 |
Even in the country with the world’s
highest number of female cabinet ministers, the gender gap is not closed in the workplace
 Despite an Equal Opportunities
Act passed in 1979, Swedish women earn 15 to 20 per cent less than men. Five years
ago, an economist won her case, proving that she took home less than her male counterparts
in the same borough, although her responsibilities and education were identical.
But when it comes to comparing different jobs deemed of equal value, the task is
much more complex.
In 1995, almost 400 Stockholm area nurses lodged a wage discrimination complaint
with their Equal Opportunities Ombudsman. Because cases are dealt with on an individual
basis, three different proceedings were filed in the Labour Court. A fourth was filed
separately in 1996 by two midwives from Orebro county council, in southern Sweden.
Five years down the line, none of these cases has been resolved. The nurses and midwives
claim that their work is of equal value to that of male medical technicians, but
that their wages are about 15 per cent lower. The former look after hospital apparatus
and require less education.
The case has revolved around job evaluations. The midwives’ employers maintain that
there is no salary gap between the two work categories since they receive compensation
for night shifts and work four hours less. The medical technicians work days only.
The Ombudsman has argued that basic monthly wages should be compared, not those taking
compensation for shift work into account. The Labour Court turned to the European
Court of Justice in Luxembourg, which ruled in April that basic salaries should be
compared, taking the case back to the Swedish court.
“The most significant thing about these cases is that they are all focusing on the
difference in pay between different professions, one dominated by women, one by men.
How do you prove that work is of equal value? There is no precedent in our court
about this,” explains Raija Lounavaara, of the Equal Opportunities office.
If the nurses and midwives win their respective cases, their employers will be held
liable for damages. It does not follow that the 400 nurses who filed complaints in
1995 will benefit. “But rulings stating that these persons have been discriminated
against will send a very important message to trade unions and employers,” said Lounavaara.
Nevertheless, the nurses’ union does not support the court cases which break with
the Swedish tradition of collective agreements. It argues that wages are best set
through negotiation and by relying on market forces, given the shortage of nurses.
Since 1995, the union has strengthened this negotiating process and obtained the
sharpest wage hikes on the labour market.
|
