General Report
Cing-Kae Chiao
Research Fellow
Institute of European and American Studies
Academia Sinica
E-mail: chiao@sinica.edu.tw
International Society for Labour and Social Security Law
8th Asian Regional Congress
October 31~ November 3, 2005 - Taipei, Taiwan
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
I. Introduction
Over the last twenty years, women in the Asia Pacific region have made progress in
workforce participation. Greater numbers of women are working more than ever, and in
some countries they have achieved wage parity with their male counterparts. There are
many factors that account for the greater labor participation by women in this region. One
factor would be economic development, especially in the Newly Industrialized Countries
such as South Korea and Taiwan, where in order to sustain economic growth, women are
needed in the labor force. Secondly, the rise of education and literacy helped many
women become skilled workers and hence greater opportunities for better paying jobs.
Finally, the development of legal regimes that offer protection for working women also
greatly enhanced labor participation. Unfortunately, in spite of the advances made by
women in labor participation, gender discrimination in employment remains a serious
problem and threatens the economic and social security of women workers if not properly
addressed. Wage disparity and occupational segregation continue to demonstrate the need
for policies and programs which would bring about greater equality and security for women,
have often have to balance family responsibilities with work.
The purpose of this paper is to provide insights into how five Asia-Pacific
countries—Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea and Taiwan—have responded to the rise
in female labor participation and the perennial problems caused by sex discrimination at the
workplace and its related issues. Besides the introduction and the conclusion, the paper is
divided into five sections. Section one covers the phenomenon of the feminization of
labor markets in the past two decades, primarily looking at female labor participation rates.
Section two presents and discusses some indicators on the prevalence of sex discrimination
in the five countries’ respective labor markets. Section three provides an overview of the
legal regimes of the five countries in combating sex discrimination in employment.
Section four evaluates the effectiveness of each country in resolving major issues pertaining
to sex discrimination in employment. Finally, the last section examines future prospects
of gender equality in employment for the five countries observed.
II. Feminization in the Labor Market in the Past Two Decades
The purpose of this section is to examine the various socio-economic and cultural
transformations that have occurred which has led to greater female work participation.
(1) Australia
Women’s labor participation rates in Australia have increased substantially in the last
thirty years, especially the participation rates of mothers. Like in many other countries,
women tend to enter the labor market as part-time employees in jobs, to which to a large
extent are characterized by a lack of employment security and poor conditions of
employment. In the 1990s, Australia moved from a system of centralized wage fixation to
a system of de-centralized bargaining at the enterprise level with a minimum standards
safety net. This shift in the legal framework has been criticized as limiting the equal
opportunity agenda for women (Chapman and Trabsky).
Cing-Kae Chiao
2
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
(2) New Zealand
Education was the primary driving force for women’s labor participation in New
Zealand. Women now are in the majority in all fields of higher education except science,
where there is parity. The rise in educational levels among women opened up greater
opportunities, as women with higher education achievements has lead to a greater
proportion of women working as professionals or quasi-professionals in various jobs and
occupations. The proportion of women has also increased in the more traditional male
dominated skilled and semi-skilled areas of employment. In spite of such progress,
however, there is still a considerable gap to be overcome before women’s overall and
occupational labor participation rate are comparable to that of men (Cox).
(3) Japan
In Japan, it was revisions and enactments of legal statues that had a positive impact on
female employment. The passage of the Equal Opportunity Law in 1985 went a long way
towards encouraging women to join the workforce and to seek equality. The Family Care
Leave Law helped lower the social stigma in putting children into childcare centers which
in turn encouraged greater labor participation by Japanese mothers. Globalization, on the
other hand, has had an adverse effect on women’s employment in that part-time work is
becoming the norm, and women tend to occupy those jobs. Many young women who
leave school for employment tend to be unskilled and remain so throughout their working
lives (Aizawa).
(4) Korea
After South Korea’s industrialization in the 1960s, the transition from manufacturing
to service-oriented jobs in the 1970s and 1980s coincided with growing numbers of
educated female workers, which lead to increased numbers of working women. There was
significant demand for labor, as skilled and professional workers were needed in order to
sustain South Korea’s economic growth. Highly educated women contributed to a steady
increase of female workers as professionals, but as a whole, the average female worker was
typically hired as a temporary worker. Especially in the aftermath of the Asian Financial
Crisis with IMF mandated reforms on the country’s labor law, greater numbers of
temporary workers and temporary work agencies became a part of everyday life, with many
female workers used as part-time or temporary workers. There are numerous legislation
and legal reforms conducive to female labor participation, but discrimination remains a
serious problem (Kim).
(5) Taiwan
In Taiwan, education has been the primary factor for increased female worker
participation in the labor force. The extension of the compulsory education system
encouraged women to remain in school longer and upgrade the overall labor force potential
Cing-Kae Chiao
3
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
on Taiwan's job market. However, female participation is still confined to a few sectors
and they typically assume fewer responsibilities than their male counterparts. On the
other hand, marriage and family responsibilities are the key reasons that limit female
worker participation. Upon marriage and childbirth, women withdraw from the labor
market, and for those who do stay, they face difficulties in harmonizing their jobs with the
demands of their households. Surveys by the Council of Labor Affairs indicate that these
difficulties are compounded by a lack of childcare services for working mothers and
therefore there is a high demand for government sponsored family support measures
(Chiao).
III. Prevalence of Sex Discrimination in Employment
The purpose of this section is to examine the occurrence of sex discrimination in
employment as it occurs in the five countries, specifically in regards to direct, indirect or
mixed motive discrimination, wage disparity between the genders, existence and sources of
occupational segregation, sexual harassment in the workplace, and discrimination on the
grounds of marital status and pregnancy.
(1) Australia
Although there was a lack of data to draw comparisons between the frequencies of
direct discrimination cases versus indirect discrimination cases, a review of empirical work
and judicial decisions in this area suggest that direct discrimination complaints far
outnumber indirect discrimination complaints (Chapman and Trabsky). As of August 2003,
women workers in Australia earned 65 cents for every dollar earned by their male
counterparts. For full time adult employees, female workers earned 81 cents for every
dollar earned by males and have on the whole made gains in the last 20 years (Chapman
and Trabsky). Australia continues to be characterized by high levels of occupational and
industry sex segregation and there has been little change in this situation. In looking at
horizontal segregation, the more apparent imbalances are in the traditionally
male-dominated industries such as agriculture, forestry and fishing, mining, manufacturing,
construction, wholesale trade, transport and utilities as well as the traditionally female
dominated industries of education and health services. The genders seem to be equally
represented in retail trade, accommodation, finance and insurance, property and business
services (Chapman and Trabsky). Vertical segregation is also high, while women have
made some advances in the last two decade. For instance, the proportion of female
parliamentarians and office holders rose from 3.4% in 1986 to 21.7% in 1996. Female
legal professionals have nearly doubled, from 18.9% in 1986 to 36.4% in 2001. In the
corporate world, females have also made steady gains, as they comprise 10% of board
members in private sector companies, a figure that has continually increased since 1995 and
1998, when they comprised of 4% and 7.6% respectively. However, as of 2001, women
only occupied 1.3% of the most senior executive positions in corporations (Chapman and
Trabsky).
Sexual harassment is a serious workplace problem in Australia. According to a
national telephone survey conducted by the Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner,
Cing-Kae Chiao
4
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
28% of the surveyed women have experienced some form of sexual harassment at their
workplace, and 72% of the victims of sexual harassment were women. The Human Rights
and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) received numerous inquiries and processed
a number of complaints regarding sexual harassment. For instance, in the period between
2003 and 2004, there were 702 inquiries made to the Commission on sexual harassment,
compared to 606 inquiries in the year before.
In 2003-2004, the number of complaints
lodged on the grounds of sexual harassment numbered 179 or 28% of the total complaints
lodged on the grounds of sex discrimination (Chapman and Trabsky).
In addition to sexual harassment, The HREOC have also had to deal with cases of
pregnancy and marital status discrimination. From 2003-2004, inquiries brought forth on
the grounds of marital status discrimination numbered 146 while complaints made on the
same grounds amounted to just 14, or 2% of the total complaints filed for sexual
discrimination (Chapman and Trabsky). For cases on pregnancy discrimination, 513
inquiries were made, while 177 complaints or 28% of the total complaints filed for sexual
discrimination were made, as much as complaints of sexual harassment. As for the large
discrepancy between the number of inquiries and complaints, Chapman and Trabsky
attributes this to the fact that a majority of discrimination victims feared retribution or did
not believe that the effort and time for lodging a complaint would result in better outcomes
(Chapman and Trabsky).
(2) New Zealand
Cox points out that sexual discrimination, although unlawful, still exist. The Human
Rights Commission in New Zealand is charged with processing inquiries and complaints
related to employment discrimination. Of the 19,000 inquiries received, around 6% was
related to sexual discrimination and 4% related to pregnancy discrimination, while of the
893 formal complaints, another 6% and 1% were related to sex-based and pregnancy
discrimination, respectively. New Zealand has enacted laws to counter both direct and
direct sexual discrimination, notably the 1990 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, the Human
Rights Act and the Employment Relations Act. From the available statistical data, women
workers in New Zealand are working more hours than in previous years, much of it in
part-time work. The respective median weekly income and hourly income for females
were about 71.8% and 85.5% of their male counterparts (Cox).
Like the other countries examined by this project, there is wage parity in services and
occupations traditionally dominated by female workers, such as retail and secretarial work.
Figures show that there is a widening in the wage gap for industries such as agriculture and
fisheries, but a narrowing in many other occupations such as professionals, plant and
machine operators and assemblers. The Equal Pay Act of 1972, enacted with intent to
eliminate wage disparity, has been credited to have been relatively successfully in
eliminating gender-based wage differentials for those jobs whose rates were set in
collective agreements. This law may have been effective in those days when such
practices applied to 60% of the workforce, but changing employment trends and practices
such as individualized employment contracts may nullify the benefits of such a law. New
Zealand seems to have made great progress in reducing occupational segregation, as shown
Cing-Kae Chiao
5
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
by the 1999 report by the country's Ministry of Women Affairs. However, Cox points out
that there still remains the problem of women being underrepresented in the top tiers of
management, which is still predominantly occupied by males (Cox).
The norms in New Zealand on sexual harassment are robust, thanks in part to the
numerous court decisions that have conditioned employers to adopt zero tolerance policies
on sexual harassment in the workplace. Cox finds that employers who fail to prevent or
deal with sexual harassment faces significant legal risk from the victims of harassment,
with heavy financial penalties. In short, increased awareness of this issue and legal
protections has reduced the cases of sexual harassment (Cox).
Although there is a lack of statistical information, discrimination based on marital
status and pregnancy exist in New Zealand, as there are inquiries and complaints submitted
to the Human Rights Commission, but there are various laws which outlaw these types of
discrimination. Cox finds that the New Zealand government has been increasing support for
programs that encourage women to enter or return to the work force. As there are serious
skill shortages in a number of areas, including areas of employment dominated by women
such as teaching and nursing, a strategy to mitigate these shortages would be to encourage
mothers to rejoin the workforce (Cox).
(3) Japan
Direct discrimination is the most often occurring form of discrimination in Japan,
made apparent by the number of court cases in this area. Aizawa mentions hiring
discrimination as being only recently outlawed. Hiring practices prior to the enactment
and subsequent amendments of the EEO Law was frequently discriminatory to women.
The 1985 EEO Law did not explicitly prohibit gender discrimination in hiring and only
following the 1997 amendment was discriminatory hiring practices banned under Japanese
law. Wage disparity appears to be pronounced in Japan. As of 2003, women earned about
66.8% of what their male counterparts earned. The industries showing the smallest wage
gap is in transportation and communications, where women earned 76.3% of what men
earned, followed by the service industry, where women earned 68.7%. Wage disparity
was greatest in the financial-insurance and production industries, with females there
earning only 52.9% and 59.7% of their male counterparts (Aizawa).
Aizawa also finds that the industry with the greatest horizontal segregation to be in the
service industry, where women were mainly performing clerical work while fewer
performed technical skilled work (Aizawa). In regards to vertical segregation, it was found
that women occupied only 5.8% of all administrative and managerial positions. Mining,
construction and transportation were the most vertically segregated (Aizawa).
Sexual favoritism is the most commonly occurring form of sexual harassment, when a
male boss demands sexual favors from a female subordinate. Occurrences of sexual
harassment are frequent especially in after-hour social activities that are perceived to be
part of business culture, where improper behavior leading up to sexual harassment is often
tolerated (Aizawa). Workplace romance can sometimes lead to cases of sexual harassment,
Cing-Kae Chiao
6
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
as there has been one reported case in which an employer was held liable for a romance
which degenerated into sexual harassment. The prevalence of workplace romance is
difficult to gauge and Japanese employers in general do not prohibit or discourage
workplace romance for fear of lawsuits (Aizawa).
(4) Korea
Kim attributes the bimodal structure indicative of the female labor participation in
Korea to gender discriminatory traditions that still prevents Korean women from truly
participating in the labor market. Like in many East Asian countries, due to the heavy
responsibilities of child-rearing and household duties, as well as social expectations,
married women and mothers typically withdraw from the labor market. Although
concepts concerning gender equality were included in the Labor Standard Act of 1953, this
law has been ineffectual in eliminating habitual gender discrimination, and it was only at
the behest of women’s organizations that an Equal Opportunity Act was enacted in 1987
which afforded better protection (Kim).
(5) Taiwan
In Taiwan, surveys show that sex discrimination is a deep-rooted societal problem.
Female workers are typically subjected to discriminatory employment practices such as in
assignments, transfers, promotions, welfare, lay-offs and even terminations. In terms of
wage disparity, from Taiwan’s experience thus far, there is a strong link between wage
inequity and discriminatory employment practices. Wage disparity is evident in virtually
all industries except for the service industry. Occupational discrimination can be divided
into horizontal and vertical discrimination. Female workers in Taiwan face both, as the
male dominated lines of businesses such as mining, quarrying, water, electricity and
construction tend to have greater male to female ratio. Vertical occupational segregation
is also visible across many industries, as well as within the public sector. Female workers
are often relegated to dead-end non-professional jobs near the bottom of the hierarchy.
According to official statistics, of those who reach positions entailing brighter prospects for
promotion or career development, such as managerial staff, heads of business entities and
political office, women represent only 12.3% of those who can make it to the top (Chiao).
Sexual harassment at the workplace has received a great deal of public attention in
Taiwan recently. According to public surveys, around 15 to 33% of female workers
experienced some form of unwelcome sexual conduct at the workplace. Generally
speaking, there are two forms of sexual harassment: quip pro quo and hostile working
environment, both regarded as gender discrimination, as most victims of these incidents are
women and the perpetrators are usually men in superior positions. Since a majority of
businesses in the country are family owned, small or medium-sized businesses, employers
have considerable power over their employees. Also, taking part in informal after-work
social activities is usually mandatory, and employee performance is firmly linked to these
activities, where incidents of sexual harassment occur frequently (Chiao).
Finally, there are more subtle forms of sexual discrimination.
For instance,
Cing-Kae Chiao
7
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
pregnancy discrimination is rampant in Taiwan, where employers discharge or refuse to
hire women workers due to pregnancy. These range from overt discriminatory practices to
subtler ways of forcing pregnant women from the workplace through mixed-motive
practices, which are harder to uncover. Many employers have resorted to using so-called
fetal protection policies as an excuse to not hire women. Pregnancy discrimination occurs
frequently, as it is difficult to prove, and once proven the financial penalties exacted by law
is rather insignificant (Chiao; Kuo).
IV. Legal Regimes Combating Sex Discrimination in Employment
The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of the legal frameworks of
the countries observed, the key statutory laws used to address problems and issues arising
from gender equality in employment, related court rulings, administrative interpretations
and the key institutions responsible for enforcing anti-discrimination laws and regulations.
Also, the influence of ratified international labor conventions on the development of
anti-discrimination law will be addressed. Finally, the roles played by labor unions and
non-governmental organizations will be evaluated.
(1) Australia
The Australian constitution provides no explicit or implicit right to gender equality.
This was held by the Australian High Court in Leeth v Commonwealth, which concerned
the effect of federal laws on sentencing outcomes in different states. Instead, the goal of
gender equality in employment is secured through a raft of legislation at the federal and
state/territory levels (Chapman and Trabsky).
According to Chapman and Trabsky, the main pieces of anti-discrimination legislation
at the federal level are the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, the Equal Opportunity for Women
in the Workplace Act and a collection of provisions contained in the Workplace Relations
Act (Chapman and Trabsky).
The Sex Discrimination Act provides employees and job applicants legal recourse in
bringing a claim of direct and/or indirect discrimination because of gender, marital status,
potential pregnancy, pregnancy and breast-feeding. Furthermore, the Act prohibits direct
discrimination on the ground of family responsibilities in dismissal from employment
(Chapman and Trabsky). One exemption from this Act is the employment of staff in
religious educational institutions such as schools and universities in regards to religious
beliefs. Under the Sex Discrimination Act, sexual harassment in employment is
prohibited, and abroad definition of what behavior constitutes sexual harassment is
provided. Essentially, any unwelcome sexual behavior that includes physical contact,
verbal comments and written communication such as letters and emails constitute sexual
harassment. Sexually permeated work environment, or hostile work environment are also
prohibited (Chapman and Trabsky).
The Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act of 1999 requires private
enterprises employing 100 or more employees as well as universities and other tertiary
Cing-Kae Chiao
8
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
education institutions to develop and implement equal opportunity programs for women.
Employers are obligated to release public reports on the outcomes of these programs or else
they may be named by Parliament or even refused government contracts in the future.
However, Chapman and Trabsky note several weaknesses with this legislation. First, there
are no sanctions for non-compliance. Secondly, the Act does not require affirmative
action in the sense of achieving specified substantive outcomes through quotas and targets
or preferential hiring for women employees, as this was considered to be too controversial
to enact. Finally, the Act did not provide a complaints mechanism, and thus no
possibilities for victims of actual discrimination to even begin seeking legal redress
(Chapman and Trabsky).
Currently, industrial law supplements existing statutory rules on discrimination for
victims seeking legal redress for employment discrimination. This was not always the
case, as pointed out by Chapman and Trabsky. Up until the 1980s, issues of sexual
equality and discrimination were seen to be outside of the purview of industrial law and
relations (SDA and relevant state/territory laws). However, a linkage was established
between the two through mechanisms through which awards and registered industrial
agreements would be reviewed to remove certain rules and practices which lead to gender
discrimination. As a result, at present there are remedies available under anti-discrimination
law or industrial law in relation to discriminatory practices. The current Workplace
Relations Act provides the statutory framework for the Commonwealth system of industrial
relations, and contains a web of provisions aimed at addressing gender equality in the labor
market as well as sex discrimination, and other related issues such as family responsibilities,
marital status and pregnancy (Chapman and Trabsky).
Under the Workplace Relations Act, two main institutions are tasked to prevent
discrimination on the grounds of sex, marital status, family responsibilities, and pregnancy.
The Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC), as one of the main institutions, is
responsible for assisting workers to balance work and family responsibilities, respect the
diversity of the work force by preventing and eliminating discrimination on grounds such
as gender, marital status, family responsibilities and pregnancy. Furthermore, the AIRC is
also responsible for carrying out the principles of the Sex Discrimination Act and the ILO
Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention (Chapman and Trabsky). The second
institution of the Act is the Employment Advocate, which oversees the needs of workers in
a disadvantaged bargaining position (i.e. women) and to assist workers with family
responsibilities. Under the Workplace Relations Act, industrial awards and collective
enterprise agreements (certified agreements) must not discriminate on a range of grounds
including those mentioned above (Chapman and Trabsky).
Noteworthy is also the provision for unpaid maternity, paternity and adoption leave
following the birth of a child. The duration of unpaid parental leave is 52 weeks in total
for those who have worked at least 12 months continuously for their private sector
employer. Employees who took these parental leaves are entitled to return to the same or
an equivalent position prior to their taking of leave (Chapman and Trabsky).
(2) New Zealand
Cing-Kae Chiao
9
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
There are no constitutional provisions relating to sexual discrimination in employment.
The Employment Relations Act and the Human Rights Act are the two most important
anti-discrimination laws. The Human Rights Act applies generally to non-employment
areas such as the provision of goods and services, education, discrimination in partnerships
or industrial professional associations and so on (Cox). Once there exists an employment
relationship, the Employment Relations Act becomes applicable. Under this Act,
discrimination on the basis of sex, marital status and family status are prohibited. The
single most important provision of the Employment Act is the personal grievance procedure
that allows employees to challenge a wide range of employer conduct that is perceived to
be inappropriate. An employee may raise personal grievance with an employer on various
grounds that include discrimination and sexual harassment (Cox).
(3) Japan
The relevant constitutional articles most often associated with cases of gender
discrimination are Article 13, which guarantees the individual's right to life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness; Article 14, which declares that all people are equal under the law and
should not be discriminated in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed,
sex, social status or family origin, and Article 24, which guarantees the freedom of marriage,
which is to be based on the essential equality of the sexes (Aizawa).
Numerous statutory provisions prohibit gender-based discriminatory practices, such
those provided by the Labor Standards Law and the EEO Law. The Article 9 of the EEO
Law is of importance for the implementation of affirmative action programs in that it
authorizes voluntary affirmative action programs intended to mitigate employment disparity
between men and women. Furthermore, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare
provides necessary assistance to firms that seek to implement affirmative action programs
pursuant to Article 20 of the EEO Law, and annually awards a best practice prize to a firm
for its outstanding approach in utilizing female workers. Finally, the EEO Law includes a
provision obligating employers to take measures to prevent sexual harassment in the
workplace (Aizawa).
A number of court rulings in the Japanese courts have helped buttress its
anti-discrimination regime. Article 90, also known as the "public policy and good morals"
provision of the Civil Law, was originally used by courts to attach liability to private firms
that violated the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of marriage when they fired women
upon marriage. This was then applied more extensively to prohibit discrimination is cases
of retirement, discharge and promotion. It was the accumulation of court rulings using
Article 90 of the Civil Law that paved the way to the enactment of anti-discrimination
statutes, such as the EEO Law (Aizawa).
(4) Korea
The main anti-discrimination law in South Korea is the Equal Employment
Opportunity Act of 1987 which has undergone several amendments, of which the 2001
Cing-Kae Chiao
10
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
amendment being the most important in that the Act clearly states its intent to realize
gender equality, enshrined the principle of equal pay for equal work and stipulated
provisions prohibiting sexual harassment by an employer and provides for maternity leaves.
Of lesser significance is the Labor Standards Act, wherein Article 5 prohibits an employer
from discriminating against workers on the grounds of gender, nationality, religion, social
status, and so on. The Labor Standards Act also specifies maternity leave conditions and
provides for maternal protection in which certain hours of work are restricted from pregnant
women (Kim).
(5) Taiwan
In Taiwan, constitutional provisions and amendments, namely Article 7 and 10, Article
70 of the Civil Code, Article 25 of the Labor Standards Act, and the 1992 Employment
Service Act form the backbone of the country's legal regime in preventing and handling
gender discrimination (Chiao).
Article 70 of the Civil Code states that "a juristic act that is contrary to public order or
sound morals is null and void". The courts in Taiwan have often relied on this broad
provision to nullify overt acts of discrimination, for instance, employment practices
requiring mandatory retirement of female workers upon marriage or pregnancy. Victims
of subtler forms of discrimination, such ad "indirect" or disparate impact discrimination,
however, cannot turn to this all-important provision (Chiao).
Article 25 of the Labor Standards Act has also been frequently turned to as an
important provision in fighting gender discrimination in employment (footnote: Article 25
specifically provides that an employer shall pay equal wages to workers equivalent to work
efficiency). However, since this article only revolves around remuneration, other
employment practices in which discriminatory practices may arise such as hiring,
assignment and dismissal are not covered or addressed (Chiao; Kuo).
Another effective legal avenue for eliminating sex discrimination in employment is
through the Employment Service Act of 1992. Article 5 of the law forbids an employer to
discriminate against an employee or a job application on the basis of race, class, religion,
political affiliations, sex and other factors. The law also requires all local governments to
set up committees to handle labor disputes arising from employment discrimination. Thus
far, all counties and local municipalities have complied, with Taipei City's committee being
the most active. Most of the complaints heard by the Taipei Committee are primarily
related to gender discrimination in employment, with pregnancy discrimination and sexual
harassment as the two most frequently reported (Chiao).
The centerpiece of Taiwan's legal framework for the prevention and handling of sex
discrimination cases is the Gender Equality in Employment Act (GEEA). Enacted in 2002,
the GEEA was intended to address fundamental shortcomings of the previous framework,
which had previously provided little legal recourse for female workers who were victimized
by gender discrimination practices. Among the new innovations are expert committees at
every level of government to examine, consult and promote matters concerning gender
Cing-Kae Chiao
11
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
equality in employment. There is a prohibition of sex discrimination by employers in all
aspects of employment practices ranging from recruitment, appointment, promotion, to
retirement, severance and termination (Kuo).
Sexual harassment in the form of hostile work environment and quip pro quo sexual
harassment are also prohibited, and strict liability is placed on employers to prevent and
properly address occurrences of sexual harassment in the workplace. Furthermore, the
law provides various measures for promoting equality in employment by providing
employees with the right to sick leaves, maternity and family-care leaves, as well as
requiring employers with over 250 employees to provide child-care facilities and mandate
competent authorities at all levels to provide occupational training and employment
services for those workers who left work due to childbirth, marriage and family
responsibilities. Finally, the Act provides a variety of remedial measures for victims of
discrimination and establishes internal and external channels to settle related disputes
(Chiao; Kuo).
V. A Critical Evaluation
The purpose of this section is to evaluate the effectiveness of resolving gender
discrimination in employment issues across the countries examined by this project. The
participants were asked to comment on how their respective country’s legal regime on
gender discrimination deals with issues such as equal treatment versus special treatment,
the problem of disparate treatment discrimination and disparate impact discrimination, the
issue of equal pay for equal work and the concept of “comparable worth”, various
affirmative action programs designed to address horizontal and vertical segregations, as
well as those designed to mitigate the so-called “glass ceiling” effect. Other issues
covered are, for instance, employer liability for failure in preventing sexual harassment,
pregnancy discrimination, the extraterritorial and retroactive application of current
anti-discrimination laws and whether anti-discrimination laws apply to foreign workers.
(1) Australia
In Australia, special treatment is permissible as long as it leads to the goal of achieving
equality in an outcome. The Sex Discrimination Act gives employers the right to take
special measures for the purpose of achieving equality among people regardless of gender,
marital status, pregnancy or potential pregnancy, provided that a person is not discriminated
in the process (Chapman and Trabsky).
Under Australian law, disparate treatment discrimination is known as direct
discrimination. Disparate impact discrimination is also known as indirect discrimination.
According to Chapman and Trabsky, a primary criticism of the statutory meaning of
indirect discrimination is the concept of reasonableness, where it has been interpreted in
ways that further the purposes of the legislation and in way that reflect a formal equality
understanding of the Sex Discrimination Act’s purposes and do not further the purposes of
the legislation in bringing about substantive equality (Chapman and Trabsky).
Cing-Kae Chiao
12
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
Chapman and Trabsky also points out that there may be problems in developing a
comparable worth analysis due to the inadequate statutory framework in Australia. There
appears to be disagreement between the federal and state governments over the comparable
worth concept, whereas the former, in the form of the AIRC, strongly resisted efforts made
by women’s group to adopt comparable worth in job evaluation and the setting of wage
rates. State governments, however, have been more opened to adopting the concept
(Chapman and Trabsky).
Australia has never had legislative requirements of affirmative action in the sense of
quotas or preferential hiring, apart from special measures and cases of temporary exemption.
The only attempt would have been the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act,
but this has been deemed to be too ineffectual (Chapman and Trabsky).
The SDA has prohibited direct and indirect discrimination on the ground of pregnancy
and potential pregnancy. In the 1980s, under state and territory jurisdiction, pregnancy
became recognized as a characteristic of being a woman and thus protected as sex
discrimination. Chapman and Trabsky note this as an important development as pregnancy
was not recognized as a prohibited ground of discrimination by every state/territory at the
time. This issue has come up in the lead industry in Australia. In the 1980s, a series of
temporary exemptions were regularly granted to the industry as to not employ women in
certain areas of production in the interest of protecting their unborn fetuses (Chapman and
Trabsky).
Chapman and Trabsky find that anti-discrimination legislation has not generally had
retroactive application. Also, there are no instances in which federal anti-discrimination
legislation has had extraterritorial application. Australian anti-discrimination legislation
applies equally to foreign workers and Australian citizens alike (Chapman and Trabsky).
(2) New Zealand
Cox reports that New Zealand endeavors to find a balance between using special
treatment, and providing equal treatment to encourage women into the workforce. She
points to the Equal Pay At and the Equal Employment Opportunities Scheme as examples
of initiatives promoting gender equality without using reverse discrimination to improve
women’s situation. The existence of a Ministry of Women’s Affairs and a host of
government programs addressing women’s concerns exist, but the government tries to limit
special treatment to problems which exclusively affect women. Indirect discrimination has
a wide definition in New Zealand, and like direct discrimination prohibited under the law.
Efforts to curb disparate impact discrimination seem to have been fairly successful (Cox).
Based on Cox’s observation, the government has a commitment to ensure equal pay
for the same job. The Equal Pay Act of 1972 is representative of efforts to combat wage
disparity, and there is a current government review of the Act that will focus on comparable
worth. The New Zealand government’s Equal Employment Opportunities Trust encourages
private enterprises to employ a diverse range of people. According to Cox, it has been
fairly successful in chipping away at occupational segregation (Cox).
Cing-Kae Chiao
13
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
Employers are held liable for quid pro quo sexual harassment, as under New Zealand’s
Employment Relations Act, the employer is deemed responsible if the perpetrator is
representative of the employer (being in a superior position relative to the employee). To
be held liable for hostile environment harassment, if an individual outranking the victim
commits the harassment, the employer is deemed liable. However, since the employer must
take responsibility for the actions of employees, there is incentive on the employer’s part to
ensure a harassment-free workplace (Cox).
According to Cox, pregnancy discrimination is akin to sex discrimination as the
definition of sex discrimination in New Zealand includes pregnancy and childbirth.
Apparently, the issue of fetal protection policies has never surfaced in New Zealand, and
such policies are practically non-existent in the country (Cox).
The relevant legislation on anti-discrimination in New Zealand, the Human Rights Act
of 1993 and the Employment Relations Act of 2000 have neither retroactive nor
extraterritorial application. The laws of New Zealand are applicable to all persons
regardless of citizenship, and thus all anti-discrimination laws apply to foreign workers
(Cox).
(3) Japan
One of the major law reforms that saw the amendments of the EEO Law and the Labor
Standards Law in 1997 was to promote equal treatment for of the sexes and eliminate all
special treatment of women except those concerning maternity protection. It appears that
this major reform resolved much of the long debated equal treatment versus special
treatment controversy in Japan.
The amended EEO Law explicitly prohibited
discrimination in all stages of employment including recruitment, hiring, assignment,
promotion, provision of benefits and discharge, which was an improvement upon its
previous form, which merely called for employers to endeavor for equal treatment of the
sexes in recruitment, hiring and promotion (Aizawa).
Under the EEO Law’s, victims of disparate treatment discrimination, going through
mediation procedures is the sole means for which to correct an employer’s disparate
treatment against her. Because mediation may fail or if an administrator declines to
mediate, the only recourse a victim would have are the courts. Aizawa notes a trend in
which women resort instead to civil lawsuits because of a lack of faith in mediation. As
for successful claims of disparate treatment, plaintiffs of cases involving overt
discrimination have prevailed. On the other hand, plaintiffs have been relatively
unsuccessful in cases involving different treatment of men and women who belong to
different career tracks. Also, it was also found that plaintiff claims often did not fare well in
disparate treatment cases that were mixed motive cases, due to the lack of interest displayed
by the Japanese courts in fair allocation of the burdens of proof. Finally, with regard to
disparate impact discrimination, Aizawa expresses doubt as to whether this kind of
discrimination is even cognizable under existing statutes (Aizawa).
Cing-Kae Chiao
14
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
According to Aizawa, comparable work has been a subject of debate among Japanese
legal scholars, a number of whom argue that Article 4 of the Labor Standards law, in which
wage discrimination by reason of the worker being a female is prohibited, actually
enshrines both the principle of equal wage for equal work and also the principle of equal
wage for work of comparable worth. These scholars point to Japan’s ratification of the
Equal Remuneration Convention (Convention No. 100) of the ILO, and the fact that Article
4 of the Labor Standards Law was kept unaltered. Following a court decision in 2001, it
was confirmed that the principle of equal wage for work of comparable worth is indeed
included within the meaning of Article 4 (Aizawa).
Aizawa found that as of 2003, 29.5% of firms have already implemented affirmative
action programs with the intent to break horizontal and vertical segregations, with another
8.8% indicated their intention to implement similar programs while 28.7% had no intention
to implement any affirmative action programs. Compared to the respective numbers in
2000 of 26.3%, 13.0% and 34.2%, this shows that affirmative action programs are growing.
It was noted that financial and insurance industries were the most avid implementers, with
over half of the firms using affirmative action programs (Aizawa).
Based on a survey conducted by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, Aizawa
observes that there is a positive correlation between the implementation of affirmative
action programs and the increase of the percentages of women holding positions of high
management (Aizawa).
Japanese civil law does not distinguish between quid pro quo sexual harassment and
hostile work environment, but employers have been held liable by for both kinds of sexual
harassment due to two ways under Japanese civil law that can attach liability to an
employer (Aizawa).
The Labor Standards Law prohibits firing a female worker during her pre- or
post-natal leave period or within thirty days thereafter. Aizawa, however, points out that
due to the recent economic downturns, pregnant female workers are being unfairly treated
by being subjected to discharge, unfavorable transfers or forced switches to part time jobs.
Thus, there is a developing discourse in identifying pregnancy discrimination as a form of
gender discrimination. In fact, making pregnancy discrimination a form of sex
discrimination under EEO Law was suggested in the June 2004 governmental report
(Aizawa).
Since all employers must comply with the Labor Standards Law, which provides fetal
protection measures, they do not have the freedom to choose whether to adopt fetal
protection policies or not. Fetal protection measures apply specifically to women and
there are detailed provisions stipulating conditions in which they may not work. However,
Aizawa notes that there are no provisions to protect men from getting exposed to toxic
substances harmful to their reproductive system, and that few measures have been taken to
extend the scope of protection to men (Aizawa).
There are no specific provisions in the EEO Law regarding extraterritorial application,
and there is no retroactive application of the EEO Law. However, amendments made to
Cing-Kae Chiao
15
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
the Act on the Application of Laws in the fall of 2005 may extend more protection to
workers and consumers. As described above, amendments to the Act on the Applications
of Law, should they be approved, will also govern the applicability of the EEO Law to
foreign workers in general (Aizawa).
(4) Korea
An important aspect of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act is its inclusion of a
clause regarding equal pay for equal work. According to Article 5 of the EEO Act, the
concept of equal value work can be understood as work which has the same or similar value
regardless of the worker’s gender. The standards for judging equal value work are given
as four factors: skill, effort, responsibility, and working conditions under which workers
require in order to finish their jobs. However, as Kim notes, additional factors such as for
instance workers educational attainments, work experiences and years of continuous service
should be also be figured in determining whether the work evaluated is of equal value.
Once equal work is to be compared on a gender basis, obviously more difficulties arise. A
gender comparison would involve a job evaluation, which could be even more problematic
given the potential for gender bias and the feasibility of large-scale evaluations (Kim).
Although Kim does not address the problem of equal treatment versus special
treatment, it would appear that the enactment of certain legislation designed to address
gender equality by improving the status women warrant further investigation. For
instance, the Assistance for Women’s Enterprises Act which calls for the central and local
governments to accelerate women’s business activities by adopting comprehensive support
measures and establishes the Women’s Enterprise Promotion Committee and the Korean
Women Entrepreneurs Association.
The special treatment offered by the latter
organization in the form of financial support and special tax treatment is special treatment.
It would be of interest to know whether these initiatives have been successful in promoting
women-owned businesses as well as the general public’s awareness and attitudes towards
special treatment for women (Kim).
(5) Taiwan
The GEEA adopts a very primitive approach towards various issues of sex
discrimination in employment.
Therefore, it only addresses disparate treatment
discrimination directly while providing no remedies for other subtler forms of
discriminatory employment practices. The Act makes no mention of disparate impact
discrimination, i.e., employment practices that are superficially neutral and fair but have
negative impact or effects that are particularly adverse towards female (or male) employees.
Furthermore, the Act does not provide any guidance in handling mix-motive discrimination,
i.e. employment practices of employers that involve both legal and illegal motivations.
Since employment relationships in Taiwan have become increasingly complicated and
discriminatory employment practices adopted by employers have also become sophisticated,
it is imperative to learn from the experiences of other nations (Chiao; Kuo).
The GEEA embraces a novel concept of equal pay for equal values as one of its
Cing-Kae Chiao
16
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
guiding principles in realizing pay equity between the two sexes. The term was added into
the legislation in the final stage of its enactment at the urging of one member of the drafting
group. It was not thoroughly debated and is certain to cause an interpretation problem
when disputes arise. As mentioned earlier, the equality of remuneration system in the law
is primarily based on the principle of equal pay for equal work, largely inspired by
American practices, specifically, the Equal Pay Act of 1963. Since the concept of
comparable worth has fallen into disfavor in the 1980s in the United States, it is quite
incompatible to put these two concepts together unless Taiwan wants to use the European
model of comparable worth to solve the problem of wage differential between the two
sexes (Chiao; Kuo).
Although the GEEA is mute on the issue of affirmative action programs, the topic has
gained popular awareness recently as more and more women enter the non-traditional job
markets. Actually, affirmative action-type programs have long been in use on Taiwan. A
variety of preferential treatment plans in employment have been offered to discharged
soldiers, aborigines and disabled persons. Under public law, private enterprises receiving
government contracts are actually required to hire a certain number of aborigines and
disabled persons. However, because the proportion of males to females is about equal,
any advocacy of affirmative action programs to eliminate gender segregation is bound to
incur protests of “reverse-discrimination”. Therefore, except through perhaps voluntary
compliance agreements, any all-out preferential treatment projects promoting women’s
employment are currently unfeasible (Chiao; Kuo).
Another female employment issue that is closely related to affirmative action
programs is the so-called “glass ceiling effect” experienced by female employees in trying
to reach upper level decision-making positions in their organizational hierarchies. As
mentioned earlier, this type of horizontal segregation is extremely hard to break in both the
public and private sectors in Taiwan. The most commonly cited reason for the barrier,
which contributes to the under-representation of professional women in higher positions, is
the so-called “mommy track”. Therefore, how to establish suitable family supporting
measures to assist inspiring career-oriented female employees to reach their goals and
compete with their male counterparts on equal footing will become an important task as
Taiwan has built up a foundation for promoting gender equality in employment (Chiao;
Kuo).
As mentioned previously, one positive aspect of the GEEA is its emphasis on
prevention and correction of sexual harassment at worksites. By imposing strict liability
on employers to establish internal complaint mechanisms and offering them affirmative
defenses to avoid paying costly compensation, they will have a strong incentive to actively
engage in building a work environment that is free of incidents of this kind (Chiao; Kuo).
VI. Future Prospects of Gender Equality in Employment Systems
The purpose of this section is to provide a general picture of new issues that may
appear in both the short run and the long run, which emerge from the recent surge of female
employment and from the respective societies and legal regimes of the five countries.
Cing-Kae Chiao
17
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
(1) Payment for Housework by Homemakers
The debate on whether homemakers should be paid heated up when Taiwan began
recruiting female workers from Southeast Asian countries to work as housemaids or
caretakers in the 1990s. Local feminists argued that since these workers earned the
minimum wage, the housework done by local woman should also be compensated. After
the Taiwan High Court ruled in a case that an injured homemaker was entitled to damages
for being physically unable to do housework, women’s rights groups were inspired.
Although this may be too sensitive to put into practice, its underlying meaning is of
tremendous importance to the understanding of the essence of female employment (Chiao).
On the issue of remunerating homemakers for their household work, these issues are more
controversial in some countries than others. For instance, in New Zealand, there is little
debate as it is not a contentious issue, and there are no proposals to pay homemakers (Cox).
Similarly, in Australia, this issue has not been the subject of public debate. The Australian
government now tries to encourage homemakers receiving social security benefits to return
to the labor force. Chapman and Trabsky note that the greater issue is the distribution of
work at home between men and women, as women do over 75% of the household work
(Chapman and Trabsky). In Japan, the controversy over the price of housework goes back
to the 1960s and although initiatives have not translated into policy, some observers believe
that some form of compensation for unpaid household work in the form of a "housewife
pension" should be instituted. According to a 1997 government report, the monetary
value of an unemployed, married women performed unpaid working amounted to 2.7
million yen or $27,000 U.S. dollars a year. Aizawa observes that raising general public
awareness on the issue of unpaid work in order for society to become aware of the uneven
burdens shouldered by women and thus encourage a fair division of labor between the
genders in the future (Aizawa).
(2) Women Soldiers in Combat Missions
New Zealand recently abolished restrictions preventing women from entering combat
in the armed forces. Women may be able to enter combat by 2005 (Cox). Australian
women are excluded from combat duty . As an exemption in the Sex Discrimination Act,
the Australian Defense Force is permitted to discriminate against women on the ground of
sex in connection with employment or involvement in the performance of combat duties
(Chapman and Trabsky). As for Japan, since the country's constitution renounced militarism,
neither women nor men will be serving combat duties (Aizawa). In Taiwan, currently
7,000 women serve in the armed forces, but mostly in logistics, maintenance personnel, and
instructors and only a fraction serve in what can qualify as active military duty. Currently,
the Ministry of Defense has not paid much attention to this issue (Chiao).
(3) Protection for Workers with Special Sexual Preference or Orientation
According to various surveys, there are estimated 800,000 (or 4% of the population)
gays and lesbians living in Taiwan. During the course of the enactment of the GEEA, a
number of human rights groups had plead for the inclusion of gays and lesbians’
Cing-Kae Chiao
18
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
employment rights, but to no avail. However, during the drafting of the “consolidated”
version of the bill, the drafting group reached a consensus agreeing that the law is
applicable to gays and lesbians. Therefore, the prohibition of employment discrimination
based on sexual orientation and preference is also one of the objectives of the law (Chiao).
In New Zealand, the Human Rights Act of 1993 and Employment Relations Act of 2000
prohibit discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation (Cox). In Australia, at the
Commonwealth level, the HREOC has power to conduct inquiries into claims of
discrimination in employment on the ground of sexual preference. All state and territory
anti-discrimination legalization prohibit discrimination in employment on grounds of
sexual orientation and transsexualism (Chapman and Trabsky). Due to societal norms, in
Japan, sexual orientation rarely emerges in public discourse and thus unlikely to be afforded
protection by employment laws (Aizawa).
(4) Legalization of Sex Industry
New Zealand recently legalized prostitution in 2003, in order to ensure rights and
health of sex workers and to ensure that the industry upheld minimum standards (Cox). In
Australia, sex industry regulated through state and territory statutes, but not well protected
by industrial law (Chapman and Trabsky). In Japan, prostitution has not been legalized and
has not been considered. There is little information regarding whether sex workers
receive adequate legal protection (Aizawa). In Taiwan, this has been a subject of debate.
Local women’s rights groups were split on this issue. Except for conservative feminists
who oppose on moral grounds, a majority is ambivalent towards legalization. This debate
directly touches on the fundamental issue of sex discrimination in employment and the
government has commissioned a series of research programs on this topic (Chiao).
(5) Is Sexual Harassment in the Workplace Sex Discrimination in
Employment?
In New Zealand, victims of sexual harassment in the workplace can seek a remedy in
the Employment Relations Authority. Sexual harassment in the workplace was held to be
sexual discrimination, as was the case prior to the enactment of related provisions of the
Human Rights Act and the Employment Relations Act (Cox). In Australia, sexual
harassment is widely perceived to be sexual discrimination (definition). However, most
complainants lodge complaints about sexually harassing behavior under the sexual
harassment provisions in the relevant statutes rather than as a sex discrimination claim
(Chapman and Trabsky). In Japan, according to Aizawa, the question of whether
workplace sexual harassment is sex discrimination in employment or not has indeed
emerged in academic discourse but has faded away without being resolved (Aizawa).
(6) Controversy over Regulating Interpersonal Relationship between the Two
Sexes
As interpersonal relationships between the two sexes in the workplace become
increasingly frequent and intimate as the result of a liberalizing society, a number of
implications have emerged in Taiwan. Overzealous employers may be inclined to impose
Cing-Kae Chiao
19
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
a variety of codes of conduct to regulate other aspects of the relationships between their
male and female employees. If these personnel policies are applied with different
standards towards the two sexes or cause disparate impact, then allegations of sex
discrimination in employment may be made (Chiao). In Australia, it is accepted that
employers are legally entitled to intervene and regulate relationships between their
employees in the workplace. Employers have many ways of regulating workplace
relationships, such as through a personnel handbook or employee contact. These rules
may be also linked to disciplinary actions such as dismissal. In addition, many employers
have regulations regarding employee relationships with clients and others in the workplace
(Chapman and Trabsky). Japanese employers, on the other hand, tend not to regulate as
regulation of interpersonal relationships may be seen as an infringement of personal rights.
Most enterprises thus do not prohibit interpersonal relationships and there is little
controversy over this issue (Aizawa).
(7) Controversy over Using Affirmative Action Programs in Combating Sex
Discrimination in Employment and Glass Ceiling Effects
According to Cox, New Zealand has implemented some measures to combat sexual
discrimination and the so-called “glass ceiling effect” with success and with little
controversy (Cox). In Australia, in 1986, when the Affirmative Action Act of 1986 was
enacted, it had raised controversy, but this has died down, as businesses and the public
began realizing that the legislation was weak and did not disrupt existing power
relationships in the workplace (Chapman and Trabsky). Aizawa believes that affirmative
action programs are still underused, but once implemented and correctly understood, the
have found support and there has been little hostility against these programs (Aizawa). As
for Taiwan, Chiao finds that all out preferential treatment projects that actively promote
women’s employment opportunities are unfeasible and may incur charges of “reverse
discrimination” (Chiao).
(8) Controversy over Claims of “Reverse Discrimination”
Cox finds little controversy over the reverse discrimination in New Zealand (Cox).
This is not the case in Australia. Male complainants have lodged complaints challenging
favorable gender-based treatment, for instance, women’s only health services and women’s
only facilities. However, most of these complaints have been dismissed because in those
cases, it was found that women-only services furthered the objective of substantive gender
equality, as these services meet particular needs of women unable to be covered by services
offered to both sexes (Chapman and Trabsky). In Japan, Aizawa confirms that there are
claims of reverse discrimination, but it has not turned controversial. However, there are
discussions in amending the EEO Law to prohibit discrimination against both sexes, as
currently, the EEO only prohibits sex discrimination against women (Aizawa).
(9) Controversy over Grooming and Dress Codes
Cing-Kae Chiao
20
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
In Taiwan, in the past it was common for employers to institute different grooming and
dress codes for female and male workers, or even require female employees to be
monitored for weight changes. At least in once case, it had been found that such practices
constituted sexual discrimination, if one sex was required to adhere to a certain dress code
and not the other (Chiao). Grooming and dress codes are well tolerated in New Zealand
and there are no controversies associated with their implementation, as most of these
employer requirements apply to both men and women (Cox). In Australia, employers are
legally entitled to enforce dress codes, provided these are not discriminatory on the grounds
given by anti-discriminatory laws (Chapman and Trabsky). The most likely controversy
over dress codes in Japan would occur over treatment of persons with gender identity
disorder, who want to cross dress in their workplace (Aizawa).
(10) Status of Special Agencies in Charge of Resolving Related Disputes
In New Zealand, the agencies in charge are the Human Rights Commission, the
Employment Relations Authority and the Mediation Service (institutions created under the
Employment Relations Act) which are all expert agencies with competences in their
respective areas. The normal judicial process is available to complainants when problems
cannot be solved through these specialized agencies (Cox). For Australia, the primary
federal agency in charge of dispute resolution, the Australian Human Rights Equal
Opportunity Commission seems to be under attack. As described previously, the HREOC
has had to cut back on staff after weathering severe budget cuts under Australia’s current
government, and repeated attempts to reduce its power and independence through
legislation (Chapman and Trabsky). In Japan, the Rengo or Japanese Trade Union
Confederation, would like to replace the current special agency under the EEO Law, the
prefectural Women’s and Young Persons Office, with an independent commission
specifically to resolve sex discrimination. However, this reform proposal will probably
not succeed, as there are no plans by the government to alter the status of offices in charge
of enforcing the EEO Law (Aizawa).
(11) The Influence of “Core” International Labor Standards
Cox finds that New Zealand complies with the core labor conventions and labor
standards in terms of their relationship with discrimination in employment. Furthermore,
international labor standards such as the ILO’s core labor conventions have been influential
in the reform of New Zealand’s human rights and labor legislation, and have been
integrated with the country’s domestic laws (Cox). Similarly, Chapman and Trabsky find
Australian federal anti-discrimination legislation is also closely tied with international
convention, with federal statues containing the text of many relevant conventions as
annexes to the Act (Chapman and Trabsky). The ILO Equal Remuneration Convention
(#100) has had an impact on Japanese law and will continue to have a lasting influence
(Aizawa). Although Taiwan is currently not an ILO member state, it will be in its interest
to observe the core international labor standards as a responsible member of the
international community (Chiao).
VII. Conclusion
Cing-Kae Chiao
21
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
As the experiences from the five countries show, there has been a great deal of change
in the last twenty years as more female workers entered the job market of their respective
countries. This general report attempted to present a brief overview of the development
within the legal regimes of these five countries in response to this trend, showing how
national traditions shaped their responses, the influence of international labor conventions
and a review of possible future developments that may influence legal developments. The
purpose of conducting such a survey is for learning about what others are doing in response
to the same problem, and hopefully this paper will encourage a productive exchange of
ideas.
Cing-Kae Chiao
22
The General Report : Plenary Section 1
References
Aizawa, Michiko, “The Participation of Women in the Labour Market—Toward the Goal of
Gender Equality in Employment in the 21st Century, The National Report of Japan,”
paper will be presented at the 8th Asian Congress, International Society for Labour
and Social Security Law, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., October 31-November 3, 2005.
Chapman, Anne & Marc Trabsky, “The Participation of Women in the Labour
Market—Toward the Goal of Gender Equality in Employment in the 21st Century,
Australia,” paper will be presented at the 8th Asian Congress, International Society for
Labour and Social Security Law, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., October 31-November 3,
2005.
Chiao, Cing-Kae, “The Efforts of Eliminating Sex Discrimination in Employment in
Taiwan,” Japan-Taiwan Lawyers Review, No.4, December 2004, pp. 63-120.
Cox, Griere, “The Participation of Women in the Labour Market—Toward the Goal of
Gender Equality in Employment in the 21st Century, National Report of New
Zealand,” paper will be presented at the 8th Asian Congress, International Society for
Labour and Social Security Law, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., October 31-November 3,
2005.
Kim. Soh-yeong, “The Participation of Women in the Labour Market in Korea—Toward
the Goal of Gender Equality in Employment in the 21st Century,” paper will be
presented at the 8th Asian Congress, International Society for Labour and Social
Security Law, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., October 31-November 3, 2005.
Kuo, Ling-Hwei, “Gender Equality Employment Laws and Regulations in Taiwan,” paper
will be presented at the 8th Asian Congress, International Society for Labour and
Social Security Law, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C., October 31-November 3, 2005.
Cing-Kae Chiao
23