WRITTEN QUESTION E-1682/01 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Language discrimination in the European Commission's Socrates Technical Assistance Office.
Date: 2001-06-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community body, European Commission, administrative competition, free movement of workers, linguistic discrimination, mother tongue, official language

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/19

8. How many applicants had studied at neither an English- nor a French-language university?

9. How many of the applicants interviewed were of English mother tongue?

10. How many of the applicants interviewed were of French mother tongue?

11. How many of the applicants interviewed were of neither English nor French mother tongue?

12. How many of the applicants interviewed had studied for more than one year at an English-language

university?

13. How many of the applicants interviewed had studied for more than one year at a French-language

university?

14. How many of the applicants interviewed had studied for more than one year at neither an English-

nor a French-language university?

15. Of what mother tongues are the members of staff recruited?

(1) The Brussels-based Socrates, Leonardo and Youth Technical Assistance Office assists the European Commission …
At present the following opportunities (m/f) exist: Assistants … The major requirements are language knowledge
(English mother tongue, excellent French and German and another Union language … Administrative Officer …
English mother tongue, excellent command of French and another Union language 8 Bulletin, 7/12/00, p. 66.
Socrates, Leonardo and Youth Technical Assistance Office … assists the European Commission … has a vacant post
for a (m/f) Communications Officer … Excellent command of spoken English and French … mother tongue a plus.
8 Bulletin, 01/03/01, p. 59.

(2002/C 93 E/022)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1682/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(14 June 2001)

Subject: Language discrimination in the European Commission’s Socrates Technical Assistance Office

According to Commission Member Ms Diamantopoulou, the native speaker criterion could be considered
to be discriminatory and therefore incompatible with Community rules on the freedom of movement of
workers in the Community. That was stated in her answer to Written Question E-0779/01 (1) on vacancies
in non-governmental organisations, companies and European Institutions stipulating English mother
tongue as a prior requirement. Belgian Minister Laurette Onkelinx had also on a previous occasion
acknowledged that the principle of non-discrimination and free movement of workers was being violated
by the posting of vacancies for native English speakers. She based that view on the European Declaration
of Human Rights and the International Labour Organisation Convention on Discrimination. In the matter
of recruitment in the Belgian Federation, she drew attention to Collective Labour Convention No 38, the
Vandezande decree and the French Community decree on social relations between employers and
employees.

Job advertisements of this kind turn up regularly in the weeklies European Voice and The Bulletin. During
the European Year of Languages, European organisations and institutions are clearly becoming every more
explicit in requiring job applicants to be English mother-tongue speakers. They are thereby discriminating
openly against job-seeking speakers of other languages. English is thus 8 quite unjustifiably 8 being given
the status of (culturally) dominant language. Non-native English speakers are being excluded in advance
from selection procedures even when their command of English or French is more than adequate. Other
language speakers manifestly no longer come in for consideration for certain duties.

It is astonishing that Socrates, a technical assistance office of the European Commission, should have been
guilty of this kind of discrimination (The Bulletin, 07/12/00, p. 66).

I therefore ask the Commission the following:

8 Does the Commission acknowledge that the Socrates Technical Assistance Office discriminates against

non-English speakers by posting such vacancy notices?

C 93 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

8 If not, how does the Commission reconcile the prior requirement that applicants be of English mother

tongue with the non-discrimination principle?

8 If so, what action will the Commission take to call a halt to such discriminatory practices?

(1) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001, p. 245.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1681/01 and E-1682/01
given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 2001)

The Honourable Member’s attention is drawn to the Commission’s answers to the Honourable Member’s
Written Questions E-4100/00 (1), E-0779/01 (2) and E-1356/01 by Mr Gemelli (3) on this same subject.

Organisations performing services under contract for the Commission, such as the Socrates, Leonardo and
Youth Technical Assistance Office, are required to operate in a wide range of languages and the staff
recruited by such organisations is composed of a wide range of nationalities and mother tongues. They
may from time to time require to recruit staff with a very high level of knowledge of a specific language or
languages. In so doing, they are bound to comply with all legal and administrative provisions applicable in
Belgium, including Community regulations on the free movement of workers.

that

The Commission has drawn the attention of the Socrates, Leonardo and Youth Technical Assistance Office
to the fact
in recruitment
the use of expressions such as ‘mother tongue’ or ‘native speaker’
advertisements might be considered as discriminatory and, thus, incompatible with Community law. The
organisation’s management has informed the Commission that it will ensure such terms do not appear in
future vacancy notices.

(1) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001, p. 233.
(2) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001, p. 245.
(3) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 132.

(2002/C 93 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1714/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 June 2001)

Subject: Differing needs regarding interest rates as a result of unequal and non-simultaneous economic

growth.

1.
Does the Commission remember that in March and April pressure was brought to bear, inter alia by
the USA, for the European Central Bank to lower its interest rates but that this reduction in interest rates
did not initially take place on the grounds that it might increase the risk of inflation in the euro zone?

2.
Does the Commission consider that the risk of inflation in May, when the interest rate was indeed
reduced, had abated as a result of new statistics indicating that the growth in money supply was less than
originally expected?

3.
Is the Commission aware of a study by the Dutch-Belgian bank group ING according to which the
economies in the euro-zone will grow further and further apart, inter alia because Member States and
regions will specialise in different sectors such as high-tech, cultivation of vegetables or car manufacture
and that this will result in economic highs and lows in different regions at different times?

4.
Can the Commission confirm that the interest rates set by the ECB since the beginning of 1999 have
had a beneficial effect for France in particular which succeeded in combining a low rate of inflation with
remarkable growth in employment in the said period?