1

Unequal opportunities for migrants?Ungleiche Chancen für MigrantInnen?

The problem of ethnic discrimination in the EU

Das Problem der Diskriminierung aufgrund ethnischer Zugehörigkeit in der EU

John WrenchCentre for Diversity and Inclusion

Zentrum für Diversität und Inklusion Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Graz, November 2012

EU AgenciesEU- Agenturen

Specialised bodies set up to assist member states to cope with new tasks of a legal, technical or scientific nature•European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (EUROFOUND)Europäische Stiftung zur Verbesserung der Lebens- und Arbeitsbedingungen

•EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)Agentur der Europäischen Union für Grundrechte (FRA)

2

3

Recommendations: Eurofound 1996Empfehlungen seitens Eurofound 1996

• EU directive prohibiting racial discrimination in employment

• Anti-discrimination legislation in all EU member states

• More awareness raising, information provision and research

4

5

Racial Equality Directive (2000/43 /EC)

Richtlinie zur Anwendung des Gleichbehandlungsgrundsatzes ohne Unterschied der Rasse oder ethnischen Herkunft

prohibits:• direct discrimination • indirect discrimination • harassment • instruction to discriminateon grounds of racial or ethnic origin,

in employment and training, (as well as education, social security, healthcare, housing, access to goods and services)

6

Founded in Vienna in 1998 as the European Monitoring

Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC).Europäische Stelle zur Beobachtung von Rassismus und Fremdenfeindlichkeit

On 1st March 2007 the EUMC’s mandate was

extended, and it became the European Union Agency for

Fundamental Rights (FRA)Agentur der Europäischen Union für Grundrechte (FRA)

7

One of its prime objectives has beenzu deren Hauptzielen zählt…

to provide the Community and its Member States with objective, reliable and comparable data at European level on the phenomena of racism and xenophobia in order to help them take measures or formulate

courses of action within their respective spheres of competence

FRA Annual Report 2011Jahresbericht der FRA 2011

8

Migrants, Minorities and Employment: Exclusion and Discrimination in 27 Member States of the European Union 2010

MigrantInnen, Minoritäten und Beschäftigung: Ausgrenzung und Diskriminierung in den 27 Mitgliedsstaaten der EU 2010

9

10

Sources of evidence for racial discrimination in employment Informationsquellen in Bezug auf rassistisch/ethnisch motivierte

Diskriminierung in der Beschäftigung

1. Statistics and official surveys2. Evidence from complaints, court cases1. Evidence from research

11

1997: Cases of racial/ethnic discrimination in employment put forward for legal consideration

1997: Fälle rassistisch/ethnisch motivierter Diskriminierung in der Beschäftigung, welche juristisch geprüft wurden  

 

 Sweden France UK

12

1997: Cases of racial/ethnic discrimination in employment put forward for legal consideration

1997: Fälle rassistisch/ethnisch motivierter Diskriminierung in der Beschäftigung, welche juristisch geprüft wurden  

 

 Sweden 0 France 4 UK 3 173

13

Evidence from researchForschungsergebnisse als Informationsquellen

• Surveys of the majority population and ’gatekeepers’

• Surveys of the minority population (’victim surveys’)

• Discrimination testing

National surveys – employersNationale Erhebungen unter ArbeitgeberInnen

• 2000 Denmarkof 1200 private sector employers, 25% would not hire an immigrant or refugee under any circumstances

• 2007 Belgium 80 % of employers (small/self-employed) would never hire an immigrant

• 2007 Slovenia of 112 major employers, 32% prioritised recruitment of ‘ethnic Slovenians’; 74% rejected positive action for ethnic minorities

• 2009 Lithuaniaof 404 companies, 60% prioritised ‘local citizens’; resistant to recruiting refugees

14

Surveys of migrants & minoritiesErhebungen unter MigrantInnen & Angehörigen von Minoritäten

In 2006 report: •Russian speakers in Estonia, Turks in Germany, Russians, Estonians & Vietnamese in Finland, immigrants in Denmark, immigrants and their descendants in France, all reported subjective experiences of discrimination•0f 1000 Turks in Germany, 56% experienced discriminatory treatment at the workplace

15

ILO Situation TestingInternationale Arbeitsorganisation-ILO Situations Tests

zur Erhebung von Diskriminierung

• Net discrimination rates of around 35 % (i.e. in one in three attempts migrants/minorities faced ethnic discrimination)

• Minority candidates need to make 3 -5 times more attempts to achieve a positive response

• In one local situation they needed to make 17 times more attempts

16

17

18

EU-MIDIS: Largest EU-wide survey on minoritiesEU-MIDIS: Größte EU- weite Erhebung zu Minderheiten und Diskriminierung

– Roma – Sub-Saharans/Caribbeans – Central and Eastern

Europeans

– Turkish – Former Yugoslavians – North Africans – Russian

• 23,500 migrant/ethnic minority respondents

• Different groups surveyed across Member States:

• 5,000 majority population respondents

19

EU – MIDIS: Background InfoEU- Midis: Hintergrundinformationen

Respondents age 16+, in country at least 1 year Random sample of 500 – 1,500 respondents per

country (min 500 per group) Standardised questionnaire Face-to-face interviews in people’s homes lasting

between 20 to 60 minutes Fieldwork period May – mid July 2008, some in

Oct-Nov 2008

20

Discrimination ExperiencesDiskriminierungserfahrungen

EU-MIDIS asked respondents about discrimination they had experienced, in the past 12 months or in the past 5 years, in nine areas:

1.when looking for work2.at work3.when looking for a house or an apartment to rent or buy4.by healthcare personnel5.by social service personnel6.by school personnel7.at a café, restaurant or bar8.when entering or in a shop9.when trying to open a bank account or get a loan

21

Percentage discriminated at work or looking for work: Iast 12 months (%)

EU-MIDIS 2008, questions CA2 & CB2

22

Percentage of respondents who did not report work-related discriminationProzentsatz der Befragten, welche Diskriminierungvorfälle nicht meldetenMost recent incident in the past 12 months, out of all those who experienced work-related discrimination

EU-MIDIS 2008, questions CA4 & CB4

23

Reasons for not reporting the most recent incident of discriminationGründe für das Unterlassen der Meldung eines Diskriminierungsvorfalles In the past 12 months, all respondents (%)

24

Yes

37%No

60%

Don't

know/Refused3%

Percentage of respondents in the EU27 who have heard of at least one of up to three equality bodies in their country

Prozentsätze der Befragten in den EU 27, welche mindestens eine /bis zu drei Anti- Diskriminierungseinrichtungen in ihrem Land nennen konnten

25

Racial Equality Directive(2000/43/EC)

Die Richtlinie zur Gleichbehandlung ohne Unterschied der Rasse

• Prohibits racial / ethnic discrimination in:– Employment– Education– Social security–Health care– Access to goods and services–Housing

26

Racial Equality Directive (2000/43 /EC)

Die Richtlinie zur Gleichbehandlung ohne Unterschied der Rasse

Bans:• direct discrimination • indirect discrimination • harassment • instruction to discriminate

on grounds of racial or ethnic origin

27

28

Research on Social Partners’ views on the Racial Equality Directive

Untersuchung der Einstellung der Sozialpartnerzur EU-Richtlinie zur Rassengleichbehandlung

• Focus of the study:

– Awareness of the Directive and relevant national legislation among the social partners

– Opinions of the social partners on the value of the Directive and on the role of equality bodies

– Opinions on the impact of the Directive

28

29

Study methodologyMethodik der Studie

• Qualitative study: 344 interviews in EU-27

– trade unions, employers organisations (+ some NGOs and Equality Bodies)

– 2 questionnaires; interview time 30 min – 2hours– fieldwork: March – June 2009

Positive employersPositive Rückmeldungen der ArbeitgeberInnen

• Austrian private sector• “The Racial Equality Directive was a positive step and an important weapon for HR

managers wishing to generalise non-discriminatory practices and harassment. Behaviour regarded as a ‘peccadillo’ before is now an offence to be prosecuted.”

• Austrian Federal Economic Chamber • “Since the implementation of the law in 2004 staff recruitment processes of

companies have decisively improved and are more and more oriented on principles of equal treatment, as a result of more training …..”

• Swedish Construction Confederation • “The EU directive has helped to raise the public debate on discrimination and this

has in turn increased the awareness and knowledge on this problem.”

30

Positive trade unionsPositive Rückmeldungen der Gewerkschaften

• Trade union, France• “Without the European legislation the strength of denial has always been so

strong that we would still be having to battle in order to start the fight against discrimination.”

• Trade union, Belgium• “Collective bargaining on discrimination has become noticeably easier with the

employers after the Racial Equality Directive had been transposed nationally.”

• Trade union, Sweden• “The EU Racial Equality Directive and the subsequent Swedish law have made the

problem of racism and discrimination more visible”

31

Negative employersNegativ gestimmte ArbeitgeberInnen

• Danish Local Government• “They (the anti-discrimination laws) are based on a naïve idea that the situation

can be changed if you come up with a new law… I consider it a misconception to think that one can pass laws on these issues… Legislation will not solve these issues.”

• German private sector• “They want to regulate something than cannot be regulated. They are restricting

people's freedom… I do not think that such a law is necessary because discrimination is something intrinsic which cannot be hindered by laws.”

• German private sector• “It is a law for idiots. I would never say ‘I do not want you because you are

Turkish’. Nobody would do that… ……I do not think you can regulate this through laws. I am totally opposed to this law - to these kinds of laws.”

32

’No problem here’ – employers”Wir haben kein Problem” – ArbeitgeberInnen

• Romanian employers’ organisation: • “All in all, I do not consider that there are racial problems in Romania.”

• Bulgarian employers' organisation: • “Working people from the minorities… do not feel oppressed or

discriminated against.”

• Latvian employers organisation: • “Maybe there have been problems in Germany historically - we know that

with the Jews. But in Latvia we have never had anything like that. Ethnic discrimination is not a problem, it has never been here. Never!”

33

’No problem here’ – trade unions”Wir haben kein Problem”- Gewerkschaften

• Trade union, Czech Republic : • “The racial discrimination issue is marginal.”

• Trade Union Confederation, Estonia: • “I think that racial discrimination in the workplace is missing in Estonia.”

• Trade union, Latvia: • 'The EU non-discrimination law is seen as something forced on the

country from the outside, and non-essential”.

34

RomaMinorität der Roma

• Employer, Lithuania• ”The problem in Lithuania is about the Roma species, as we call them

here. They simply don’t want to work, they don’t want to learn, .....”

• Employer, Bulgaria• ”There are some practices in Bulgaria that are not discrimination, but as a

result there are Roma people in an unfavourable position”.

• Trade Union Confederation, Lithuania: • “We don't see a lot of discrimination here in Lithuania at all‘ …….”As

regards Gypsies, our employers do not like to have workers who are Gypsies.”

35

Levels of awareness and responseAusprägung des Problembewusstseins und Reaktionen

• Are they (employers or unions) aware of the Racial Equality Directive?

• Are they aware of national anti-discrimination legislation? • Are they aware of their national Equality Body (if one exists)? • Have they adapted their policies to include combating racial/

ethnic discrimination? • Have they adapted their practices to include anti-

discrimination measures? • Are they strongly committed to combating racial/ethnic

discrimination?

36

Awareness and response scoreProblembewusstheit und Bewertung der Reaktionen

Country Score

Sweden 6.0

Ireland 5.7

Finland 5.5

UK 5.2

Germany 5.1

Denmark 5.0

Belgium 5.0

Netherlands 4.7

Austria 4.6

PortugalSpainFranceItaly

4.54.54.54.2

Greece 4.0

Luxembourg 3.8 37

Awareness and response score (cont.)Problembewusstheit und Bewertung der Reaktionen (forts.)

Country Score

Cyprus 3.7

Slovenia 3.6

Slovakia 3.5

Malta 3.4

Romania 3.3

Poland 3.3

Lithuania 3.3

Hungary 3.3

Czech Republic 3.2

Bulgaria 3.2

Latvia 3.0

Estonia 2.8

38

39

Key resultsWesentliche Ergebnisse

• Trade unions more aware and sympathetic than employers

• Mixed awareness: EU15/EU12 divide • Roma unequal treatment not conceptualised as

discrimination; the minority “not deserving” protection under the Directive

• More awareness-raising and training needed among employers and TU officials

40

1997: Cases of racial/ethnic discrimination in employment put forward for legal consideration

1997: Fälle rassistisch/ethnisch motivierter Diskriminierung in der Beschäftigung, welche juristisch geprüft wurden  

 

 Sweden 0 France 4 UK 3 173

2009: Complaints of racial/ethnic discrimination made to equality bodies

2009: Zahl der bei Gleichbehandlungsstellen eingegangenen Beschwerdefälle zu rassistischer/ethnischer Diskriminierung

• Sweden 2 409

• France 3 009

• UK 4 983

41

42

www.fra.europa.eu