WRITTEN QUESTION E-0857/99

by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: Discrimination against women in a municipal transport company in Murcia (Spain)

The transport company LAT Ltd operates in the Murcian capital and all the surrounding districts, providing both municipal transport and discretionary and school transport services. It employs over 300 people, and operates under a municipal concession from Murcia City Council.

I am informed that this company employs no women bus drivers, and does not even invite women to sit the technical exams required for the job. Within the establishment, however, it so happens that those responsible for cleaning the buses are mainly women, and they do have to drive the vehicles for cleaning purposes, a fact which is in flat contradiction with the company's policy of not contracting women as drivers.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. Does the Commission not believe that the municipal authorities, specifically the Murcia city councillor responsible for town planning and transport, should have examined the company's policy on the employment of women when they granted it a municipal concession?

3. Does the Commission not believe that the municipal authorities are responsible for ensuring that labour legislation on quality of opportunities for men and women is actually complied with?

4. Does the Commission not believe that the right of European women, and more specifically, Directive 76/207/EEC(1) on implementing the principle of equal treatment for men and women is being infringed, particularly with reference to access of employment, vocational training and development, and working conditions?

5. What is the Commission doing about this situation?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

1. The Commission was not aware of the situation outlined by the Honourable Member.

2. The Commission agrees that it would have been welcome if the municipal authorities had examined the transport company's policy on the employment of women before awarding it a municipal contract. The Commission's communication of 11 March 1998 on public procurement in the European Union(2) emphasised the importance of the elimination of inequality and the promotion of equality between men and women as an aspect to be taken into account in awarding public contracts. However, there is nothing under the existing Community rules on public procurement that would legally require such a practice to take place.

3. On the basis of the information provided, the municipality cannot be held legally responsible for any eventual breaches of equal treatment legislation. Any action brought by a complainant should be taken against the private company or employer involved.

4. From the information given it is not clear whether LAT Ltd operates a formal ban on women being employed as bus drivers or whether it happens to be the case that no women are employed as bus drivers. A formal ban would be contrary to Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions.

5. The right to equal treatment in access to employment, contained in Article 3(1) of Directive 76/207/EEC, has direct effect(3) and can be relied upon by an individual as against a private enterprise before the national courts. It is therefore up to individuals who feel they have been discriminated against to take legal action against the company in the Spanish courts.

(1) OJ L 39, 14.2.1976, p. 40.

(2) COM(98) 143 final.

(3) Case 222/84 - Johnston v Royal Ulster Constabulary.