justified, the Court recently affirmed.
This ruling reaffirms the stance adopted by the European Court of Justice over the years when it came to interpret this all important principle entrenched in the EC Treaty itself. This judgment comes in the wake of a string of others wherein the Court pronounced itself on the illegality of indirect discrimination between men and women in particular where part-time work is concerned.
This particular case concerned a German law which permits certain categories of civil servants to receive remuneration for overtime instead of extra leave. However, the hourly rate of pay for overtime set out is lower than the hourly rate of pay for hours worked in the course of normal working hours.
Ms Voß worked as a part-time teacher but decided to give additional lessons for a certain period of time. The remuneration she received for that period was lower than that received by a full-time teacher for the same number of hours worked. Ms Voß tried unsuccessfully to claim remuneration equal to that received by full-time teachers.
The national tribunal before which legal proceedings where eventually brought decided to refer the case to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling on the issue as to whether the principle of equal pay precludes national legislation which results in a lower rate of pay for part-time civil servants as compared with full-time civil servants.
The European Court of Justice ascertained that the principle of equal pay precludes not only direct discrimination but also any unequal treatment through the application of criteria unrelated to sex where such unequal treatment affects women considerably more than men and cannot be justified by objective factors wholly unrelated to discrimination based on sex. It maintained that the lower hourly rate for overtime gives rise to a difference in treatment to the detriment of teachers working part-time. Such a difference in treatment could affect a considerably higher number of women than men, the Court concluded. It is then up to the national court to ascertain this as a fact and to ascertain whether there are any objectively justified criteria wholly unrelated to sex discrimination which could justify such a measure.
This judgment goes to show that the dismantling of inequalities in remuneration between men and women continues to remain an important objective for the European Court of Justice. This comes as no surprise when one considers the fact that women in the EU earn on average 15 per cent less than men. Even in this day and age, the reality still is that women with a level of experience equal to that of men are sometimes paid less than men for the same work. Other facts prove that despite the fact that the fundamental principle of equal treatment between women and men has been entrenched in the EC Treaty since 1957, the EU must continue to strive to reduce the pay gap between the sexes. To my mind, this objective must remain at the forefront of the EU's social policy while the current situation persists.
The reality is that professions and jobs in which women predominate are undervalued in comparison with those in which men predominate. The reality is that only a third of managers are women in companies within the EU. The reality still is that women experience greater difficulties than men when it comes to balancing work and family life which in turn affects their career choice and which in turn means that far more women than men work on a part-time basis.
We therefore still have far to go if inequality between the sexes - at least in so far as remuneration is concerned - is to be erased once and for all!
Dr Vella Cardona is a freelance consultant in EU, intellectual property and competition law. She is also a visiting lecturer at the University of Malta.
This ruling reaffirms the stance adopted by the European Court of Justice over the years when it came to interpret this all important principle entrenched in the EC Treaty itself. This judgment comes in the wake of a string of others wherein the Court pronounced itself on the illegality of indirect discrimination between men and women in particular where part-time work is concerned.
This particular case concerned a German law which permits certain categories of civil servants to receive remuneration for overtime instead of extra leave. However, the hourly rate of pay for overtime set out is lower than the hourly rate of pay for hours worked in the course of normal working hours.
Ms Voß worked as a part-time teacher but decided to give additional lessons for a certain period of time. The remuneration she received for that period was lower than that received by a full-time teacher for the same number of hours worked. Ms Voß tried unsuccessfully to claim remuneration equal to that received by full-time teachers.
The national tribunal before which legal proceedings where eventually brought decided to refer the case to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling on the issue as to whether the principle of equal pay precludes national legislation which results in a lower rate of pay for part-time civil servants as compared with full-time civil servants.
The European Court of Justice ascertained that the principle of equal pay precludes not only direct discrimination but also any unequal treatment through the application of criteria unrelated to sex where such unequal treatment affects women considerably more than men and cannot be justified by objective factors wholly unrelated to discrimination based on sex. It maintained that the lower hourly rate for overtime gives rise to a difference in treatment to the detriment of teachers working part-time. Such a difference in treatment could affect a considerably higher number of women than men, the Court concluded. It is then up to the national court to ascertain this as a fact and to ascertain whether there are any objectively justified criteria wholly unrelated to sex discrimination which could justify such a measure.
This judgment goes to show that the dismantling of inequalities in remuneration between men and women continues to remain an important objective for the European Court of Justice. This comes as no surprise when one considers the fact that women in the EU earn on average 15 per cent less than men. Even in this day and age, the reality still is that women with a level of experience equal to that of men are sometimes paid less than men for the same work. Other facts prove that despite the fact that the fundamental principle of equal treatment between women and men has been entrenched in the EC Treaty since 1957, the EU must continue to strive to reduce the pay gap between the sexes. To my mind, this objective must remain at the forefront of the EU's social policy while the current situation persists.
The reality is that professions and jobs in which women predominate are undervalued in comparison with those in which men predominate. The reality is that only a third of managers are women in companies within the EU. The reality still is that women experience greater difficulties than men when it comes to balancing work and family life which in turn affects their career choice and which in turn means that far more women than men work on a part-time basis.
We therefore still have far to go if inequality between the sexes - at least in so far as remuneration is concerned - is to be erased once and for all!
Dr Vella Cardona is a freelance consultant in EU, intellectual property and competition law. She is also a visiting lecturer at the University of Malta.