The state as regulator? The ‘dual-track’ system of employment in the Chinese public sector and barriers to equal pay for equal work

Abstract

<jats:p> Although equal pay for equal work has been clearly incorporated in the law in China for several decades, its implementation faces considerable impediments. This article investigates how labour market transformation and state sector reform in China have led to new forms of labour market segmentation that have undermined gender equality and created barriers to upholding the equal pay for equal work principle. Using the dual-track employment and remuneration system in the public sector as an example, the analysis illustrates the absence of implementation mechanisms or a remedial channel to support this principle in the Chinese context. It shows how the values and norms used in wage-setting in China impede the implementation of equal pay for equal work and in turn its extension to the notion of work of equal value mandated by the International Labour Organization in its Equal Remuneration Convention. It concludes that unless fundamental changes take place at the institutional level with strong state intervention, the International Labour Organization principle will remain a high-level inspiration rather than an enforceable law that could benefit those who are disadvantaged in the labour market. </jats:p>

Equal pay for work of equal value, wage-setting and the gender pay gap

“…The impediments highlighted in Japan and South Korea have considerable resonance with those illustrated in Feng et al.’s (2020) case study of the ‘dual track’ employment structure in the Chinese public sector. The Chinese case study is nevertheless distinctive, particularly in its identification of new institutional forces associated with economic transition as drivers of increasing gender pay inequality in China.…”

“…However, gender pay gaps differ widely between, and to some extent within, the regional groupings: Australia and New Zealand continue to record narrower gaps than the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average (estimates for these countries at the time of writing were 11.7% and 7.9% respectively, compared with an OECD average of 13.1%), while South Korea and Japan have consistently recorded the widest gaps in the OECD (estimates at the time of writing were 34.1% and 24.5%, respectively) (OECD, 2020). 5 While comparable figures for China are not available, recent research (cited by Feng et al., 2020) has estimated a gender pay ratio of 78.3% in 2018, equivalent to a gender pay gap of 21.7%.…”

“…The analysis underlines the complexity of wage structures, their disengagement from explicit means of establishing the value of work, and limitations of legislative provisions as ongoing barriers to the redress of gender pay inequalities through equal pay principles. A priority for future advancement is seen as the need to move beyond wage-setting norms that are ‘subjective, historically entrenched, culturally informed, and relatedly, gendered’ (Feng et al., 2020).…”

“… 6 Terminology relating to this division varies internationally. For the terms and definitions used in Japan, South Korea and China, see the articles in this issue by – respectively – Beniyama (2020); Lee and Kim (2020); Feng et al. (2020).…”

Salary scale and the diversity of wage systems

“…Overtime, which workers want and expect, is limited to a maximum of 50 hours per month. Sunday is a weekly holiday, but there are many other holidays throughout the year as well (Feng et al, 2020). For example, there are 5 national holidays, given one week of vacation during the New Year period for all workers.…”