Judicial analysis on the principle of Equal pay for equal work under the constitution of India
Introduction:
In today’s society, the principle of equal pay for equal work stands as a cornerstone of fairness and equality in the workplace. However, achieving this ideal has been a long and ongoing struggle, marked by legal battles and societal changes. The contemporary judicial approach to equal pay for equal work reflects an evolving understanding of discrimination and a commitment to rectifying disparities. This essay delves into the multifaceted nature of the contemporary judicial approach, exploring its foundations, key legal frameworks, recent developments, and the ongoing challenges in achieving true pay equity.
All human beings desire for social security. India is a welfare state, and in a welfare state, an employee who is engaged in an activity cannot be paid any less than that who is engaged in the same activity and is performing the same share of responsibilities and duties. These three are the primary necessity for the survival of human beings and for fulfilling these needs, human beings have to earn money by giving their efforts on the production process of goods and services as a factor of production.
Definition and meaning of this doctrine:
The term “equal pay for equal work” is widely used to refer to the gender pay gap which is the difference in income between the men and women who do the same job with the same workload and responsibilities.
The concept of equality that was established under the Indian constitution gave rise to the principle of equal pay for equal work but it is not explicitly stated as a fundamental or even constitutional right in the Indian constitution. Further, the Indian constitution states under Article 39 of its Directive Principles of State Policy that all states should ideally direct their policy towards securing equal pay for equal work for both men and women, as well as ensuring that men and women have the right to an adequate means of livelihood. But this could not be made enforceable in a court of law because it was only a Directive Principle and is present primarily while making legislation in order to have good governance. This article will examine the legal provisions and several acts that directly or indirectly include the principle of equal pay for equal work, and further, citing various cases to see how courts have interpreted this issue thus far.
The Doctrine of Equal pay for Equal work:
The doctrine of “equal pay for equal work” mentions that individuals should be entitled to equal remuneration provided the work is same, irrespective of the gender, caste or religion. This to ensure that there is no discrimination between any individual. This legal principle is very well recognized in India. There are legislations which mention about the same. The Constitution of India refers to this doctrine under Article 39 (to be read with Article 14). Further, it is an issue that relates to labour rights.
The Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 is an Act which provides for the payment of equal pay to men and women workers and to avoid any sort of discrimination on the grounds of sex. Also, this particular principle is also identified on an international forum. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the European Social Charter African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the Constitution of the International Labour Organization also focus on the same policy. This factor of equality is a very important element and it signifies women are having the freedom to be themselves and are totally free to develop their capabilities without any restrictions set by stereotypes or rigid gender roles. Exists not only in India but all over the world, equal pay for equal work is typically understood. To understand the concept of gender, pay gap, it is important to first understand the difference between sex and gender. Sex denotes biologically-determined characteristics, while gender indicates culturally and socially shaped variations between men and women.
Foundations of Equal Pay Legislation:
The question for equal pay has deep roots in history, with fair compensation dating back centuries. However, significant legislative strides have been made in recent decades to address pay disparities. Key milestones include the Equal Pay Act of 1963 in the United States and similar legislation in other countries, which aimed to prohibit wage discrimination based on gender.
These legislative frameworks laid the groundwork for the contemporary judicial approach to equal pay. They established the legal basis for challenging discriminatory pay practices and emphasized the importance of evaluating job roles based on objective criteria rather than personal characteristics.
Interpretation of Equal Pay Laws:
Central to the contemporary judicial approach is the interpretation of equal pay laws by courts and legal authorities. Courts analyze various factors to determine whether two positions are substantially equal in terms of work performed. These factors often include job responsibilities, skills required, effort exerted, working conditions, and any other relevant considerations.
Moreover, courts recognize the nature of workplace dynamics and the potential for indirect forms of discrimination. They acknowledge that pay disparities may not always be overt but can stem from systemic biases or structural inequalities. Consequently, the contemporary judicial approach extends beyond a narrow interpretation of equal pay laws to encompass broader considerations of fairness and equity
The Doctrine of Equal pay for Equal work under the constitution of India:
The legal principle of “equal pay for equal work” is mentioned under Article 39(d), part IV of the Constitution of India. It states that the State should direct its policy towards securing the objective that there is an equal remuneration for both men and women. It indicates that where the work is same, all the circumstances and considerations are similar then the people holding identical posts or ranks shall not be treated in a different way on the basis of the gender.
In Randhir Singh v Union of India, it was held by Supreme Court that though this doctrine is mentioned under Part IV of the Constitution and it does not have a status of a Fundamental Right, but it is certainly regarded as a constitutional goal. Therefore, it can be enforced through the remedies provided under the Article 32 of the Constitution. The Court in a case has also held that this principle can only be invoked if there is a similarity in the nature of the job and it carries the same qualification otherwise it cannot be said to qualify the doctrine. This Article aims to establish equality between men and women and to ensure that there is equal status of individuals in India. This doctrine seeks to balance the rights of individuals and try to promote respect, equity and respect. The Preamble of the Constitution seeks to achieve and provide social, economic and political justice to all the citizens of the country. Article 14 guarantees equality within the Indian Territory and Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex, religion, caste etc. Hence the Constitution treats each and every citizen equal and further provides them with equal right.
Equal pay for equal work is a principle deeply rooted in the Indian Constitution, reflecting the nation’s commitment to equality, social justice, and non-discrimination. The Constitution of India, adopted in 1950, enshrines several provisions that uphold the principle of equal pay for equal work and safeguard the rights of workers against discrimination based on various factors such as gender, caste, religion, or place of birth. Let’s delve deeper into the Indian Constitution’s perspective on equal pay for equal work:
1. Right to Equality (Article 14):
Article 14 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law to all individuals within the territory of India. This provision forms the cornerstone of the principle of equal pay for equal work by ensuring that no person is discriminated against in matters of employment or wages.
2. Right Against Discrimination (Article 15):
Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This provision reinforces the principle that all individuals are entitled to equal opportunities and treatment in matters of employment, including equal compensation for work of equal value.
3. Directive Principles of State Policy (Article 39):
Article 39 of the Indian Constitution directs the State to ensure that the economic system is not operated in a manner that results in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the detriment of the common good. It emphasizes the need for equitable distribution of resources and opportunities, which includes ensuring equal pay for equal work.
4. Right to Work and Just and Humane Conditions of Work (Article 41):
Article 41 recognizes the right to work, education, and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness, and disability. This provision underscores the importance of fair wages and decent working conditions, thereby indirectly supporting the principle of equal pay for equal work.
5. Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32):
Article 32 empowers individuals to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights. This provision serves as a safeguard against any violation of the right to equal pay and enables aggrieved parties to seek judicial redressal in cases of discrimination or unfair treatment in matters of wages.
6. Labor Laws and Judicial Interpretation:
In addition to constitutional provisions, India has enacted various labour laws and regulations aimed at promoting fair labour practices and ensuring equal pay for equal work. Courts have played a crucial role in interpreting these laws and upholding the principle of equal pay, often ruling in favour of workers who have been subjected to discriminatory wage practices.
The Equal remuneration act, 1976
In pursuance to the Constitution of India, an ordinance was promulgated on 26th September, 1975 known as the Equal Remuneration Ordinance, 1975. It was further converted into an Act in 1976, the Equal remuneration Act. Prior to this Act, women were struggling for equal rights and wages. This Act provides provisions against discrimination in recruitment and promotion of men and women. The same was also held in the case of Dharwad District P.W.D. Literate Daily Wage Employees Association and others v. State of Karnataka and another.
Section 5 of this Act also mentions that there shall be no discrimination while appointing men and women for identical work. The Act further establishes an Advisory Committee to increase the employment opportunity for women and also have the power to decide on the related matters. It also provides for the maintenance of registers or any other document in order to avoid any unfair practices. The sole objective of this entire legislation is to provide equal pay or wages to an individual.
Recent Developments and Case Law:
In recent years, there has been a notable shift in judicial attitudes towards equal pay, marked by several high-profile cases and landmark rulings. These developments reflect a growing recognition of the persistence of pay disparities and a determination to address them effectively.
One such case is Rizo v. Yovino (2018), where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that prior salary history cannot be used to justify pay differences between male and female employees. This decision marked a significant departure from traditional practices and underscored the need for objective criteria in determining compensation.
Similarly, in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (2007), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the issue of pay discrimination and the statute of limitations for filing claims. The court’s decision prompted legislative action, culminating in the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which expanded protections against pay discrimination.
These cases exemplify the evolving nature of the contemporary judicial approach to equal pay, characterized by a willingness to challenge conventional norms and adapt legal principles to changing societal attitudes.
There are some challenges which are arising in the achieving the the concept of Equal pay for Equal work:
1. Gender Pay Gap: One of the most significant challenges is the persistent gender pay gap, where women, on average, earn less than men for performing the same or similar work. Deep-rooted societal norms, stereotypes, and biases contribute to this gap, perpetuating inequality in the workplace.
2. Occupational Segregation: Certain occupations and industries remain heavily segregated by gender or other factors, leading to disparities in pay. Jobs traditionally held by women, such as caregiving and administrative roles, tend to be undervalued and receive lower compensation compared to male-dominated fields.
3. Lack of Pay Transparency: Limited transparency in pay practices makes it difficult for employees to ascertain whether they are receiving equal pay for equal work. In many cases, employers do not disclose salary information, which can perpetuate disparities and hinder efforts to address wage inequities.
4. Implicit Bias: Unconscious biases, such as assumptions about the value of work based on gender, race, or other characteristics, can influence pay decisions. These biases may result in undervaluation of certain workers’ contributions and contribute to unequal pay outcomes.
5. Salary History and Negotiation: Asking for salary history during the hiring process can perpetuate existing wage gaps, as previous salary levels may reflect past discrimination. Moreover, negotiation skills can impact an individual’s ability to secure fair compensation, disadvantaging those who are less assertive or experienced in negotiating salaries.
6. Informal and Gig Economy: The rise of informal and gig economy work presents challenges in ensuring equal pay for equal work. These sectors often lack formal wage structures and protections, leaving workers vulnerable to exploitation and arbitrary pay practices.
7. Globalization and Outsourcing: Globalization has led to increased outsourcing of labour, including to countries with lower wage standards. This can result in disparities in pay for workers performing the same tasks but located in different regions, complicating efforts to achieve equal pay on a global scale.
8. Legal and Enforcement Challenges: Despite legal protections against wage discrimination, enforcement mechanisms may be inadequate or ineffective. Employees may face barriers in accessing legal recourse, such as lack of awareness, financial constraints, or fear of retaliation, limiting the efficacy of legal protections.
Conclusion:
The contemporary judicial approach to equal pay for equal work represents a crucial battleground in the ongoing fight for workplace equality. Through a combination of legislative frameworks, judicial interpretation, and landmark rulings, progress has been made in addressing pay disparities and challenging discriminatory practices.
However, achieving true pay equity requires continued vigilance and concerted efforts from all stakeholders. It necessitates a commitment to dismantling systemic barriers, promoting transparency in pay practices, and empowering individuals to assert their rights.
Ultimately, the pursuit of equal pay is not merely a legal imperative but a moral imperative—one that reflects society’s commitment to fairness, dignity, and respect for all workers, regardless of their gender, race, or background. Only through collective action and unwavering determination can we realize the promise of equal pay for equal work.
Lo
Post Comment