Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Legislative update
DRAFT CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE ON EQUAL PAY FOR WORK OF EQUAL VALUE
The Minister of Labour published the Draft Code of Good Practice on equal pay for work of equal value (“Draft Code”) on the 29th of September 2014. The Draft Code is available for public comment until the 31st of October 2014. The purpose of the Draft Code is to provide employers with practical guidance on how to comply with Section 6(4) of the Employment Equity Amendment Act 47 of 2013 (“EEA”). The latter provision makes the differential treatment of employees performing the same or substantially the same work or work of equal value that is either directly or indirectly based on any of the grounds listed in Section 6(1) of the EEA, a form of unfair discrimination.
The Draft Code provides three steps to determine compliance with Section 6(4). The first step requires a determination ofwhether the jobs being compared are the same, substantially the same or of equal value in terms of an objective assessment. In this regard, the Draft Code emphasises the importance of ensuring that in determining the value of jobs, employers utilise objective assessment criteria and that whatever classification system is used does not have the effect of discriminating unfairly on the grounds listed in Section 6(1) of the EEA.
In particular, the Draft Code warns of the role gender stereotypes have played in the valuation of male dominated and female dominated jobs. The example given is the undervaluing of care-giving or cleaning jobs due to the erroneous and gender-biased assumption that these jobs do not require any skill, learning or training but are rather skills that come naturally to women.
Three factors should constitute the basic valuation assessment criteria: the responsibility demanded by the work, the skills and qualifications required for the work, and the physical, mental and emotional effort required to perform the work.
The second step requires a determination of whether there are any differences in terms and conditions of employment, including remuneration of the employees in the jobs that are being compared. This entails identification and evaluation of the differences in terms and conditions between the jobs of equal value. In evaluating the difference in remuneration, the Draft Code provides that the employer can use the average or the median earning of the employees in the jobs being compared or any other fair and rational method.
The final step requires the employer to determine whether the differences identified are justifiable on fair and rational grounds. Differences are justifiable if they are based on any of the following grounds:
- the individual’s seniority or length of service;
- the individual’s qualifications, ability or competence;
- the individual’s performance or quality of work;
- whether the employee has been demoted for any legitimate reason but draws a salary still fixed at a higher level than employees in his/her new job category until their remuneration reaches that level;
- where an individual is temporarily in a position for the purpose of gaining experience or training;
- a difference in terms and conditions due to the existence of a shortage of relevant skill in a particular job classification.
The Draft Code recommends that the above process be done on an annual basis to ensure that any differentiation that is not justified on the grounds listed above be redressed.
Latest News
Sports Betting Opportunity: Mpumalanga Economic Regulator Invites Proposals for Bookmaker Licences
Introduction The Mpumalanga Economic Regulator has published a notice that it intends to invite proposals for Bookmaker Licences in terms [...]
Watt You Need to Know on the draft Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Regulations
by Jonathan Behr, Director, and Robyn Helling, Candidate Attorney The draft regulations to facilitate planning for the procurement and establishment [...]
No Claim? No Problem. Rethinking Creditor Rights in Insolvency Law
A recent judgment handed down in the Johannesburg High Court in Single Destination Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Another v Van [...]
The Balancing Act: The Sharing of Company Information by Exiting Shareholders with Potential Third-Party Purchasers
and Emma Reid, Candidate Attorney INTRODUCTION The default position regarding who can access a company's records and information ("company information") [...]
Court Orders Gauteng Department of Health to Provide Cancer Treatment to Patients Awaiting Care
and Slade van Rooyen - Candidate Attorney and Farah Yassin - Candidate Attorney On 27 March 2025, the Gauteng Local [...]
Allegations of Ethnic Discrimination Require Evidence: the Sagan Principle
and Isabella Keeves - Candidate Attorney In 1979 science communicator and physicist Carl Sagan wrote in his book Broca's Brain [...]