----

(2004/C 33 E/255)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2319/03

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(14 July 2003)

Subject:   ‘For Diversity, Against Discrimination’ campaign

The campaign to encourage diversity and combat discrimination is a multiannual project and has started with discrimination at the workplace. Workers in undertakings criticised for not being sufficiently diverse are depicted as a set of crash-test dummies. On the campaign website and in its pamphlets, an idyllic picture is painted of firms which feature ‘diversity’: diversity results in enhanced motivation for the workers, in improved creativity, even in larger profits.

In a large number of areas, however, businesses are operating which, with regard to ethnic diversity, are not ‘diverse’, although they are efficient, creative and innovative — in part because of the diversity of the talents and capabilities of their workforce. Although a large number of undertakings employ few workers from ethnic minorities, that is not because they are pursuing any kind of discriminatory policy. In many cases, persons from ethnic minorities do not generally possess the qualifications required, sometimes because of a lack of knowledge of languages and of the high school dropout rates of such minorities.

What mechanisms will be incorporated into the campaign with a view to preventing undertakings which operate in good faith from being stigmatised because of their ‘lack’ of ethnic diversity?

Is the Commission aware of the danger that undertakings — under pressure from European or other governmental campaigns — might resort to what is known as ‘affirmative action’, with better qualified applicants being rejected on the grounds that they are not members of an ethnic minority? What measures is the Commission thinking of taking so as to counter such perverse effects of diversity campaigns?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-2305/03, E-2306/03 and E-2319/03

given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(26 August 2003)

The initiative referred to by the Honourable Member is designed to inform people of their new rights and obligations under the two anti-discrimination Directives based on Article 13 of the EC Treaty that were adopted in 2000 (1). The campaign is funded under the awareness-raising strand of the Community action programme to combat discrimination (2).

The campaign website will soon be available in all Union languages. The different language versions of the campaign materials are in the process of being finalised, following consultations with the relevant stakeholders (national authorities, the social partners and non-governmental organisations (NGOs)) on the adaptation of the campaign materials in each Member State. The initial presentation of the website in three languages was intended to avoid delays in the launching of the campaign. This way of proceeding is in line with the practice adopted for other websites of the Community Institutions, including that of the Parliament, where some pages are available in a limited number of languages. It is in the interest of transparency to make information available as soon as possible rather than to wait for the availability of all Community languages.

The Honourable Member also asks about the application of language tests for certain jobs and requirements concerning the level of knowledge requested. On the discriminatory practice of applying ‘mother tongue’ or ‘native speaker’ qualifications in job advertisements, the Commission explained its position concerning this problem in general in numerous replies to written questions. The Honourable Member is therefore referred to the replies of the Commission given to Written Questions: No E-4100/00 by Mr Staes (3), E-0779/01 by Mr Staes (4), E-1356/01 by Mr Gemelli (5), E-1681/01 by Mr Staes (6), E-1682/01 by Mr Staes (6), E-2331/01 by Mr Ferrer (7), E-2900/01 by Mr Staes (7), E-2901/01 by Mr Staes (7), E-2944/01 by Mr Staes (7), E-3189/01 by Mr Rothley (7), E-3572/01 by Mr Staes (8), E-0941/02 by Mr Staes (9), E-2764/02 by Mr Staes (10), E-1733/03 by Mr Leinen (11) and E-2018/03 by Mr Staes (12).

With regard to the Honourable Member's question about ‘affirmative action’, the case-law of the Court of Justice in sex discrimination cases (13) sets clear limits to the scope of measures designed to overcome the disadvantages suffered by particular groups in the labour market. These limits prohibit the use of measures which promote the appointment of workers who are less well qualified for the job on the grounds that they are members of a disadvantaged or discriminated group.

Finally, the Commission sees no risk of firms which are acting ‘in good faith being stigmatised because of a lack of ethnic diversity’.

----

(1)  Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin — OJ L 180, 19.7.2000 and Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation — OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(2)  Council Decision 2000/750/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a Community action programme to combat discrimination (2001 to 2006) - OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(3)OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001.

(4)OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001.

(5)OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001.

(6)OJ C 93 E, 18.4.2002.

(7)OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002.

(8)OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002.

(9)OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002.

(10)OJ C 92 E, 17.4.2002.

(11)OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004, p.221.

(12)  See page 201.

(13)  e.g. judgements in C-450/93 Kalanke of 17.10.1995; C-409/95 Marschall of 11.11.1997.

----