WRITTEN QUESTION E-2944/01 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Language discrimination in the recruitment of TACIS staff.
Date: 2001-10-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community body, EU statistics, administrative competition, job access, linguistic discrimination, mother tongue, official language

C 134 E/142

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

The Commission’s TACIS programme is looking for a native speaker of English for its Information Centre.
This manifestly runs counter to the principle of non-discrimination laid down in the European Declaration
of Human Rights and the ILO’s Discrimination Convention, and in Belgian legislation on recruitment, as
set out in collective labour agreement no 38, the Vandezande decree and the decree of the French
Community on social relations between employers and employees.

Does the Commission acknowledge that the above-mentioned recruitment procedure manifestly runs
counter to the principle of non-discrimination and is therefore incompatible with the rules on the freedom
of movement of workers, as stated in the answer to Question E-0779/01?

If so, what legal action will it take in respect of the above violation of the principle of non-discrimination,
laid down in the European Declaration of Human Rights and the ILO’s Discrimination Convention, and in
Belgian legislation on recruitment, as set out in collective labour agreement no 38, the Vandezande decree
and the decree of the French Community on social relations between employers and employees?

If not, what arguments can it advance for violating the principle of non-discrimination and the rules on
the freedom of movement of workers when recruiting a communications officer
for the TACIS
programme?

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

(2002/C 134 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2944/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 October 2001)

Subject: Language discrimination in the recruitment of TACIS staff

The European Commission’s TACIS and PHARE communications centre is looking for an English-speaking
member of staff. This recruitment process deliberately discriminates against non-English speakers. They are
excluded from the selection procedure in advance, even if they have more than a good command of
English. Speakers of other languages are obviously not eligible for these posts. It is inconceivable that the
European Commission’s TACIS and PHARE programmes should be guilty of discrimination of this kind.

Is the Commission prepared to suspend the current discriminatory procedure immediately and to publish a
new non-discriminatory notice of vacancy? If not, why is the Commission maintaining this procedure
which is in flagrant breach of Community law on free movement of workers (E-0779/01 (1), E-1681/01
and E-1682/01 (2), E-1356/01 (3) and E-4100/00 (4))?
the Commission publish a non-
discriminatory notice of vacancy?

If so, will

(1) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001, p. 245.
(2) OJ C 93 E, 18.4.2002, p. 19.
(3) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 132.
(4) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001, p. 233.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2901/01 and E-2944/01
given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2001)

The vacancy notice the Honourable Member is referring to was issued by the PHARE & TACIS Information
Centre on Enlargement, managed by a company called East West Consulting. The notice did indeed make

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/143

reference to the recruitment of a ‘native speaker of English’. The Commission readily agrees that such a
wording was inadequate, as the aim of the advertisement was simply to recruit someone with a good
enough level of English to be able to deal with the written and oral enquiries addressed to the Centre in
English, given that it was proving impossible to deal fast enough with the sheer number of such enquiries.

This apparently discriminatory wording should have been formulated differently in order to make clear
that considering the nature of the vacancy to be filled, a high standard of knowledge of a particular
language was required. In that situation, as the Commission stated in its answer to written question
E-0779/01, such a requirement is not considered discriminatory.

Nevertheless, the recruitment procedure was carried out ‘openly’ through interviews with candidates, many
of whom had a good knowledge of English without English necessarily being their mother tongue. Even
though the person recruited is in fact a native English speaker, he also has many other qualities, including
language abilities, in that he has a very good knowledge of another EU official language.

In any case, the Commission has notified East West Consulting that the wording of the notice was
inappropriate and has asked the company to take all necessary measures to prevent such an incident from
reoccurring.

(2002/C 134 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2904/01

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Council

(22 October 2001)

Subject: Visits of Taiwanese Government officials to EU Member States

Further to the Council’s reply of 27 September to my question of 29 March (1) D during which six months
Taiwan enjoyed a flourishing democracy while the People’s Republic of China suffered under six months of
totalitarian government- would it specify what it means when it says that ‘it does not encourage official
visits’? Does this mean that such visits are not allowed?

(1) Written Question E-0945/01 D OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 29.

Reply

(14 February 2002)

The Council itself has not invited any members of the Taiwanese government to Europe. However, there is
no Council common position or any other legislative act that prevents visas from being issued to members
of the Taiwanese government who are on an official visit to the Member States. The Council does not
encourage such visits to the Member States of the EU.

(2002/C 134 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2905/01

by Pietro-Paolo Mennea (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 October 2001)

Subject: Regional funding for training

Can the Commission say whether there are any regions in Italy which, despite receiving funding for
training from the European Social Fund, do not have any laws governing the use of such funding? Can it
also ascertain whether part of the funding is used by some regions to finance the training of categories of
profession which are not recognised by any law and for which there are no job opportunities?

If this is true, what decision will the Commission take on the subject?