Law assignment - Administrative Law, Papers of Administrative Law

Download Law assignment - Administrative Law and more Papers Administrative Law in PDF only on Docsity!

european network against racism

Racism and discrimination

in employment in Europe

ENAR Shadow Report 2012 - 2013

Authors commissioned by ENAR for this report: Miet Lamberts - HIVA-KU Leuven (Belgium), Arend Ode and Bertine Witkamp - Regioplan (The Netherlands)

Copy editors: Shannon Pfohman, Claire Fernandez and Georgina Siklossy of ENAR

Racism is a reality in the lives of many ethnic and religious minorities in the EU. However, the extent and manifestations of this reality are often unknown and undocumented, especially in official data sources, meaning that it can be difficult to analyse the situation and to establish solutions to it.

The ENAR Shadow Reports are produced to fill the gaps in the official and academic data, to offer an alternative to that data and to bring an NGO perspective on the realities of racism in the EU and its Member States. NGO reports are, by their nature, based on many sources of data, official, unofficial, academic and experiential. This allows access to information which, while sometimes not backed up by the rigours of academic standards, provides the vital perspective of those that either are or work directly with those affected by racism. It is this that gives NGO reports their added value, complementing academic and official reporting.

Published by the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) in Brussels, March 2014, with the support of the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity - PROGRESS (2007-2013), the Open Society Foundations and the ENAR Foundation.

PROGRESS is implemented by the European Commission. It was established to financially support the implementation of the objectives of the European Union in the employment, social affairs and equal opportunities area, and thereby contribute to the achievement of the Europe 2020 Strategy goals in these fields. The seven-year Programme targets all stakeholders who can help shape the development of appropriate and effective employment and social legislation and policies, across the EU-27, EFTA-EEA and EU candidate and pre-candidate countries. For more information see: http://ec.europa.eu/progress

The Open Society Foundations work to build vibrant and tolerant societies whose governments are accountable and open to the participation of all people. For more information: http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/

The information contained in this publication does not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission or of the Open Society Foundations.

ENAR reserves the right not to be responsible for the accuracy, completeness or quality of the information provided in this report. Liability claims regarding damage caused by the use of any information provided, including any information which is incomplete or incorrect, will therefore be rejected.

Design and layout: Crossmark

ENAR – European Network Against Racism aisbl 60 rue Gallait, B-1030 Brussels Tel +32 2 229 35 70 Fax +32 2 229 35 75 Email: [email protected] www.enar-eu.org

I am delighted to present this latest edition of the European Network Against Racism’s Shadow Report on Racism in Europe. It is based on 23 national Shadow Reports and provides a crucial and unique civil society perspective on the situation of racism and related discrimination in Europe, from March 2012 to March 2013.

This year, ENAR chose to focus on racism and discrimination in the field of employment. Despite the lack of comparable and reliable equality data, disaggregated by ethnic origin, religion and other characteristics, this report sheds light on the current labour market situation in Europe and manifestations of discrimination in employment, as well as the way in which discrimination is tackled via policies and public and private initiatives.

Evidence from the national Shadow Reports shows that despite the existence of a legal framework, discrimination in employment is still experienced across Europe as a widespread and pervasive phenomenon. Migrants and ethnic and religious minorities continue to face unequal treatment in the labour market. In addition, the economic and financial crisis has further exacerbated the employment gap between minorities and migrants on the one hand, and the majority population on the other.

Worryingly, the report finds that despite the existence of legislation and/or policy measures covering discrimination in employment in all Member States, they are not always as efficient as they should be. There is no comprehensive policy framework specifically addressing discrimination in employment and the procedures in place to seek redress against discrimination remain complex. The lack of political will to tackle discrimination, coupled with negative political and public discourses on ethnic minorities and migrants in a number of Member States, has not made the situation any better.

The picture is not all bleak: this report highlights numerous efforts being made by institutions and organisations to promote equality, anti-racism and anti- discrimination in the field of employment (and beyond). However, all these initiatives taken together form a

scattered landscape in which efforts are not centrally organised or monitored.

ENAR works precisely to fill this void by consolidating the different actions undertaken by ENAR members across every EU Member State. As the only pan-European network of NGOs working to counter discrimination and racism in Europe, a huge potential is there to steer progressive change towards full equality, solidarity and well-being for all. But as many national Shadow Reports mention, it is not uncommon for ambitious programmes to fail because of changes in politics or funding cuts. All this contributes to slowing the mobilisation of key actors in combating discrimination and racism in employment (and beyond) effectively and sustainably throughout the European Union.

In addition, while an active civil society is welcome and necessary, it is not their responsibility alone to uphold equality. States urgently need to show real political commitment and invest in action to curb racism and discrimination in employment.

Ahead of the 2014 European elections, the stakes are high: estimates show that ethnic and religious minorities represent around 12% of the total European population. As for migrants, they constitute 5% of the total working age population of the European Union. How will European Parliament candidates address the question of access to employment for minorities and migrants? How could concerted efforts to combat discrimination in employment support Member States in reaching the Europe 2020 targets? We hope to start bringing some answers to these questions in this report and will continue to offer suggestions on ways to tackle this challenging situation.

Finally, we are very grateful to all the dedicated people who have contributed to ENAR’s Shadow Reports, and for the valuable support of the European Commission and the Open Society Foundations in making the publication of this unique monitoring tool possible.

Foreword

Sarah Isal

ENAR Chair

12345678905405 ^3

ENAR’s Shadow Report on racism and racial discrimination in employment in Europe is based on 23 national Shadow Reports from EU Member States^1 and Turkey. It covers the period between March 2012 and March 2013.

High unemployment among migrants and ethnic and religious minorities continues to be problematic, especially for Roma and for low-skilled and non-EU migrants. The economic and financial crisis has further exacerbated the employment gap between minorities and migrants on the one hand, and the majority population on the other. At the same time, political and public discourses on migrants and minorities are increasingly portraying them as economic, security and cultural threats.

Despite the existence of a legal framework, discrimination in employment is still experienced as a widespread phenomenon. Given that current EU labour market indicators only reveal rough differences between target groups and the national average, monitoring discrimination in the labour market cannot be carried out by only looking at labour market indicators, especially since vital comparable data remains amiss. By looking at concrete examples and manifestations of racism and discrimination, this report sheds light on perceptions of discrimination in employment, the groups most vulnerable to such discrimination, discrimination in access to employment and discrimination in the workplace.

Five groups are identified as being most vulnerable to discrimination in employment: migrants from non-EU Member States, including undocumented migrants, refugees and asylum seekers; Roma; Muslims; people of African descent and Black Europeans; and all women with a minority or migrant background.

At the stage of recruitment, discrimination manifests itself, for example, when there are no public job postings, the selection is on the basis of names and addresses, or there is a requirement to add a picture to the letter of application. Access to employment is further often (indirectly) hampered by discriminatory regulations of recruitment agencies, by a number of institutional policies, the problematic procedure of recognition of foreign qualifications and the lack of personal networks.

With regard to discrimination in the workplace , migrants and ethnic and religious minorities are often paid less than

1 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ger- many, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Neth- erlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and the United Kingdom.

their mainstream national colleagues, encounter a glass-ceiling effect, are prone to precarious and difficult working conditions, are often victims of harassment and abusive dismissal, and are discriminated against based on wearing religious symbols.

The European Union’s engagement to combat discrimination in employment is founded on a solid legal framework. When looking at this legal framework on a national level, the analysis reveals that EU anti-discrimination legislation has been transposed into national law but that there remain a number of gaps in implementation and protection mechanisms. In addition, none of the reviewed countries have adopted a comprehensive national strategy on discrimination in employment although some national policies might indirectly tackle discrimination in employment or focus on specific groups.

Due to significant obstacles to seek judicial remedies , victims of discrimination in employment do not usually bring their case to court. Key obstacles include the difficulty to prove discrimination, a lack of trust in the judicial system, lack of awareness of legal provisions, the length and cost of proceedings, and the fear of re-victimisation.

Equality bodies and Ombudsman institutions can provide legal assistance to potential victims of discrimination in the field of employment. However, there are concerns regarding their independence and limited financial resources. In a number of Member States, labour inspectorates are active in combating discrimination, although they do not always have expertise on and/or awareness of racial discrimination.

Civil society (trade unions and NGOs) plays a key role in combating discrimination in employment. The level of activity of trade unions varies between countries. Some national reports mention examples of good practices while in others, the level of involvement of trade unions is very low. In all EU countries there is at least one NGO focusing on racism and discrimination in employment. Their activities often include campaigning, raising awareness, and providing information, training, or counselling.

Employers and employer organisations are generally less active in fighting discrimination in employment although there are examples of good practices to be mentioned.

The report concludes that all these initiatives taken together form a scattered landscape in which efforts are not centrally organised or monitored, and that the lack of a comprehensive framework hinders efforts to fight discrimination in employment effectively.

Executive Summary

12345678905405 ^5

6. Ease and ensure the process of recognition of foreign qualifications, making it free of charge, and improve conditions for assessing and accrediting informal qualifications or practical work experience.
7. Ensure stable and adequate resource allocation to National Human Rights Institutions and equality bodies so that they can pursue the missions they are entrusted with in European legislation. Ensure, especially during the economic crisis, that no recruitment moratorium in the public sector applies to them.
8. Ensure judicial and non-judicial complaint mechanisms for employment discrimination cases are transparent and clear information is available to victims when reporting discrimination.
9. Ensure public sector employers have a positive equality duty, which implies the duty to recruit professionals from migrants and minority groups and the duty to mainstream diversity in public procurement policies (ensure that external contractors implement diversity management policies with a focus on ethnic and religious minorities and migrants).
10. Develop national/regional standard setting initiatives such as diversity charters and ensure control mechanisms for the implementation of such initiatives. Incomplete implementation should not give way to claiming official participation in such standard setting initiatives at national level.

To equality bodies

1. Proactively collect and publish data on court cases and complaints concerning discrimination in employment and disaggregate data by ground of discrimination and field of complaint.
2. Pro-actively conduct research on ethnic and religious minorities’ discrimination experiences in employment by using surveys to overcome underreporting of discrimination cases.
3. Launch public campaigns to better inform both employers and groups of victims of discrimination about anti-discrimination legislation, complaint procedures and relevant developments in non- discrimination case-law.

To civil society organisations

1. Conduct systematic monitoring and report discriminatory practices in employment and effective practice addressing underlying inequalities and discrimination.
2. Continue to promote greater awareness among migrants and ethnic minority groups as to what constitutes discrimination in employment and how to report it.
3. Work with both public and private sector organisations to share good practices in combating racism and related discrimination in employment and build coalitions.
4. Increase coordination between anti-racist organisations at regional/national level to cater for further specialisation in monitoring, advocacy and litigation in the field of employment.

To employers

1. Mainstream the fight against racism and related discrimination in the workplace in corporate social responsibility and diversity strategies.
2. Monitor and review recruitment, progression and retention of workforce by equality strand in order to identify direct or indirect discriminatory practices and adopt corrective measures which will reduce inequalities in each of these areas.
3. Develop clear internal regulations against racism, related discrimination and harassment in the workplace. These regulations should include clear information for employees who are victims or witnesses of discrimination, internal remedy procedures and the establishment of a complaint desk/trusted representative to assist victims in reporting discrimination cases either to court or to equality bodies.
4. Sign and implement diversity charters, which exist in several EU Member States and which enable companies to share good practices in the recruitment of migrants and ethnic minorities. Implement diversity labels where they exist (such as the AFNOR certification in France or the European Holistic Management Certificate™).

To trade unions

1. Develop internal strategies to support delegates in addressing racism and related discrimination within trade union structures and affiliates, and in supporting victims of racism and related discrimination in the workplace.
2. Develop and promote good practices in monitoring and addressing racism and related discrimination in employment, including on the grounds of culture/religion.
3. Accurately inform delegates and employees on their rights and duties in case of discrimination and racism in employment.
4. Place racism and related discrimination in employment on the agenda in social dialogues with both the government and employers’ organisations.
5. Closely cooperate with other trade unions, employers and NGOs, including at EU level, to develop innovative ideas to address discrimination in the workplace.

To local governments

1. Monitor information on the local employment situation in order to identify local labour market profiles of ethnic and migrant groups.
2. Work with front line organisations to deliver programmes which will improve the employability of local migrants and minorities. Share and replicate good practices that occur in other municipalities.
3. Use the leverage of a positive equality duty in all call for tenders and public procurement policies, requiring external contractors to prove that they actually implement diversity management policies that include a focus on ethnic and religious minorities and migrants.

Concerns about work force entrants compensating these depleting figures have gradually raised more attention in the direction of migrants’ and minorities’ contributions to European society.

The competencies and skills required of work forces worldwide are also more complex, diverse and specialised. A forecasting study by the McKinsey Global Institute estimated that the global shortage of high skilled and trained technical skills is projected to reach 85 million by

2020.^9 At a time when employers around the world today

9 McKinsey Global Institute, The world at work: Jobs, pay, and skills for 3. billion people. 2012.

complain that they cannot fill one in three jobs on offer with the needed level of skills, this seven-year warning is fast approaching. Michael Hüther, head of the Cologne Institute for Economic Research, a think tank that is aligned with employers’ associations, assesses that today’s immigrants are on average better qualified than German workers.^10

Migration has become essential to ensure Europe’s continuous development and economic growth. During 2011, there were about 1.7 million migrants moving to the

10 ‘Welfare for Immigrants: EU Wants Fortress Germany to Open Up’. Spiegel Online, 14 January 2014. Available at: http://www.spiegel.de/interna- tional/germany/brussels-may-force-germany-to-loosen-access-to-social- benefits-a-943224-2.html.

Composition of population in the European Union in 2012 (%) Country Native-born EU-27 Non EU- Austria 84,1 6,5 9, Belgium 84,7 7,2 8, Bulgaria 98,8 0,4 0, Croatia - - - Cyprus 76,1 12,6 10, Czech Republic 96,3 1,3 2, Denmark 90,5 3,0 6, Estonia 83,9 1,5 14, Finland 95,1 1,7 3, France 88,7 3,3 8, Germany 87,0 4,2 7, Greece 88,8 2,8 8, Hungary 95,3 3,2 1, Ireland 84,2 11,0 4, Italy 91,0 2,9 6, Latvia 85,4 1,5 13, Lithuania 95,1 0,6 4, Luxembourg 58,6 31,4 9, Malta 91,6 4,2 4, Netherlands 88,6 2,8 8, Poland 98,2 0,7 1, Portugal 91,9 2,0 6, Romania 99,1 0,4 0, Slovakia 97,1 2,4 0, Slovenia 88,8 1,0 10, Spain 86,6 4,6 8, Sweden 84,9 5,2 9, United Kingdom 87,8 4,1 8, Source: Eurostat, The composition of the population in EU Member States, 2012. The numbers are the percentages of nationals, EU migrants and non-EU migrants living in the Member States, based on the country of birth.

12345678905405 ^9

EU from a non-EU country. In addition, 1.3 million people migrated from one Member State to another Member State.^11

Europe’s economic challenges The current economic and financial crisis has led to a rise in unemployment (with youth particularly affected) as well as increased job competition. Austerity measures and related financial ‘reforms’ imposed by international lenders have contributed to heightening wealth disparities across Europe and have had a negative impact on the social and economic rights of the most vulnerable.^12

Share of Europeans who believe the economic crisis is contributing to more discrimination in the labour market on the grounds of ethnic origin

Source: European Commission, Eurobarometer 393: Discrimination in the European Union in 2012, 2012.

11 Eurostat, Migration and migrant population statistics. 2013. 12 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Nils Muiznieks, Launch of the report ‘Safeguarding human rights in times of economic crises’. 4 De- cember 2013. Available at: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=2130915.

According to a report by the Council of Europe’s High Commissioner for Human Rights as well as the national Shadow Reports, human rights have been significantly eroded due to austerity policies in the different EU Member States.^13

Europe’s challenges with populism As most Member States’ economies have been hit by the economic and financial downturn, and in light of lacking innovative solutions to move Europe out of the crisis, many politicians have resorted to stirring up sentiment against immigrants and ethnic minorities as well as against the European Union. The public perception of ethnic and religious minorities in most countries remains largely negative: they are often accused of taking job opportunities from the native labour force, of abusing the welfare system and of increased crime rates. They are used as scapegoats for everything that goes wrong in society and their return has been called for as a solution to high unemployment rates.^14 Besides this security-based discourse, a utilitarian approach (or superiority-based approach) is also very much present, which considers migrants as labour force entities, filling jobs that the bulk of EU citizens do not want to carry out.

In Greece, the far-right Golden Dawn party pledged to “protect the country from an unprecedented invasion and halt the immigration problem, which is perhaps even a greater problem than the financial crisis”.^15

Ruža Tomašić, a right-wing politician in Croatia, now a member of the European Parliament, stated that “Croatia is for Croats while everyone else is just a guest”.^16

Immigrants are also commonly described as ‘welfare shopping’ in many EU Member States. Andreas Scheuer, Germany’s General Secretary of the Christian Social Union party, for instance, accused the European Commission of giving “free admission to the German social safety net”, predicting a serious influx of immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania.^17 In the UK as well, there were frequent references to “tidal floods of new immigrants” (MEP Bloom,

13 Ibid. 14 The 2012 annual report of the FRA confirms that racist and xenophobic attitudes in EU Member States increasingly reflect the perception that Roma, Jewish people, Muslims and/or migrants represent a threat to soci- ety. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Fundamental rights: challenges and achievements in 2012. 2013. Vienna: FRA. 15 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Greece. 16 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Cyprus. 17 ‘Welfare for Immigrants: EU Wants Fortress Germany to Open Up’. Spiegel Online, 14 January 2014.

The economic crisis, coupled with

the failure to invest in essential

social protection, health and

education programmes, has had dire

consequences on vulnerable groups,

especially children, young persons, the

elderly and communities vulnerable

to structural disadvantages and

discrimination, including migrants and

ethnic and religious minorities.^12

12345678905405 ^11

The lack of equality data on the ground of ethnic origin is rooted in Europe’s history of human rights violations against minorities. Respect for privacy is very important in Europe, as is enshrined in both European data protection legislation and in cultural norms. However, the European Data Protection Directive, currently under reform,^25 does not include a blanket prohibition of the collection of data revealing ethnic origin. The processing of personal data revealing ethnic origin is, in principle, forbidden, but there are several exceptions to this general rule in EU law, including: the data subject has given explicit consent to the processing of this data, the data is necessary for the defence of legal claims, and the data is processed by States for reasons of substantial public interest.^26 The processing of such data should also be conducted according to adequate standards.

A large number of EU Member States have adopted a strict interpretation of the EU legislation, as reported by the Shadow Reports of France, Hungary, Spain, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Croatia, Turkey, Italy, Belgium, Poland, Greece, Ireland, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Austria, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Finland, Lithuania, Germany and Portugal. This results in a huge data gap on the situation of ethnic and religious minorities in employment.

25 See: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/data-protection/news/120125_en.htm. 26 See Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regards to the processing and on the free movement of such data, Article 8.

The two EU Equality Directives^27 do not provide for a direct legal duty for employers to monitor the diversity of their workforce. The Employment Equality Directive, however, mentions that Member States should take “adequate measures to promote social dialogue (…) with a view to fostering equal treatment, including through the monitoring of workplace practices”.

ENAR believes that equality data is critical to identify and measure patterns of exclusion and discrimination in employment, and monitor progress (or lack thereof) achieved by different groups at various stages of their career progression.^28

Despite data challenges, the present report aims to join existing (and limited) statistical data with qualitative information from the national Shadow Reports in order to present a clear picture of discrimination in employment, and to offer solutions towards achieving a diverse workplace and establishing structures in society that allow equal opportunities in employment for all.

27 The EU Racial Equality Directive and the Employment Equality Direc- tive. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=CELEX:32000L0043:en:HTML and http://eur-lex.europa.eu/Lex- UriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32000L0078:en:HTML. 28 For more information about ENAR’s project on equality data beyond employ- ment, see: http://www.enar-eu.org/Page.asp?docid=32201&langue=EN.

The lack of official comparable

data makes it very difficult to assess

the extent of discrimination in

employment in Europe.

Labour market data, disaggregated by ethnic origin or nationality, can provide a snapshot of inequalities in the different EU countries, but not necessarily of direct discrimination. As touched on in the introduction, data collection mechanisms that enable a comparative and reliable depiction of discrimination in different areas does not exist systematically, making it difficult to ascertain exactly who is impacted by discrimination in the labour market on grounds of ethnic origin. Nonetheless, the national Shadow Reports, combined with other sources of information, such as Eurostat data, enable a solid description of the current labour market situation in Europe as its impacts migrants and minorities.

Employment levels It is often presumed that migrants experience barriers in accessing the labour market, and consequently, are likely to be employed at a lower rate than nationals. This is true in several EU Member States, as shown in the table below. However, in Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia, the percentage of non-EU born in gainful employment surpasses the percentage of native-born employed, indicating how important non-EU migrants are to these countries’ and the EU’s economies. In countries where data is collected on persons of foreign origin (which can include both nationals and non-nationals), there is an employment gap between ‘native’ nationals and

2. The context: labour market outlook

Percentage of employed by country of birth (EU-27, non-EU and native-born) for the EU Member States for 2012

Source: Eurostat, Labour Force Survey, Employment rates by sex, age and country of birth (%) for the EU Member States, 2013.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 EU-27 Non EU-27 Native-born

Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain United Kingdom

Shadow Reports mention particularly high rates of unemployment affecting people of African descent and Black Europeans^31 as well as Muslim, Turkish and North African migrants.^32 In the UK, where ethnic data is collected, almost all ethnic minority groups have a higher proportion of their male population unemployed than their White British counterparts. This is particularly acute for men of Black backgrounds (African, Caribbean, Black Other and Mixed) who are 2.5 to 3 times more likely to be unemployed than White British men.^33

The global economic crisis has further exacerbated the employment gap between minorities and migrants on the one hand, and the majority population on the other, as highlighted in the Shadow Reports of Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Turkey, Slovakia and Spain.

The rising unemployment figures among migrant and ethnic minority communities are linked to increased labour market pressure and job competition. Migrants and minorities are in a less favourable situation than the majority population: typically, they are the first to lose their jobs as a result of staffing cuts and redundancies and are less likely to be hired, with longer waiting periods before re-entering the workforce. The Shadow Reports of Hungary, Bulgaria, Greece, Spain, Italy, France and the Netherlands all remarked on this trend.

A number of national Shadow Reports also attribute the disproportionate increase of unemployment among migrants and minorities during the crisis to the fact that ethnic minority and migrant workers mainly work or worked in the public sector, areas

31 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Reports: Spain (African migrants, not specified), Ireland (Black African migrants, not specified), the UK (African, Caribbean, Black, Other and Mixed), Finland (Somali migrants), the Netherlands (Antil- lean migrants), France (Sub-Saharan Africans). 32 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Reports: Spain (Muslim migrants, not specified), the Netherlands (Turkish and Moroccan migrants), Austria (Turkish mi- grants), Bulgaria (Turkish migrants), France (Turkish migrants, Moroccan migrants, Tunisian migrants, Algerian migrants). 33 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: United Kingdom.

that have been most affected by the crisis, i.e. as regards redundancies and budget cuts.

Social exclusion from the formal labour market has become a prevalent issue in a number of EU countries, identified as one of the main explanations for the increased activity of migrants and minorities in the informal economy.

The Roma community was hit especially hard by the economic crisis, especially when compared with the majority population. In Bulgaria, the risk of unemployment among Roma is twice as high as other ethnic groups.^34 A study by the EU Fundamental Rights Agency showed that among eleven Member States, one out of three Roma respondents reported that they were unemployed.^35 In addition, the unemployment rates for Roma women are on average one third higher than those of Roma men.^36

African migrants in Spain are twice as likely to be unemployed as people from the majority population.^37

In the Netherlands, Moroccans have the highest unemployment rates.^38

Youth unemployment levels Youth unemployment rates are generally much higher than unemployment rates for all ages. From the beginning of 2009, the gap between youth and total unemployment rates increased, and in 2012 the youth unemployment rate was 2.6 times the total rate.^39 The high unemployment rate among migrant and minority youth in Europe is even more staggering.

34 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Bulgaria. 35 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and United Na- tions Development Programme, The situation of Roma in 11 Member States. 2012. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. These countries were: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, France, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia. Available at: http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/2099-FRA-2012-Ro- ma-at-a-glance_EN.pdf. 36 UNDP/World Bank/EC regional Roma survey 2011. 37 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Spain. 38 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: The Netherlands. 39 Eurostat, Labour Force Survey, Unemployment rates by sex, age and coun- try of birth (%) for the EU Member States. 2013.

Migrants face higher rates of unemployment compared to the majority population.

12345678905405 ^15

Given that the current EU labour market indicators only reveal rough differences between target groups and the national average, monitoring discrimination in the labour market cannot be carried out by only looking at labour market indicators, especially since vital comparable data remains amiss. By looking at concrete examples and manifestations of racism and discrimination, this section sheds light on perceptions of discrimination in employment, the groups most vulnerable to such discrimination, discrimination in access to employment and discrimination in the workplace. It is important to note that the discriminatory patterns highlighted here are not just temporary but often persist over time, resulting in lasting disadvantages for individuals.

3.1 Perceptions of discrimination in employment^40

Labour market discrimination is considered as a major and widespread phenomenon, resulting in the disadvantage of certain groups throughout Europe. This is confirmed in the Shadow Reports of Belgium, Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Luxembourg, Malta, Spain and the UK. Surveys, such as the one undertaken by the survey institute CSA^41 in France, also confirm this assessment. In CSA’s survey, 60% of those interviewed were also in support of a strong fight

40 European Commission, 2012. 41 CSA Survey Institute, Xénophobie, Antisémitisme, Racisme, Anti-racisme et Discriminations en France. 2012. Available at: http://www.csa.eu/fr/ index.aspxhttp://www.csa.eu/fr/index.aspx.

against discrimination. In other Member States, as reported by the Shadow Reports of Ireland, Lithuania and Turkey, people generally do not perceive discrimination in the labour market on grounds of ethnicity or nationality as a major issue. In Lithuania, for instance, labour market discrimination is neither on the political agenda nor in public discourse.

In addition, when asked if they have personally experienced discrimination during the past years, 27% of Europeans who belong to an ethnic minority group reported feeling discriminated against on grounds of ethnic origin.^42 Figures from the 2012 Eurobarometer on Discrimination in the EU and from surveys conducted by FRA and the United National Development Programme (UNDP) (in association with the World Bank) show that Roma are particularly likely to face discrimination in employment.

In Hungary, a study demonstrated that people believe Roma to be more likely than other groups to experience discrimination with regard to hiring, firing, allocation of responsibilities at work and in dealings with policy, as well as in education.^43

3.2 Groups vulnerable to discrimination in employment

42 European Commission, 2012. 43 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Hungary.

3. Manifestations of racism and

discrimination in employment

〉 Ethnic origin remains the most widely perceived ground for discrimination in the EU (56%).^38

〉 Europeans are more likely to believe discrimination is widespread in employment than in other areas of life.

〉 39% of Europeans believe skin colour or ethnic origin would be a factor that could put job applicants at a disadvantage.

Five groups are identified as being most vulnerable to discrimination in employment: 〉 migrants from non-EU Member States including undocumented migrants, refugees and asylum seekers 〉 Muslims (and especially Muslim women) 〉 Roma and Travellers 〉 people of African descent and Black Europeans 〉 all women with a minority or migrant background

12345678905405 ^17

market discrimination on the ground of ethnicity. Although the size and composition of the Roma and Traveller population differ across EU Member States, they are recognised as highly discriminated against in the Shadow Reports of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey and the UK.

Moreover, Roma women are also said to suffer multiple disadvantages. They have a disproportionate share of work in the family and have limited access to day-care institutions for their children.

Muslims Among those experiencing discrimination on the ground of religion or belief, Muslim people (and especially Muslim women) tend to experience the most severe labour market discrimination, as evidenced by the Shadow Reports of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Turkey and the UK.

Muslim women are especially disadvantaged as a result of experiences with multiple forms of discrimination. A Muslim woman with a migrant background and who wears a headscarf is described in the German Shadow Report as a woman embodying three major obstacles, inhibiting labour market access.

Moreover, existing stereotypes reinforce negative images of Muslims as a threat to society. Muslim men are perceived as ‘backwards’ and Muslim women wearing headscarves are considered ‘oppressed’. Such imagery has been strengthened in a number of EU Member States by parties like the Golden Dawn in Greece or the True Finns in Finland, among others.

People of African descent / Black Europeans According to the Shadow Reports of the UK, Ireland and Bulgaria, Black people experience more discrimination based on their skin colour. For instance in Ireland, the results of the Special 2010 Equality Module of the Quarterly National Household Survey showed that discrimination is most experienced by Black Africans and Ethnic Minority EU individuals.

The Shadow Reports of some other countries such as Austria or Croatia mention a ‘shift’ from discrimination against Black people to discrimination against Muslims and Muslim women wearing headscarves.

Black Africans in Ireland are seven times more likely to report discrimination in the workplace and have lower chances of employment.^44

Forms of discriminatory practices A first distinction can be made between direct discrimination and indirect discrimination.^45 Indirect discrimination may be exemplified by some policies that indirectly restrict access of ethnic/religious minorities and migrants in public sector employment, resulting generally in low representation of these groups in this sector. In Poland, for example, state professional exams, e.g. the state examination for lawyers or medical doctors, are held on Saturdays, which can be interpreted as a case of indirect religious discrimination since Saturday is a religious holiday for several denominations.^46

Direct discrimination on the basis of origin occurs, for example, in the taxi industry in Ireland. A report written by the Irish Centre for Human Rights revealed severe discrimination against African taxi drivers in the Galway taxi industry. Almost all African taxi drivers are self- employed due to discrimination in employment, while 83% of Irish taxi drivers are employed by a taxi company.^47

The national Shadow Reports also mention the occurrence of administrative discrimination. Administrative discrimination refers to the application of additional barriers when accessing the labour market, for instance, lengthy and opaque procedures in obtaining work permits and residence permits; reluctant employers cautious of hiring migrants because of associated fears of administrative costs and burden; the failure to recognise foreign qualifications; or ineffective and lengthy procedures linked to regularisation programmes. This is also known as structural discrimination.

3.3 Discrimination in accessing employment

Discriminatory practices often place migrants and minorities at a disadvantage already when they

44 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Ireland. 45 Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 on establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation. 46 Saturday is the Jewish day of rest (Shabbat). In addition, in 2013, the three- day celebration of the end of Ramadan included a Saturday, in addition to Alban Elfed (Pagan, Wiccan, Druid), Navrati which is one of the greatest Hindu festivals, Midwinter (Pagan, Wiccan, Druid), Candlemas (Pagan, Wic- can, Druid), Buddha Day (Buddhist), and Midsomer (Pagan, Wiccan, Druid). 47 Jaichand V., Riding Along with Racism, Research on the Galway Taxi Indus- try: Employment Opportunities, Patterns of Public Use and User Percep- tions. 2010. Galway: Irish Centre for Human Rights.

attempt to access the labour market, i.e. when they try to apply for a job. Accessing employment is identified as a major problem for certain groups of migrants and minorities in almost all the national Shadow Reports. This reality is confirmed by other European studies, such as reports by the Network of socio-economic experts in the non-discrimination field.^48

According to a study carried out in Hungary, 64% of the respondents admitted having experienced discrimination when looking for a job.^49

An OECD study demonstrated that migrants in Germany are less likely to find employment than Germans with the same level of education but without a migrant status or background.^50

Discriminatory practices at the stage of recruitment

There is a growing consensus among researchers that discrimination at the stage of recruitment can best be measured by conducting field experiments.^51 Initially, these experiments were done by relying on real people who resemble each other as closely as possible in all respects, except for the variable of interest (for instance ethnic origin), to apply for the same jobs. When differences in treatment occur between the two candidates, influencing the probability of being hired, it is concluded that there is discrimination. More recently, the experimental technique has been applied by sending written resumes to vacancies, instead of

48 Network of socio-economic experts in the non-discrimination field, Synthesis report 2010 part II - Ethnic minorities, migrants and employ- ment. 2010. 49 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report Hungary. 50 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Germany. 51 Bovenkerk F. (1992), Testing Discrimination in Natural Experiments: a Manual for International Comparative Research on Discrimination on the Grounds of `Race’ and Ethnic Origin. 1992. Geneva: International Labour Organisation; Fix M. & Struyk R.J. (eds.), Clear and Convincing Evidence. Measurement of Discrimination in America. 1993. Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute Press; Riach P.A. & Rich J., ‘Field Experiments of Discrimi- nation in the Market Place?’. The Economic Journal Vol. 112 No. 483; Ri- ach P.A. & Rich J. (2004), ‘Fishing for Discrimination’. Review of Social Economy Vol.42(4). 2004.

using real persons, so-called correspondence tests.^52 In Belgium, correspondence tests indicate that a candidate of foreign origin is more likely (6.6 percentage points) to suffer from a discriminatory disadvantage and less likely (4.5 percentage points) to benefit from a discriminatory advantage when invited to a job interview.^53

Such research projects reveal that name-based discrimination at the point of application is prominent in a number of countries.

In the UK, a test commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions found that people with minority ethnic or foreign sounding names are a third less likely to be shortlisted for jobs than people with ‘white’ sounding names.^54

In the Czech Republic, a CV testing carried out by the academic institute CERGE-EI revealed that an applicant with a majority-sounding name is 75% more likely to be invited to a job interview, compared to an applicant with a Roma-sounding name.^55

Some of the national Shadow Reports also mention discrimination on the basis of one’s address.

In France, applicants who live in socially disadvantaged areas, e.g. poorer suburbs of Paris or Lyon among other major cities, face discrimination when applying for a job.^56

The requirement of adding a photo to the letter of application is also experienced as a form of discrimination at the stage of the job application, as reported by the Shadow Reports of Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Spain, Germany and Portugal, but is difficult to prove. This is a major obstacle in finding a job, in particular for Muslim women wearing a headscarf.

This form of discrimination on the basis of wearing religious symbols or clothing like a headscarf or a

52 Lahey J.N. & Beasley R.A., ‘Computerizing Audit Studies’. Journal of Eco- nomic Behavior & Organization 70. 2009; Oreopoulos P., ‘Why Do Skilled Immigrants Struggle in the Labor Market? A Field Experiment with Six Thousand Résumés’. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Vol.4(3). 2011; Capéau B., Eeman L., Groenez S., Lamberts M., Wie heeft voorrang: jonge Turken, prille grijsaards of aanstaande moeders? Een exper- imenteel onderzoek naar discriminatie op basis van persoonskenmerken bij de eerste selectie van sollicitanten. 2012. Leuven: HIVA. 53 CGKR, Diversiteitsbarometer Werk. 2012. Brussels; Capéau, B., Eeman, L., Groenez, S., Lamberts, M., Wie heeft voorrang: jonge Turken, prille grijsaa- rds of aanstaande moeders? Een experimenteel onderzoek naar discrimina- tie op basis van persoonskenmerken bij de eerste selectie van sollicitanten.

2012. Leuven: HIVA. 54 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: United Kingdom. 55 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: Czech Republic. 56 ENAR 2012/13 Shadow Report: France.

At the point of application, discrimination manifests itself when there are no public job postings, the selection is on the basis of names and addresses, or there is a requirement to add a picture to the letter of application.