WRITTEN QUESTION E-3027/03 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Discrimination against employees of OTE (Telecommunications Organisation of Greece).
Date: 2003-10-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, age discrimination, application of EU law, gender equality, job access, job description, labour law, sexual discrimination

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/259

regarding future policy development. It will also address the new challenges posed by the enlargement of
the Union and will help to map out the way ahead for Union action on equality over the next five years or
more.

(1) OJ L 335, 19.12.2001.
(2) 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.

(3) OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004, p. 248.

(2004/C 65 E/273)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3027/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 October 2003)

Subject: Discrimination against employees of OTE (Telecommunications Organisation of Greece)

Certain undertakings discriminate against workers on the basis of the age of recruitment. One of these
undertakings is the Telecommunications Organisation of Greece (OTE), which in its advertisements aimed
at recruiting staff with experience in the specialisation of telephone operator imposes an age-limit of 30 or
26 years for fixed-term part-time employment contracts. This practice means that a large number of
workers, primarily women (95 % of workers in this field are women), who have been employed for
decades are prevented from continuing to work and putting their experience to use because once they
have passed the specific age limit they cannot renew their contracts.

This practice contravenes Article 5(1) of Directive 97/81/EC (1) by placing obstacles in the way of
opportunities for part-time employment, and Directive 76/207/EEC (2) on the implementation of the
principle of equal treatment for men and women, as stated in the Court of Justice’s ruling in Case C-77/
2002, which pointed out that many more women than men work part-time and, consequently, under the
provision in question, are disqualified from the part-time employment system because of their age.

Could the Commission say whether the existence in a job advertisement of a provision which at first sight
seems neutral, such as that concerning the age limit, constitutes discrimination, given that it operates to
the detriment of those who are employed and wish to renew their contracts?

(1) OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, p. 9.
(2) OJ L 39, 14.2.1976, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2003)

The Honourable Member is asking the Commission if the application of recruitment age limits by the
Telecommunications Organisation of Greece amounts to indirect discrimination on grounds of sex given
that it affects mainly women.

treatment

Articles 2(1) and 3(1) of Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle
of equal
for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and
promotion, and working conditions prohibit direct and indirect discrimination on grounds of sex. In
accordance with the definition of indirect discrimination in Council Directive 97/80/EC of 15 December
1997 on the burden of proof in cases of discrimination based on sex and the jurisprudence of the
European Court of Justice, indirect discrimination exists where an apparently neutral provision, criterion or
practice disadvantages a substantially higher proportion of members of one sex unless the provision,
criterion or practice is appropriate and necessary and can be justified by objective factors unrelated to sex.

C 65 E/260

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

framework for equal

The Honourable Member may also wish to note that Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000
in employment and occupation (1) must be
establishing a general
treatment
implemented by the Member States by 2 December 2003 at
the latest. This Directive outlaws
discrimination on grounds of religion and belief, disability, age or sexual orientation in the employment
field. However, Article 6 of the Directive provides that differences of treatment on grounds of age shall not
they are objectively and
constitute unlawful discrimination if, within the context of national
reasonably justified by a legitimate aim, such as labour market policy.

law,

The deadline for the implementation of Directive 2000/78/EC has not yet passed, and the Commission has
not yet received notification from Greece of its implementing measures. Once these have been received the
Commission will study whether they are in conformity with the Directive, and in particular whether the
practice mentioned in the Honourable Member’s questions would be justified by the exception contained
in Article 6 of the Directive.

As the Telecommunications Organisation of Greece is a public body, the Commission will, in the interim,
contact the Greek authorities in order to obtain further information in relation to the practice referred to
by the Honourable Member with a view to determining whether the practice amounts to indirect
discrimination against women. The Commission will be in contact with the Honourable Member as soon
as the necessary information is received.

(1) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(2004/C 65 E/274)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3033/03

by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Subject: Structural Funds (cid:1) Objective 2 region (cid:1) province of Limburg, Belgium

On 1 October 2003, the European board of the automobile manufacturer Ford announced the company’s
plans to reorganise its European production network. The production capacity of Ford’s plant in Genk
is to be cut drastically in the near future, with disastrous social
(province of Limburg, Belgium)
consequences, given that 3000 employees will lose their jobs. Job losses in firms supplying components
are put at many thousands. This represents a further severe blow to the economic and social fabric of the
province of Limburg.

In the past, the Commission recognised the province of Limburg as an Objective 2 region (involving three
priorities and nine measures) and approved a development programme for the province for the period
2000-2006 funded in the amount of EUR 214 million. Measures and projects can be implemented on the
basis of financial support from the European Regional Development Funds (ERDF) and the European Social
Fund (ESF).

Can the Commission state what scope there is for releasing additional financial resources with a view
to tackling more promptly the structural, economic and social problems facing the province of Limburg?
Has the Commission received a request to that effect from the Flemish Government? Does the Commission
itself intend to take such a step?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 2003)

On 28 June 2001 the Commission approved the single programming document for the province of
Limburg under Objective 2 for 2000-2006 covering a total cost of EUR 240 482 000. The municipality of
Genk is covered by this programme.

The Structural Fund contribution is EUR 92 696 000, i.e. 38 % of total programme expenditure.