Equal pay, opportunity get nod

The Legislative Assembly of the Cayman Islands has approved a bill that aims at ensuring equal pay and equal opportunity for men and women in the country, and for the first time creates an offence for sexual harassment.

After some minor amendments, members unanimously supported the legislation brought by Gender Affairs Minister Mike Adam, following protests from a number of local business groups after the bill was proposed in June. The bill is scheduled to take effect 31 January, 2012.

“The Gender Equality Bill, 2011, is an important and progressive piece of legislation for the Cayman Islands. This bill seeks to provide for the elimination of sex and gender discrimination in employment, training and recruitment, and to promote the payment of equal remuneration to male and female employees who perform work of equal value,” Mr. Adam told members last week. “The bill also aims to protect against discrimination in other areas, such as access to goods, services and facilities, as well as discrimination through job advertisements, applications forms and interviews. Issues such as discrimination by professional partnerships, qualifying and vocational training bodies, and employment agencies, as well as sexual harassment in the workplace, are addressed within this legislation.”

Bill provisions

Mr. Adam said the primary motivation for the bill is to have legislation in place to enable the Cayman Islands to join 187 other countries that have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979. However, Mr. Adam added, “The government is supportive of all efforts toward promoting gender equality in our country.” He referred to the UDP’s 2009 platform to that effect.

The bill creates a five-person ‘Gender Equality Tribunal’ to hear cases brought by complainants, or with complainants’ approval. A complaint should be brought within six months of the alleged offence, although the Tribunal has discretion to make exceptions to the time limit. The governor will determine remuneration and allowances for tribunal members.

If the tribunal finds the complainant’s allegations or suspicions are substantiated, then it may issue directions requiring the person against whom the complaint was made to stop the discrimination, and take remedial action or pay compensation not to exceed $20,000 to the aggrieved individuals. Parties have 28 days to appeal the tribunal’s decision to the grand court. The bill also creates offences, each carrying a penalty of $5,000, for attempting to thwart or failure to comply with the tribunal’s activities.

Opposition, amendments

After the legislation was first proposed, business groups urged for the withdrawal and redrafting of the measure.

“The bill, as drafted, will increase the cost of doing business and adds more red tape at a time when businesses are struggling to keep their costs under control,” Chamber President Jim O’Neill said in July.

“We fear that it may hinder employment and add to employers’ costs as they endeavour to implement it,” read a letter sent to the government and signed by Cayman Islands Law Society President Charles Jennings. “At [a] time of high unemployment … every effort should be made to encourage hiring.”

Business leaders met with Mr. Adam to discuss the legislation, and before it was passed, it was amended to specify employers would not be held liable under the legislation if they took all steps to prevent individual employees from discriminating. Additionally, there were revisions to the definition of an employer and the definition of sexual harassment.

Evidence of inequality

“I know that there are those listening who would question why we even need a gender equality law. They think that the Cayman Islands is a modern country that affords equal opportunities to men and women. Well on the surface that is true, but when we drill down and actually look at the statistics that are available to us, it becomes glaringly obvious that men and women in the Cayman Islands are not afforded equal opportunities nor are they on a level playing field when it comes to income and other areas,” Mr. Adam said.

Citing data from the 2009 Labour Force Survey by the Economics and Statistics Office, Mr. Adam said women make up the majority of the two lowest salary brackets in the survey – 83 per cent of workers making less than $800 per month, and 64 per cent of those making less than $1,600 per month. On the other end of the spectrum, men make up 66 per cent of workers making $7,200 or more per month.

“Being confined to the poorest of the poor is extremely challenging, especially for women, who are oftentimes the sole breadwinner in the family, receiving no or no adequate support from the father of their children,” he said.

Mr. Adam also referred to evidence from the 2005 Occupational Wage Survey by the Department of Employment Relations showing a disparity in wages between men and women performing the same work. Out of 87 occupations, there was only one where men and women received equal salaries for performing the same work. In 60 occupations, men reported receiving higher salaries, while in 26 occupations, women reported receiving higher salaries.

“The provisions in this bill will no doubt be an opportunity for women and men to seek redress of discriminatory practices such as these,” Mr. Adam said.

Exemptions

The bill does contain exemptions for certain charitable activities and for religious bodies, specifically so as not to interfere with the ordination, selection or appointment of religious leaders or with doctrinal practices.

Also, the bill does allow discriminatory hiring practices based on gender in special situations; for instance if the essential nature of the job calls for a man or woman for reasons of physique or if the person is likely to have physical contact with individuals of the opposite sex. Another exemption to the bill is given if the business establishment or facility requires a person of a certain gender to maintain the “essential character” of the establishment.

While recruitment protections do not apply to employment “for the purpose of a private household” or by “a private education authority”, Mr. Adam said post-hiring protections, such as against sexual harassment, do apply to domestic workers and private school employees.

During the final vote, the tally was eight members for, zero members against and seven members absent. Four members were present from UDP and four from PPM.