Pay equalization: the judicial journey in the face of complex labor scenarios

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to examine the challenging scenarios faced by the administration of justice in cases of discriminatory wage treatment, which seek wage equalization and reimbursement of remuneration. Wage homologation, being a legal-procedural mechanism, enables the affected worker to resort to the courts in order to obtain a fair remuneration for work of equal value, proposing another worker as a term of comparison. With the purpose of scrutinizing the aforementioned subject, conceptual aspects are developed based on criteria outlined by the Supreme Court of Justice of Peru and the Constitutional Court, references that allow understanding the details of the right to equality and non-discrimination, its incidence in labor relations and those parameters that will allow noticing a discriminatory treatment, or on the contrary, a differentiated treatment derived from an objective cause. The author presents different scenarios, which are not limited to the simple contrast between the plaintiff and his counterpart but introduces and condenses variables —extracted from the judicial work— which have an impact and nuance the analysis of the conflict. Finally, the author concludes that the legal operators at the service of the administration of justice face complex situations regarding the homologation of remunerations, without a uniform position to guide their decisions, being essential that the Constitutional and Social Law Chambers address topics such as those exposed and clarify divergent criteria in the interpretation of the norm in similar cases.