The Gender Wage Gap: A Comparative Analysis on the Indian Framework vis-à-vis the UK and South Korea
Keywords:
South Korea, Equality Act 2010, “Women and Men in India 2022”, Gender Wage GapAbstract
The gender wage gap remains a significant socio-economic and legal concern across the globe, varying in scope and impact across different legal systems. This paper provides a comparative study of the regulatory frameworks addressing gender-based pay disparities in India, the United Kingdom, and South Korea. It examines legislative measures, enforcement strategies, and the practical challenges that hinder wage parity. India’s recent labor code reforms have raised expectations about their role in reducing wage inequalities and strengthening equal pay provisions. However, implementation challenges persist due to limited legal awareness among employers and employees, weak enforcement mechanisms, and financial barriers to seeking legal recourse. The “Women and Men in India 2022” report, published by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation,
illustrates a significant disparity in labor force participation rates between men and women, highlighting deep-rooted structural and legal hurdles to wage equality. In contrast, the United Kingdom has developed a more structured approach to tackling pay inequality, notably through the Equality Act 2010, which mandates gender pay gap disclosures for large companies. South Korea,
despite having legal safeguards against wage discrimination, faces systemic challenges due to entrenched corporate hierarchies and rigid labor market norms. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of these legal frameworks and extract key insights that could inform India’s efforts to achieve wage parity. The paper concludes with recommendations to enhance enforcement, raise
awareness, and create a more equitable labor market that ensures fair compensation regardless of gender.
References
National Statistical Office. Women and Men in India; 2022. p. 38.
Chancel L, Piketty T, Saez E, Zucman G, et al. World Inequality Report 2022, World Inequality Lab wir2022.wid.world.
Chancel L, Piketty T, Saez E, Zucman G, et al. World Inequality Report 2022, World Inequality Lab wir2022.wid.world.
Code on Wages, no. 29, Acts of Parliament, 2019.
Kelly A. Worst fashion wage theft. The Guardian. Dec 16, 2021.
Mezzadri et al. (2015) found that even when contract laborers were paid on par with employees, employers preferred contract laborers to prevent unionization, cut down supervision costs and maintain flexibility of labour.
WP 9143/2020 (2020), Kar HC. Available at https://www.workersrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Karnataka-High- Court-Order-Staying-Postponement-of-DA.pdf.
Annie Kelly, “Worst fashion wage theft”, The guardian, Dec 16, 2021.
Air India v. Nargesh Meerza. 4 SCC 335. 1981.
Moghe K. On International Domestic Workers’ Day, a lookback at the ghastly conditions they are subjected to in India. The Leaflet. June 16, 2023. Available at https://theleaflet.in/on-international-domestic-workers-day-a-lookback-at-the-ghastly-conditions-they-are-subjected-to-in-india/
The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, no. 51, Acts of Parliament, 1961.
Equal Employment Opportunity and Work-Family Balance Assistance Act, 2016, no. 13932, Acts of Parliament.
