Older generations are part of our future
– the EU's response
to demographic change
World Ageing & Generations Congress
St. Gallen, October 1st 2005
Speech by
Mr Vladimir Špidla
Member of the European Commission
Commissioner for Employment,
Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities
2
Ladies and gentlemen,
Demographic change is one of the three major forces
reshaping Europe, alongside a growing globalisation of
the economy and technological advance. According to
demographic predictions, by 2030 the EU's working age
population will have fallen by almost 21 million. In the next
twenty years the number of young Europeans will drop by
20%. And by 2050, the number of people over 65 will
make up 20% of our population. Elderly people are
becoming an increasingly important group in society, and
not just in statistical terms - as voters, as consumers, as
opinion-makers.
Although I will deal in my speech with a number of
economic aspects of this development, I would like to
signal first and foremost that for the European
Commission and for me personally this is far more than
just an economic issue. It is above all a human issue, and
I will be the first to resist reducing it just to its economic
dimension. Increased life expectancies - which are a
welcome sign of progress - also represent a challenge
which is far more than just an economic one. That is, how
do we add LIFE to YEARS, and not just YEARS to LIFE?
In other words, how do we ensure that today´s and
3
tomorrow´s elderly people have the quality of life which
they deserve?
Ageing is not only a demographic process but also a
socio-economic trend with serious social and economic
implications for policy makers and institutions at all levels.
The public sphere has an important role to play here. We
may wish that all future elderly maintain as much
independence as long as possible; and indeed the
fostering of autonomy and independence is to be seen as
a major policy goal in itself. However, it is clear that
among the growing numbers of Europe´s elderly there are
- and will be - many who will require ample support from
public policies.
Although some of us may wish for a return to purely
individual or family responsibility, it is not a realistic option.
The very fact that today´s families are smaller means that
there are usually fewer relatives to rely upon. Furthermore,
in a world of equal opportunities there is no way to return
to traditional society in which support and care for the
dependent elderly used to be provided chiefly by female
relatives who were themselves out of the job market.
Therefore, if the dignity and well-being of our elder citizens
is to assured in our society, then public policy must
4
provide ample support for the individuals and families
concerned.
Therefore, European social services and health services
of have to be prepared to provide care in a way which is
worthy of the 21st century. Paternalistic approaches to
elderly people cannot be acceptable any more. Neither is
it acceptable to focus only on the material aspects of care.
The expectations of people who are growing old now are
going to be different from preceding generations, and
rightly so. They will insist on individualized services, not
treatment en masse; they will be far more acquainted with
a "human rights culture".
Therefore, I consider it one of the principal roles of the
European Commission to stimulate the exchange of good
practices through the Open Method of Co-ordination,
which from 2006 onwards will also include long-term care.
Although substantial progress has been made over the
last few decades, far too many elder Europeans still live in
large institutions, - and while some of these institutions
have thoroughly modernized their approach to clients, in
many others the quality of care remains inadequate.
5
As our sensitivity to the needs for autonomy, dignity and
privacy grows, European societies are becoming
increasingly aware of the problem of such inadequacies of
care, which sometimes may be classified as various forms
of elder abuse. This problem is not specific to institutional
settings, as it can appear also in community care and in
the form of domestic violence, but the culture of many
closed institutions appears to be conducive to it. The
European Commission is therefore dedicated to the
support of community-based alternatives to institutional
care, as well as to exchange of good practices among the
institutions in various Member States.
The issue of increased needs for long-term care for
dependent elderly people is, of course, only one of the
preoccupations which we are facing. Although every one
of us is likely to need care at some point, it is to be
expected and hoped that a majority of elderly people will
be basically independent and in good health for most of
the time. Indeed, there are indications that most elderly
will lead an increasingly active life.
However, both the issue of care for frail and vulnerable
elderly and the facilitation of an active lifestyle of the
independent ones have an important socioeconomic
6
dimension. I emphasize the word socioeconomic, because
it is not just the question of resources needed for pensions
on one hand and quality care on the other; it affects also
urbanism, policy decisions on regional level, conditions for
participation of civil society in decision-making and so
forth. Yet it is undeniable that there is also an economic
aspect which needs to be addressed - though here again I
underline that the financial aspect must be perceived as
an instrument, not as a goal in itself.
It is in this context that we must ask ourselves whether
Europe will be able to maintain strong growth, generate
tax revenues and sustain social protection systems. We
must address the issue whether Europe’s labour markets
and social protection systems are adapting to
demographic change well enough to guarantee the quality
of life of today´s and tomorrow´s elderly. I believe that
there still is a gap between demographic trends and public
policies, and that this gap needs to be closed.
To defend the humanistic values of the European social
model and to deliver the improved quality of life that
longetivity should bring, we must modernise the practices
that define solidarity between generations.
7
Increases in life expectancy mean that we cannot
encourage people to have shorter working lives just at a
time when they are fitter and able to work longer. To
maintain high quality of life means we have to increase
available resources. Older workers are not part of
Europe’s problem - they are part of the solution. Active
ageing policies and the prevention of health and safety
risks at work are key to ensuring adequate and financially
sustainable pension and healthcare systems.
Increasingly, Member States are developing policies on
ageing. There is evidence that comprehensive ageing
strategies can achieve results, and some countries have
covered huge ground.
For example, between 1997 and 2004 Finland managed
to raise the employment rate of older workers by 15
percentage points. The Netherlands has made similar
progress. So lessons can be learned from these countries.
It is clear that no country in Europe will escape
demographic decline. And when countries run into
common difficulties, the EU is a rich source of experience,
guidance and good practice.
8
So what are we doing at EU level to meet the challenge of
ageing?
Exploiting the full potential of every worker, including older
workers, is a priority for the EU’s renewed Lisbon strategy
for growth, employment and greater social cohesion. By
putting active ageing at the core of the lifecycle approach,
the revised European Employment Strategy, through its
integrated guidelines, is clear about what needs to be
done to attract older workers into the labour force.
Meeting the challenge of an ageing society requires action
across a wide range of policies. Some of the main areas
include reforming retirement schemes and pensions,
increasing access to lifelong learning, carrying out tax and
benefits reforms, improving quality in work and, above all,
changing attitudes and stereotypes.
The European Social Fund, the Employment strategy’s
financial lever, also plays a key role in translating active
ageing policies into a reality by improving the employability
and adaptability of older workers. Its focus on skills and
diversity of the work force means age becomes less of an
issue.
9
But reversing trends is also about creating solidarity
between generations. Our older workers today will be the
elderly generation tomorrow. What will they require? How
will we manage with less young people to replace older
generations?
-----
To ensure prosperity for all, Europe needs to adapt its
social and economic model to the realities of today. It is in
this spirit that we published a Green Paper earlier this
year. The aim was to stimulate debate and encourage a
more global approach to reform.
It must be emphasized that the European Commission
cannot directly influence family policy, which is a domain
of the individual Member States. However, there is an
aspect for which the Commission is responsible, and that
is the promotion of gender equality. And it is slowly
becoming evident that, as research suggests, that there is
a gap between the number of children Europeans desire
and the number that they actually have - because women
are still facing the difficult choice between having a child
and continuing a career.
10
Research also indicates that this effect is less pronounced
in those countries where equal opportunities at work are
matched by a chance to reconcile work and home life.
Public policy which focuses on equal opportunities for men
and women can therefore have a positive effect, as
demonstrated by some of the Nordic countries, which
have gone ahead of many others in allowing men and
women to share family responsibilities, encouraging
parental leave and flexible working hours.
Low birth rates also raise the difficult issue of immigration.
Immigration can contribute to raising Europe’s population.
In some countries the influx of migrants is already making
a difference. Closing Europe to future immigration would
be illogical and wrong. However, immigration also requires
far more effective integration policies than most European
states have been able to carry out until now. We cannot
create two-tier societies in which immigrants would be
socially excluded or serving merely as providers of labour,
without fully participating in all ranges of the economic,
social and cultural life of a given society.
Furthermore, creating favourable conditions for the quality
of life of tomorrow´s elderly will require today´s young
people to become more productive, if they are to sustain
11
our future social protection systems. Qualification is vitally
linked to high productivity: we need to invest in the
education of young people now. We need to fight youth
unemployment. We need to ensure young people are
getting the best education from the earliest possible stage
in life.
We know that older workers are central to achieving
stronger growth and greater social cohesion, so all of this
underlines how our approach to ageing must embrace
every stage of the lifecycle. In addition, facilitating the
transfer of knowledge from one generation to the next is
vital for achieving higher quality of life and promoting an
inclusive society.
---
As a follow up to the Green Paper debate, the
Commission will publish a White Paper at the end of this
year. This will set out concrete proposals to move forward.
We still have along way to go in terms of adapting all of
our policies to respond effectively to demographic change
in the EU - and with twenty-five countries there is no onesize-
fits all. But we can learn from each other. It doesn’t
make sense to respond to a challenge this size only at
12
national level. Through strong partnerships at European,
national, regional and local level, we can better manage
the enormous changes going on around us.
I believe that we are moving towards a consensus on how
we have to adapt our policies to today’s realities. This
conference provides us with yet another opportunity to
listen and to learn. It is also a chance for the EU to share
its experience. I look forward to the discussions and to an
interesting debate.
Δευτέρα
L 303/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
L 303/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2000/78/EC
of 27 November 2000
establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community, and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social
Committee (3),
Having regard to the Opinion of the Committee of the
Regions (4),
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Article 6 of the Treaty on European
Union, the European Union is founded on the principles
of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles
which are common to all Member States and it respects
fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the
constitutional traditions common to the Member States,
as general principles of Community law.
(2) The principle of equal treatment between women and
men is well established by an important body of
Community law, in particular in Council Directive 76/
207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of
the principle of equal treatment for men and women as
regards access to employment, vocational training and
promotion, and working conditions (5).
(3) In implementing the principle of equal treatment, the
Community should, in accordance with Article 3(2) of
the EC Treaty, aim to eliminate inequalities, and to
promote equality between men and women, especially
since women are often the victims of multiple
discrimination.
(4) The right of all persons to equality before the law and
protection against discrimination constitutes a universal
right recognised by the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,
United Nations Covenants on Civil and Political Rights
and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and by the
European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to which all Member
States are signatories. Convention No 111 of the International
Labour Organisation (ILO) prohibits discrimination
in the field of employment and occupation.
(5) It is important to respect such fundamental rights and
freedoms. This Directive does not prejudice freedom of
association, including the right to establish unions with
others and to join unions to defend one's interests.
(6) The Community Charter of the Fundamental Social
Rights of Workers recognises the importance of
combating every form of discrimination, including the
need to take appropriate action for the social and
economic integration of elderly and disabled people.
(7) The EC Treaty includes among its objectives the promotion
of coordination between employment policies of
the Member States. To this end, a new employment
chapter was incorporated in the EC Treaty as a means of
developing a coordinated European strategy for employment
to promote a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce.
(8) The Employment Guidelines for 2000 agreed by the
European Council at Helsinki on 10 and 11 December
1999 stress the need to foster a labour market favourable
to social integration by formulating a coherent set
of policies aimed at combating discrimination against
groups such as persons with disability. They also emphasise
the need to pay particular attention to supporting
older workers, in order to increase their participation in
the labour force.
(9) Employment and occupation are key elements in guaranteeing
equal opportunities for all and contribute
strongly to the full participation of citizens in economic,
cultural and social life and to realising their potential.
(10) On 29 June 2000 the Council adopted Directive 2000/
43/EC (6) implementing the principle of equal treatment
between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.
That Directive already provides protection against such
discrimination in the field of employment and
occupation.
(11) Discrimination based on religion or belief, disability, age
or sexual orientation may undermine the achievement
of the objectives of the EC Treaty, in particular the
attainment of a high level of employment and social
(1) OJ C 177 E, 27.6.2000, p. 42.
(2) Opinion delivered on 12 October 2000 (not yet published in the
Official Journal).
(3) OJ C 204, 18.7.2000, p. 82.
(4) OJ C 226, 8.8.2000, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 39, 14.2.1976, p. 40. (6) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.
2.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 303/17
protection, raising the standard of living and the quality
of life, economic and social cohesion and solidarity, and
the free movement of persons.
(12) To this end, any direct or indirect discrimination based
on religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation
as regards the areas covered by this Directive should be
prohibited throughout the Community. This prohibition
of discrimination should also apply to nationals of third
countries but does not cover differences of treatment
based on nationality and is without prejudice to provisions
governing the entry and residence of third-country
nationals and their access to employment and
occupation.
(13) This Directive does not apply to social security and
social protection schemes whose benefits are not treated
as income within the meaning given to that term for the
purpose of applying Article 141 of the EC Treaty, nor to
any kind of payment by the State aimed at providing
access to employment or maintaining employment.
(14) This Directive shall be without prejudice to national
provisions laying down retirement ages.
(15) The appreciation of the facts from which it may be
inferred that there has been direct or indirect discrimination
is a matter for national judicial or other
competent bodies, in accordance with rules of national
law or practice. Such rules may provide, in particular,
for indirect discrimination to be established by any
means including on the basis of statistical evidence.
(16) The provision of measures to accommodate the needs of
disabled people at the workplace plays an important role
in combating discrimination on grounds of disability.
(17) This Directive does not require the recruitment, promotion,
maintenance in employment or training of an individual
who is not competent, capable and available to
perform the essential functions of the post concerned or
to undergo the relevant training, without prejudice to
the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation for
people with disabilities.
(18) This Directive does not require, in particular, the armed
forces and the police, prison or emergency services to
recruit or maintain in employment persons who do not
have the required capacity to carry out the range of
functions that they may be called upon to perform with
regard to the legitimate objective of preserving the
operational capacity of those services.
(19) Moreover, in order that the Member States may continue
to safeguard the combat effectiveness of their armed
forces, they may choose not to apply the provisions of
this Directive concerning disability and age to all or part
of their armed forces. The Member States which make
that choice must define the scope of that derogation.
(20) Appropriate measures should be provided, i.e. effective
and practical measures to adapt the workplace to the
disability, for example adapting premises and equipment,
patterns of working time, the distribution of tasks
or the provision of training or integration resources.
(21) To determine whether the measures in question give rise
to a disproportionate burden, account should be taken
in particular of the financial and other costs entailed, the
scale and financial resources of the organisation or
undertaking and the possibility of obtaining public
funding or any other assistance.
(22) This Directive is without prejudice to national laws on
marital status and the benefits dependent thereon.
(23) In very limited circumstances, a difference of treatment
may be justified where a characteristic related to religion
or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation constitutes
a genuine and determining occupational requirement,
when the objective is legitimate and the requirement is
proportionate. Such circumstances should be included in
the information provided by the Member States to the
Commission.
(24) The European Union in its Declaration No 11 on the
status of churches and non-confessional organisations,
annexed to the Final Act of the Amsterdam Treaty, has
explicitly recognised that it respects and does not prejudice
the status under national law of churches and religious
associations or communities in the Member States
and that it equally respects the status of philosophical
and non-confessional organisations. With this in view,
Member States may maintain or lay down specific provisions
on genuine, legitimate and justified occupational
requirements which might be required for carrying out
an occupational activity.
(25) The prohibition of age discrimination is an essential part
of meeting the aims set out in the Employment Guidelines
and encouraging diversity in the workforce.
However, differences in treatment in connection with
age may be justified under certain circumstances and
therefore require specific provisions which may vary in
accordance with the situation in Member States. It is
therefore essential to distinguish between differences in
treatment which are justified, in particular by legitimate
employment policy, labour market and vocational
training objectives, and discrimination which must be
prohibited.
(26) The prohibition of discrimination should be without
prejudice to the maintenance or adoption of measures
intended to prevent or compensate for disadvantages
suffered by a group of persons of a particular religion or
belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, and such
measures may permit organisations of persons of a
particular religion or belief, disability, age or sexual
orientation where their main object is the promotion of
the special needs of those persons.
L 303/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
(27) In its Recommendation 86/379/EEC of 24 July 1986 on
the employment of disabled people in the
Community (1), the Council established a guideline
framework setting out examples of positive action to
promote the employment and training of disabled
people, and in its Resolution of 17 June 1999 on equal
employment opportunities for people with disabilities
(2), affirmed the importance of giving specific attention
inter alia to recruitment, retention, training and
lifelong learning with regard to disabled persons.
(28) This Directive lays down minimum requirements, thus
giving the Member States the option of introducing or
maintaining more favourable provisions. The implementation
of this Directive should not serve to justify
any regression in relation to the situation which already
prevails in each Member State.
(29) Persons who have been subject to discrimination based
on religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation
should have adequate means of legal protection. To
provide a more effective level of protection, associations
or legal entities should also be empowered to engage in
proceedings, as the Member States so determine, either
on behalf or in support of any victim, without prejudice
to national rules of procedure concerning representation
and defence before the courts.
(30) The effective implementation of the principle of equality
requires adequate judicial protection against victimisation.
(31) The rules on the burden of proof must be adapted when
there is a prima facie case of discrimination and, for the
principle of equal treatment to be applied effectively, the
burden of proof must shift back to the respondent when
evidence of such discrimination is brought. However, it
is not for the respondent to prove that the plaintiff
adheres to a particular religion or belief, has a particular
disability, is of a particular age or has a particular sexual
orientation.
(32) Member States need not apply the rules on the burden
of proof to proceedings in which it is for the court or
other competent body to investigate the facts of the
case. The procedures thus referred to are those in which
the plaintiff is not required to prove the facts, which it is
for the court or competent body to investigate.
(33) Member States should promote dialogue between the
social partners and, within the framework of national
practice, with non-governmental organisations to
address different forms of discrimination at the workplace
and to combat them.
(34) The need to promote peace and reconciliation between
the major communities in Northern Ireland necessitates
the incorporation of particular provisions into this
Directive.
(35) Member States should provide for effective, proportionate
and dissuasive sanctions in case of breaches of
the obligations under this Directive.
(36) Member States may entrust the social partners, at their
joint request, with the implementation of this Directive,
as regards the provisions concerning collective agreements,
provided they take any necessary steps to ensure
that they are at all times able to guarantee the results
required by this Directive.
(37) In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity set out
in Article 5 of the EC Treaty, the objective of this
Directive, namely the creation within the Community of
a level playing-field as regards equality in employment
and occupation, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the
Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale
and impact of the action, be better achieved at
Community level. In accordance with the principle of
proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive
does not go beyond what is necessary in order to
achieve that objective,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 1
Purpose
The purpose of this Directive is to lay down a general framework
for combating discrimination on the grounds of religion
or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation as regards
employment and occupation, with a view to putting into effect
in the Member States the principle of equal treatment.
Article 2
Concept of discrimination
1. For the purposes of this Directive, the ‘principle of equal
treatment’ shall mean that there shall be no direct or indirect
discrimination whatsoever on any of the grounds referred to in
Article 1.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1:
(a) direct discrimination shall be taken to occur where one
person is treated less favourably than another is, has been
or would be treated in a comparable situation, on any of
the grounds referred to in Article 1;
(b) indirect discrimination shall be taken to occur where an
apparently neutral provision, criterion or practice would
put persons having a particular religion or belief, a particular
disability, a particular age, or a particular sexual orientation
at a particular disadvantage compared with other
persons unless:
(i) that provision, criterion or practice is objectively justified
by a legitimate aim and the means of achieving
that aim are appropriate and necessary, or
(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1986, p. 43.
(2) OJ C 186, 2.7.1999, p. 3.
2.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 303/19
(ii) as regards persons with a particular disability, the
employer or any person or organisation to whom this
Directive applies, is obliged, under national legislation,
to take appropriate measures in line with the principles
contained in Article 5 in order to eliminate disadvantages
entailed by such provision, criterion or practice.
3. Harassment shall be deemed to be a form of discrimination
within the meaning of paragraph 1, when unwanted
conduct related to any of the grounds referred to in Article 1
takes place with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of
a person and of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading,
humiliating or offensive environment. In this context, the
concept of harassment may be defined in accordance with the
national laws and practice of the Member States.
4. An instruction to discriminate against persons on any of
the grounds referred to in Article 1 shall be deemed to be
discrimination within the meaning of paragraph 1.
5. This Directive shall be without prejudice to measures laid
down by national law which, in a democratic society, are
necessary for public security, for the maintenance of public
order and the prevention of criminal offences, for the protection
of health and for the protection of the rights and freedoms
of others.
Article 3
Scope
1. Within the limits of the areas of competence conferred
on the Community, this Directive shall apply to all persons, as
regards both the public and private sectors, including public
bodies, in relation to:
(a) conditions for access to employment, to self-employment
or to occupation, including selection criteria and recruitment
conditions, whatever the branch of activity and at all
levels of the professional hierarchy, including promotion;
(b) access to all types and to all levels of vocational guidance,
vocational training, advanced vocational training and
retraining, including practical work experience;
(c) employment and working conditions, including dismissals
and pay;
(d) membership of, and involvement in, an organisation of
workers or employers, or any organisation whose members
carry on a particular profession, including the benefits
provided for by such organisations.
2. This Directive does not cover differences of treatment
based on nationality and is without prejudice to provisions and
conditions relating to the entry into and residence of thirdcountry
nationals and stateless persons in the territory of
Member States, and to any treatment which arises from the
legal status of the third-country nationals and stateless persons
concerned.
3. This Directive does not apply to payments of any kind
made by state schemes or similar, including state social security
or social protection schemes.
4. Member States may provide that this Directive, in so far
as it relates to discrimination on the grounds of disability and
age, shall not apply to the armed forces.
Article 4
Occupational requirements
1. Notwithstanding Article 2(1) and (2), Member States may
provide that a difference of treatment which is based on a
characteristic related to any of the grounds referred to in
Article 1 shall not constitute discrimination where, by reason
of the nature of the particular occupational activities concerned
or of the context in which they are carried out, such a characteristic
constitutes a genuine and determining occupational
requirement, provided that the objective is legitimate and the
requirement is proportionate.
2. Member States may maintain national legislation in force
at the date of adoption of this Directive or provide for future
legislation incorporating national practices existing at the date
of adoption of this Directive pursuant to which, in the case of
occupational activities within churches and other public or
private organisations the ethos of which is based on religion or
belief, a difference of treatment based on a person's religion or
belief shall not constitute discrimination where, by reason of
the nature of these activities or of the context in which they are
carried out, a person's religion or belief constitute a genuine,
legitimate and justified occupational requirement, having
regard to the organisation's ethos. This difference of treatment
shall be implemented taking account of Member States' constitutional
provisions and principles, as well as the general principles
of Community law, and should not justify discrimination
on another ground.
Provided that its provisions are otherwise complied with, this
Directive shall thus not prejudice the right of churches and
other public or private organisations, the ethos of which is
based on religion or belief, acting in conformity with national
constitutions and laws, to require individuals working for them
to act in good faith and with loyalty to the organisation's ethos.
Article 5
Reasonable accommodation for disabled persons
In order to guarantee compliance with the principle of equal
treatment in relation to persons with disabilities, reasonable
accommodation shall be provided. This means that employers
shall take appropriate measures, where needed in a particular
case, to enable a person with a disability to have access to,
participate in, or advance in employment, or to undergo
training, unless such measures would impose a disproportionate
burden on the employer. This burden shall not be
disproportionate when it is sufficiently remedied by measures
existing within the framework of the disability policy of the
Member State concerned.
Article 6
Justification of differences of treatment on grounds of age
1. Notwithstanding Article 2(2), Member States may provide
that differences of treatment on grounds of age shall not
constitute discrimination, if, within the context of national law,
they are objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate
L 303/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
aim, including legitimate employment policy, labour market
and vocational training objectives, and if the means of
achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary.
Such differences of treatment may include, among others:
(a) the setting of special conditions on access to employment
and vocational training, employment and occupation,
including dismissal and remuneration conditions, for young
people, older workers and persons with caring responsibilities
in order to promote their vocational integration or
ensure their protection;
(b) the fixing of minimum conditions of age, professional
experience or seniority in service for access to employment
or to certain advantages linked to employment;
(c) the fixing of a maximum age for recruitment which is
based on the training requirements of the post in question
or the need for a reasonable period of employment before
retirement.
2. Notwithstanding Article 2(2), Member States may provide
that the fixing for occupational social security schemes of ages
for admission or entitlement to retirement or invalidity benefits,
including the fixing under those schemes of different ages
for employees or groups or categories of employees, and the
use, in the context of such schemes, of age criteria in actuarial
calculations, does not constitute discrimination on the grounds
of age, provided this does not result in discrimination on the
grounds of sex.
Article 7
Positive action
1. With a view to ensuring full equality in practice, the
principle of equal treatment shall not prevent any Member
State from maintaining or adopting specific measures to
prevent or compensate for disadvantages linked to any of the
grounds referred to in Article 1.
2. With regard to disabled persons, the principle of equal
treatment shall be without prejudice to the right of Member
States to maintain or adopt provisions on the protection of
health and safety at work or to measures aimed at creating or
maintaining provisions or facilities for safeguarding or
promoting their integration into the working environment.
Article 8
Minimum requirements
1. Member States may introduce or maintain provisions
which are more favourable to the protection of the principle of
equal treatment than those laid down in this Directive.
2. The implementation of this Directive shall under no
circumstances constitute grounds for a reduction in the level of
protection against discrimination already afforded by Member
States in the fields covered by this Directive.
CHAPTER II
REMEDIES AND ENFORCEMENT
Article 9
Defence of rights
1. Member States shall ensure that judicial and/or administrative
procedures, including where they deem it appropriate
conciliation procedures, for the enforcement of obligations
under this Directive are available to all persons who consider
themselves wronged by failure to apply the principle of equal
treatment to them, even after the relationship in which the
discrimination is alleged to have occurred has ended.
2. Member States shall ensure that associations, organisations
or other legal entities which have, in accordance with
the criteria laid down by their national law, a legitimate interest
in ensuring that the provisions of this Directive are complied
with, may engage, either on behalf or in support of the
complainant, with his or her approval, in any judicial and/or
administrative procedure provided for the enforcement of obligations
under this Directive.
3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to national
rules relating to time limits for bringing actions as regards the
principle of equality of treatment.
Article 10
Burden of proof
1. Member States shall take such measures as are necessary,
in accordance with their national judicial systems, to ensure
that, when persons who consider themselves wronged because
the principle of equal treatment has not been applied to them
establish, before a court or other competent authority, facts
from which it may be presumed that there has been direct or
indirect discrimination, it shall be for the respondent to prove
that there has been no breach of the principle of equal treatment.
2. Paragraph 1 shall not prevent Member States from introducing
rules of evidence which are more favourable to plaintiffs.
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to criminal procedures.
4. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall also apply to any legal
proceedings commenced in accordance with Article 9(2).
5. Member States need not apply paragraph 1 to proceedings
in which it is for the court or competent body to investigate
the facts of the case.
Article 11
Victimisation
Member States shall introduce into their national legal systems
such measures as are necessary to protect employees against
dismissal or other adverse treatment by the employer as a
reaction to a complaint within the undertaking or to any legal
proceedings aimed at enforcing compliance with the principle
of equal treatment.
2.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 303/21
Article 12
Dissemination of information
Member States shall take care that the provisions adopted
pursuant to this Directive, together with the relevant provisions
already in force in this field, are brought to the attention of the
persons concerned by all appropriate means, for example at the
workplace, throughout their territory.
Article 13
Social dialogue
1. Member States shall, in accordance with their national
traditions and practice, take adequate measures to promote
dialogue between the social partners with a view to fostering
equal treatment, including through the monitoring of workplace
practices, collective agreements, codes of conduct and
through research or exchange of experiences and good practices.
2. Where consistent with their national traditions and practice,
Member States shall encourage the social partners, without
prejudice to their autonomy, to conclude at the appropriate
level agreements laying down anti-discrimination rules in the
fields referred to in Article 3 which fall within the scope of
collective bargaining. These agreements shall respect the
minimum requirements laid down by this Directive and by the
relevant national implementing measures.
Article 14
Dialogue with non-governmental organisations
Member States shall encourage dialogue with appropriate nongovernmental
organisations which have, in accordance with
their national law and practice, a legitimate interest in contributing
to the fight against discrimination on any of the
grounds referred to in Article 1 with a view to promoting the
principle of equal treatment.
CHAPTER III
PARTICULAR PROVISIONS
Article 15
Northern Ireland
1. In order to tackle the under-representation of one of the
major religious communities in the police service of Northern
Ireland, differences in treatment regarding recruitment into that
service, including its support staff, shall not constitute discrimination
insofar as those differences in treatment are expressly
authorised by national legislation.
2. In order to maintain a balance of opportunity in employment
for teachers in Northern Ireland while furthering the
reconciliation of historical divisions between the major religious
communities there, the provisions on religion or belief in
this Directive shall not apply to the recruitment of teachers in
schools in Northern Ireland in so far as this is expressly authorised
by national legislation.
CHAPTER IV
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 16
Compliance
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that:
(a) any laws, regulations and administrative provisions
contrary to the principle of equal treatment are abolished;
(b) any provisions contrary to the principle of equal treatment
which are included in contracts or collective agreements,
internal rules of undertakings or rules governing the independent
occupations and professions and workers' and
employers' organisations are, or may be, declared null and
void or are amended.
Article 17
Sanctions
Member States shall lay down the rules on sanctions applicable
to infringements of the national provisions adopted pursuant
to this Directive and shall take all measures necessary to ensure
that they are applied. The sanctions, which may comprise the
payment of compensation to the victim, must be effective,
proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify those
provisions to the Commission by 2 December 2003 at the
latest and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent
amendment affecting them.
Article 18
Implementation
Member States shall adopt the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 2
December 2003 at the latest or may entrust the social partners,
at their joint request, with the implementation of this Directive
as regards provisions concerning collective agreements. In such
cases, Member States shall ensure that, no later than 2
December 2003, the social partners introduce the necessary
measures by agreement, the Member States concerned being
required to take any necessary measures to enable them at any
time to be in a position to guarantee the results imposed by
this Directive. They shall forthwith inform the Commission
thereof.
In order to take account of particular conditions, Member
States may, if necessary, have an additional period of 3 years
from 2 December 2003, that is to say a total of 6 years, to
implement the provisions of this Directive on age and disability
discrimination. In that event they shall inform the Commission
forthwith. Any Member State which chooses to use this additional
period shall report annually to the Commission on the
steps it is taking to tackle age and disability discrimination and
on the progress it is making towards implementation. The
Commission shall report annually to the Council.
L 303/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain
a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference
on the occasion of their official publication. The methods
of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States.
Article 19
Report
1. Member States shall communicate to the Commission, by
2 December 2005 at the latest and every five years thereafter,
all the information necessary for the Commission to draw up a
report to the European Parliament and the Council on the
application of this Directive.
2. The Commission's report shall take into account, as
appropriate, the viewpoints of the social partners and relevant
non-governmental organisations. In accordance with the principle
of gender mainstreaming, this report shall, inter alia,
provide an assessment of the impact of the measures taken on
women and men. In the light of the information received, this
report shall include, if necessary, proposals to revise and
update this Directive.
Article 20
Entry into force
This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication
in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Article 21
Addressees
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 November 2000.
For the Council
The President
É. GUIGOU
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2000/78/EC
of 27 November 2000
establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community, and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social
Committee (3),
Having regard to the Opinion of the Committee of the
Regions (4),
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Article 6 of the Treaty on European
Union, the European Union is founded on the principles
of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles
which are common to all Member States and it respects
fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the
constitutional traditions common to the Member States,
as general principles of Community law.
(2) The principle of equal treatment between women and
men is well established by an important body of
Community law, in particular in Council Directive 76/
207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of
the principle of equal treatment for men and women as
regards access to employment, vocational training and
promotion, and working conditions (5).
(3) In implementing the principle of equal treatment, the
Community should, in accordance with Article 3(2) of
the EC Treaty, aim to eliminate inequalities, and to
promote equality between men and women, especially
since women are often the victims of multiple
discrimination.
(4) The right of all persons to equality before the law and
protection against discrimination constitutes a universal
right recognised by the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,
United Nations Covenants on Civil and Political Rights
and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and by the
European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to which all Member
States are signatories. Convention No 111 of the International
Labour Organisation (ILO) prohibits discrimination
in the field of employment and occupation.
(5) It is important to respect such fundamental rights and
freedoms. This Directive does not prejudice freedom of
association, including the right to establish unions with
others and to join unions to defend one's interests.
(6) The Community Charter of the Fundamental Social
Rights of Workers recognises the importance of
combating every form of discrimination, including the
need to take appropriate action for the social and
economic integration of elderly and disabled people.
(7) The EC Treaty includes among its objectives the promotion
of coordination between employment policies of
the Member States. To this end, a new employment
chapter was incorporated in the EC Treaty as a means of
developing a coordinated European strategy for employment
to promote a skilled, trained and adaptable workforce.
(8) The Employment Guidelines for 2000 agreed by the
European Council at Helsinki on 10 and 11 December
1999 stress the need to foster a labour market favourable
to social integration by formulating a coherent set
of policies aimed at combating discrimination against
groups such as persons with disability. They also emphasise
the need to pay particular attention to supporting
older workers, in order to increase their participation in
the labour force.
(9) Employment and occupation are key elements in guaranteeing
equal opportunities for all and contribute
strongly to the full participation of citizens in economic,
cultural and social life and to realising their potential.
(10) On 29 June 2000 the Council adopted Directive 2000/
43/EC (6) implementing the principle of equal treatment
between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.
That Directive already provides protection against such
discrimination in the field of employment and
occupation.
(11) Discrimination based on religion or belief, disability, age
or sexual orientation may undermine the achievement
of the objectives of the EC Treaty, in particular the
attainment of a high level of employment and social
(1) OJ C 177 E, 27.6.2000, p. 42.
(2) Opinion delivered on 12 October 2000 (not yet published in the
Official Journal).
(3) OJ C 204, 18.7.2000, p. 82.
(4) OJ C 226, 8.8.2000, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 39, 14.2.1976, p. 40. (6) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.
2.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 303/17
protection, raising the standard of living and the quality
of life, economic and social cohesion and solidarity, and
the free movement of persons.
(12) To this end, any direct or indirect discrimination based
on religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation
as regards the areas covered by this Directive should be
prohibited throughout the Community. This prohibition
of discrimination should also apply to nationals of third
countries but does not cover differences of treatment
based on nationality and is without prejudice to provisions
governing the entry and residence of third-country
nationals and their access to employment and
occupation.
(13) This Directive does not apply to social security and
social protection schemes whose benefits are not treated
as income within the meaning given to that term for the
purpose of applying Article 141 of the EC Treaty, nor to
any kind of payment by the State aimed at providing
access to employment or maintaining employment.
(14) This Directive shall be without prejudice to national
provisions laying down retirement ages.
(15) The appreciation of the facts from which it may be
inferred that there has been direct or indirect discrimination
is a matter for national judicial or other
competent bodies, in accordance with rules of national
law or practice. Such rules may provide, in particular,
for indirect discrimination to be established by any
means including on the basis of statistical evidence.
(16) The provision of measures to accommodate the needs of
disabled people at the workplace plays an important role
in combating discrimination on grounds of disability.
(17) This Directive does not require the recruitment, promotion,
maintenance in employment or training of an individual
who is not competent, capable and available to
perform the essential functions of the post concerned or
to undergo the relevant training, without prejudice to
the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation for
people with disabilities.
(18) This Directive does not require, in particular, the armed
forces and the police, prison or emergency services to
recruit or maintain in employment persons who do not
have the required capacity to carry out the range of
functions that they may be called upon to perform with
regard to the legitimate objective of preserving the
operational capacity of those services.
(19) Moreover, in order that the Member States may continue
to safeguard the combat effectiveness of their armed
forces, they may choose not to apply the provisions of
this Directive concerning disability and age to all or part
of their armed forces. The Member States which make
that choice must define the scope of that derogation.
(20) Appropriate measures should be provided, i.e. effective
and practical measures to adapt the workplace to the
disability, for example adapting premises and equipment,
patterns of working time, the distribution of tasks
or the provision of training or integration resources.
(21) To determine whether the measures in question give rise
to a disproportionate burden, account should be taken
in particular of the financial and other costs entailed, the
scale and financial resources of the organisation or
undertaking and the possibility of obtaining public
funding or any other assistance.
(22) This Directive is without prejudice to national laws on
marital status and the benefits dependent thereon.
(23) In very limited circumstances, a difference of treatment
may be justified where a characteristic related to religion
or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation constitutes
a genuine and determining occupational requirement,
when the objective is legitimate and the requirement is
proportionate. Such circumstances should be included in
the information provided by the Member States to the
Commission.
(24) The European Union in its Declaration No 11 on the
status of churches and non-confessional organisations,
annexed to the Final Act of the Amsterdam Treaty, has
explicitly recognised that it respects and does not prejudice
the status under national law of churches and religious
associations or communities in the Member States
and that it equally respects the status of philosophical
and non-confessional organisations. With this in view,
Member States may maintain or lay down specific provisions
on genuine, legitimate and justified occupational
requirements which might be required for carrying out
an occupational activity.
(25) The prohibition of age discrimination is an essential part
of meeting the aims set out in the Employment Guidelines
and encouraging diversity in the workforce.
However, differences in treatment in connection with
age may be justified under certain circumstances and
therefore require specific provisions which may vary in
accordance with the situation in Member States. It is
therefore essential to distinguish between differences in
treatment which are justified, in particular by legitimate
employment policy, labour market and vocational
training objectives, and discrimination which must be
prohibited.
(26) The prohibition of discrimination should be without
prejudice to the maintenance or adoption of measures
intended to prevent or compensate for disadvantages
suffered by a group of persons of a particular religion or
belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, and such
measures may permit organisations of persons of a
particular religion or belief, disability, age or sexual
orientation where their main object is the promotion of
the special needs of those persons.
L 303/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
(27) In its Recommendation 86/379/EEC of 24 July 1986 on
the employment of disabled people in the
Community (1), the Council established a guideline
framework setting out examples of positive action to
promote the employment and training of disabled
people, and in its Resolution of 17 June 1999 on equal
employment opportunities for people with disabilities
(2), affirmed the importance of giving specific attention
inter alia to recruitment, retention, training and
lifelong learning with regard to disabled persons.
(28) This Directive lays down minimum requirements, thus
giving the Member States the option of introducing or
maintaining more favourable provisions. The implementation
of this Directive should not serve to justify
any regression in relation to the situation which already
prevails in each Member State.
(29) Persons who have been subject to discrimination based
on religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation
should have adequate means of legal protection. To
provide a more effective level of protection, associations
or legal entities should also be empowered to engage in
proceedings, as the Member States so determine, either
on behalf or in support of any victim, without prejudice
to national rules of procedure concerning representation
and defence before the courts.
(30) The effective implementation of the principle of equality
requires adequate judicial protection against victimisation.
(31) The rules on the burden of proof must be adapted when
there is a prima facie case of discrimination and, for the
principle of equal treatment to be applied effectively, the
burden of proof must shift back to the respondent when
evidence of such discrimination is brought. However, it
is not for the respondent to prove that the plaintiff
adheres to a particular religion or belief, has a particular
disability, is of a particular age or has a particular sexual
orientation.
(32) Member States need not apply the rules on the burden
of proof to proceedings in which it is for the court or
other competent body to investigate the facts of the
case. The procedures thus referred to are those in which
the plaintiff is not required to prove the facts, which it is
for the court or competent body to investigate.
(33) Member States should promote dialogue between the
social partners and, within the framework of national
practice, with non-governmental organisations to
address different forms of discrimination at the workplace
and to combat them.
(34) The need to promote peace and reconciliation between
the major communities in Northern Ireland necessitates
the incorporation of particular provisions into this
Directive.
(35) Member States should provide for effective, proportionate
and dissuasive sanctions in case of breaches of
the obligations under this Directive.
(36) Member States may entrust the social partners, at their
joint request, with the implementation of this Directive,
as regards the provisions concerning collective agreements,
provided they take any necessary steps to ensure
that they are at all times able to guarantee the results
required by this Directive.
(37) In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity set out
in Article 5 of the EC Treaty, the objective of this
Directive, namely the creation within the Community of
a level playing-field as regards equality in employment
and occupation, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the
Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale
and impact of the action, be better achieved at
Community level. In accordance with the principle of
proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive
does not go beyond what is necessary in order to
achieve that objective,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 1
Purpose
The purpose of this Directive is to lay down a general framework
for combating discrimination on the grounds of religion
or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation as regards
employment and occupation, with a view to putting into effect
in the Member States the principle of equal treatment.
Article 2
Concept of discrimination
1. For the purposes of this Directive, the ‘principle of equal
treatment’ shall mean that there shall be no direct or indirect
discrimination whatsoever on any of the grounds referred to in
Article 1.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1:
(a) direct discrimination shall be taken to occur where one
person is treated less favourably than another is, has been
or would be treated in a comparable situation, on any of
the grounds referred to in Article 1;
(b) indirect discrimination shall be taken to occur where an
apparently neutral provision, criterion or practice would
put persons having a particular religion or belief, a particular
disability, a particular age, or a particular sexual orientation
at a particular disadvantage compared with other
persons unless:
(i) that provision, criterion or practice is objectively justified
by a legitimate aim and the means of achieving
that aim are appropriate and necessary, or
(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1986, p. 43.
(2) OJ C 186, 2.7.1999, p. 3.
2.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 303/19
(ii) as regards persons with a particular disability, the
employer or any person or organisation to whom this
Directive applies, is obliged, under national legislation,
to take appropriate measures in line with the principles
contained in Article 5 in order to eliminate disadvantages
entailed by such provision, criterion or practice.
3. Harassment shall be deemed to be a form of discrimination
within the meaning of paragraph 1, when unwanted
conduct related to any of the grounds referred to in Article 1
takes place with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of
a person and of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading,
humiliating or offensive environment. In this context, the
concept of harassment may be defined in accordance with the
national laws and practice of the Member States.
4. An instruction to discriminate against persons on any of
the grounds referred to in Article 1 shall be deemed to be
discrimination within the meaning of paragraph 1.
5. This Directive shall be without prejudice to measures laid
down by national law which, in a democratic society, are
necessary for public security, for the maintenance of public
order and the prevention of criminal offences, for the protection
of health and for the protection of the rights and freedoms
of others.
Article 3
Scope
1. Within the limits of the areas of competence conferred
on the Community, this Directive shall apply to all persons, as
regards both the public and private sectors, including public
bodies, in relation to:
(a) conditions for access to employment, to self-employment
or to occupation, including selection criteria and recruitment
conditions, whatever the branch of activity and at all
levels of the professional hierarchy, including promotion;
(b) access to all types and to all levels of vocational guidance,
vocational training, advanced vocational training and
retraining, including practical work experience;
(c) employment and working conditions, including dismissals
and pay;
(d) membership of, and involvement in, an organisation of
workers or employers, or any organisation whose members
carry on a particular profession, including the benefits
provided for by such organisations.
2. This Directive does not cover differences of treatment
based on nationality and is without prejudice to provisions and
conditions relating to the entry into and residence of thirdcountry
nationals and stateless persons in the territory of
Member States, and to any treatment which arises from the
legal status of the third-country nationals and stateless persons
concerned.
3. This Directive does not apply to payments of any kind
made by state schemes or similar, including state social security
or social protection schemes.
4. Member States may provide that this Directive, in so far
as it relates to discrimination on the grounds of disability and
age, shall not apply to the armed forces.
Article 4
Occupational requirements
1. Notwithstanding Article 2(1) and (2), Member States may
provide that a difference of treatment which is based on a
characteristic related to any of the grounds referred to in
Article 1 shall not constitute discrimination where, by reason
of the nature of the particular occupational activities concerned
or of the context in which they are carried out, such a characteristic
constitutes a genuine and determining occupational
requirement, provided that the objective is legitimate and the
requirement is proportionate.
2. Member States may maintain national legislation in force
at the date of adoption of this Directive or provide for future
legislation incorporating national practices existing at the date
of adoption of this Directive pursuant to which, in the case of
occupational activities within churches and other public or
private organisations the ethos of which is based on religion or
belief, a difference of treatment based on a person's religion or
belief shall not constitute discrimination where, by reason of
the nature of these activities or of the context in which they are
carried out, a person's religion or belief constitute a genuine,
legitimate and justified occupational requirement, having
regard to the organisation's ethos. This difference of treatment
shall be implemented taking account of Member States' constitutional
provisions and principles, as well as the general principles
of Community law, and should not justify discrimination
on another ground.
Provided that its provisions are otherwise complied with, this
Directive shall thus not prejudice the right of churches and
other public or private organisations, the ethos of which is
based on religion or belief, acting in conformity with national
constitutions and laws, to require individuals working for them
to act in good faith and with loyalty to the organisation's ethos.
Article 5
Reasonable accommodation for disabled persons
In order to guarantee compliance with the principle of equal
treatment in relation to persons with disabilities, reasonable
accommodation shall be provided. This means that employers
shall take appropriate measures, where needed in a particular
case, to enable a person with a disability to have access to,
participate in, or advance in employment, or to undergo
training, unless such measures would impose a disproportionate
burden on the employer. This burden shall not be
disproportionate when it is sufficiently remedied by measures
existing within the framework of the disability policy of the
Member State concerned.
Article 6
Justification of differences of treatment on grounds of age
1. Notwithstanding Article 2(2), Member States may provide
that differences of treatment on grounds of age shall not
constitute discrimination, if, within the context of national law,
they are objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate
L 303/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
aim, including legitimate employment policy, labour market
and vocational training objectives, and if the means of
achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary.
Such differences of treatment may include, among others:
(a) the setting of special conditions on access to employment
and vocational training, employment and occupation,
including dismissal and remuneration conditions, for young
people, older workers and persons with caring responsibilities
in order to promote their vocational integration or
ensure their protection;
(b) the fixing of minimum conditions of age, professional
experience or seniority in service for access to employment
or to certain advantages linked to employment;
(c) the fixing of a maximum age for recruitment which is
based on the training requirements of the post in question
or the need for a reasonable period of employment before
retirement.
2. Notwithstanding Article 2(2), Member States may provide
that the fixing for occupational social security schemes of ages
for admission or entitlement to retirement or invalidity benefits,
including the fixing under those schemes of different ages
for employees or groups or categories of employees, and the
use, in the context of such schemes, of age criteria in actuarial
calculations, does not constitute discrimination on the grounds
of age, provided this does not result in discrimination on the
grounds of sex.
Article 7
Positive action
1. With a view to ensuring full equality in practice, the
principle of equal treatment shall not prevent any Member
State from maintaining or adopting specific measures to
prevent or compensate for disadvantages linked to any of the
grounds referred to in Article 1.
2. With regard to disabled persons, the principle of equal
treatment shall be without prejudice to the right of Member
States to maintain or adopt provisions on the protection of
health and safety at work or to measures aimed at creating or
maintaining provisions or facilities for safeguarding or
promoting their integration into the working environment.
Article 8
Minimum requirements
1. Member States may introduce or maintain provisions
which are more favourable to the protection of the principle of
equal treatment than those laid down in this Directive.
2. The implementation of this Directive shall under no
circumstances constitute grounds for a reduction in the level of
protection against discrimination already afforded by Member
States in the fields covered by this Directive.
CHAPTER II
REMEDIES AND ENFORCEMENT
Article 9
Defence of rights
1. Member States shall ensure that judicial and/or administrative
procedures, including where they deem it appropriate
conciliation procedures, for the enforcement of obligations
under this Directive are available to all persons who consider
themselves wronged by failure to apply the principle of equal
treatment to them, even after the relationship in which the
discrimination is alleged to have occurred has ended.
2. Member States shall ensure that associations, organisations
or other legal entities which have, in accordance with
the criteria laid down by their national law, a legitimate interest
in ensuring that the provisions of this Directive are complied
with, may engage, either on behalf or in support of the
complainant, with his or her approval, in any judicial and/or
administrative procedure provided for the enforcement of obligations
under this Directive.
3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are without prejudice to national
rules relating to time limits for bringing actions as regards the
principle of equality of treatment.
Article 10
Burden of proof
1. Member States shall take such measures as are necessary,
in accordance with their national judicial systems, to ensure
that, when persons who consider themselves wronged because
the principle of equal treatment has not been applied to them
establish, before a court or other competent authority, facts
from which it may be presumed that there has been direct or
indirect discrimination, it shall be for the respondent to prove
that there has been no breach of the principle of equal treatment.
2. Paragraph 1 shall not prevent Member States from introducing
rules of evidence which are more favourable to plaintiffs.
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to criminal procedures.
4. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall also apply to any legal
proceedings commenced in accordance with Article 9(2).
5. Member States need not apply paragraph 1 to proceedings
in which it is for the court or competent body to investigate
the facts of the case.
Article 11
Victimisation
Member States shall introduce into their national legal systems
such measures as are necessary to protect employees against
dismissal or other adverse treatment by the employer as a
reaction to a complaint within the undertaking or to any legal
proceedings aimed at enforcing compliance with the principle
of equal treatment.
2.12.2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 303/21
Article 12
Dissemination of information
Member States shall take care that the provisions adopted
pursuant to this Directive, together with the relevant provisions
already in force in this field, are brought to the attention of the
persons concerned by all appropriate means, for example at the
workplace, throughout their territory.
Article 13
Social dialogue
1. Member States shall, in accordance with their national
traditions and practice, take adequate measures to promote
dialogue between the social partners with a view to fostering
equal treatment, including through the monitoring of workplace
practices, collective agreements, codes of conduct and
through research or exchange of experiences and good practices.
2. Where consistent with their national traditions and practice,
Member States shall encourage the social partners, without
prejudice to their autonomy, to conclude at the appropriate
level agreements laying down anti-discrimination rules in the
fields referred to in Article 3 which fall within the scope of
collective bargaining. These agreements shall respect the
minimum requirements laid down by this Directive and by the
relevant national implementing measures.
Article 14
Dialogue with non-governmental organisations
Member States shall encourage dialogue with appropriate nongovernmental
organisations which have, in accordance with
their national law and practice, a legitimate interest in contributing
to the fight against discrimination on any of the
grounds referred to in Article 1 with a view to promoting the
principle of equal treatment.
CHAPTER III
PARTICULAR PROVISIONS
Article 15
Northern Ireland
1. In order to tackle the under-representation of one of the
major religious communities in the police service of Northern
Ireland, differences in treatment regarding recruitment into that
service, including its support staff, shall not constitute discrimination
insofar as those differences in treatment are expressly
authorised by national legislation.
2. In order to maintain a balance of opportunity in employment
for teachers in Northern Ireland while furthering the
reconciliation of historical divisions between the major religious
communities there, the provisions on religion or belief in
this Directive shall not apply to the recruitment of teachers in
schools in Northern Ireland in so far as this is expressly authorised
by national legislation.
CHAPTER IV
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 16
Compliance
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that:
(a) any laws, regulations and administrative provisions
contrary to the principle of equal treatment are abolished;
(b) any provisions contrary to the principle of equal treatment
which are included in contracts or collective agreements,
internal rules of undertakings or rules governing the independent
occupations and professions and workers' and
employers' organisations are, or may be, declared null and
void or are amended.
Article 17
Sanctions
Member States shall lay down the rules on sanctions applicable
to infringements of the national provisions adopted pursuant
to this Directive and shall take all measures necessary to ensure
that they are applied. The sanctions, which may comprise the
payment of compensation to the victim, must be effective,
proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify those
provisions to the Commission by 2 December 2003 at the
latest and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent
amendment affecting them.
Article 18
Implementation
Member States shall adopt the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 2
December 2003 at the latest or may entrust the social partners,
at their joint request, with the implementation of this Directive
as regards provisions concerning collective agreements. In such
cases, Member States shall ensure that, no later than 2
December 2003, the social partners introduce the necessary
measures by agreement, the Member States concerned being
required to take any necessary measures to enable them at any
time to be in a position to guarantee the results imposed by
this Directive. They shall forthwith inform the Commission
thereof.
In order to take account of particular conditions, Member
States may, if necessary, have an additional period of 3 years
from 2 December 2003, that is to say a total of 6 years, to
implement the provisions of this Directive on age and disability
discrimination. In that event they shall inform the Commission
forthwith. Any Member State which chooses to use this additional
period shall report annually to the Commission on the
steps it is taking to tackle age and disability discrimination and
on the progress it is making towards implementation. The
Commission shall report annually to the Council.
L 303/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.12.2000
When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain
a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference
on the occasion of their official publication. The methods
of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States.
Article 19
Report
1. Member States shall communicate to the Commission, by
2 December 2005 at the latest and every five years thereafter,
all the information necessary for the Commission to draw up a
report to the European Parliament and the Council on the
application of this Directive.
2. The Commission's report shall take into account, as
appropriate, the viewpoints of the social partners and relevant
non-governmental organisations. In accordance with the principle
of gender mainstreaming, this report shall, inter alia,
provide an assessment of the impact of the measures taken on
women and men. In the light of the information received, this
report shall include, if necessary, proposals to revise and
update this Directive.
Article 20
Entry into force
This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication
in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Article 21
Addressees
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 November 2000.
For the Council
The President
É. GUIGOU
Ιστορικά στοιχεία
Ιστορικά στοιχεία
"Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων."
Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή (Γενική Γραμματεία Απασχόλησης, Κοινωνικών Υποθέσεων και Ίσων Ευκαιριών) στα πλαίσια του Κοινωνικού Προγράμματος Δράσης κατά των Διακρίσεων, έχει ξεκινήσει μια πενταετή Πανευρωπαϊκή εκστρατεία πληροφόρησης (2003-2007) για την καταπολέμηση των διακρίσεων λόγω εθνικότητας και φυλής, θρησκείας, ηλικίας, αναπηρίας και σεξουαλικού προσανατολισμού.
Η εκστρατεία "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." εγκαινιάστηκε στις 16 Ιουνίου 2003. Σχεδιάστηκε έτσι ώστε να πληροφορεί τους πολίτες σχετικά με τα δικαιώματα τους σύμφωνα με τη νομοθεσία της ΕΕ κατά των διακρίσεων , καθώς και για να προωθεί τα ωφέλη της ποικιλομορφίας στον εργασιακό χώρο.
Η ποικιλομορφία και ο διάλογος δεν αποτελούν μόνο τα βασικά μηνύματα αλλά και και της κατευθυντήριες αρχές της εκστρατείας, η οποία περιλαμβάνει Πανευρωπαϊκές, εθνικές και τοπικές παραμέτρους. Οι παράμετροι αυτές αναπτύσσονται σε συνεργασία με εθνικούς συνεργάτες, Μη Κυβερνητικές Οργανώσεις, υπουργεία, συνδικαλιστικές οργανώσεις, συνδέσμους εργοδοτών σε κάθε Χώρα Μέλος ΕΕ. Η εκστρατεία χρησιμοποιεί μια μεγάλη γκάμα επικοινωνιακών εργαλείων και προϊόντων που στοχεύουν τις αρχές, συνδικαλιστικές οργανώσεις, συνδέσμους εργοδοτών, ΜΚΟ και τα μέσα ενημέρωσης.
Η εκστρατεία "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." προσδίσει ιδιαίτερη σημασία στο πρωτότυπο και ξεχωριστό χαρακτήρα των εκδηλώσεων. Μια σειρά από δραστηριότητες, σεμινάρια, και συνεχείς εκδηλώσεις στα ΜΜΕ αποτελούν κομμάτι της θεματολογείας της εκστρατείας σε τοπικό και εθνικό επίπεδο. Το 2004 η εκστρατεία έδωσε το παρόν σε 300 εκδηλώσεις σε όλη την ΕΕ.
Συν των πρωτοβουλιών που λαμβάνει η εκστρατεία και στις 25 χώρες, υπάρχει και ένας μεγάλος αριθμός δραστηριοτήτων που καλύπτουν όλη την ΕΕ:
Μια από τις κυριότερες δραστηριότητες στο πλαίσιο της εκστρατείας είναι το Βραβείο Δημοσιογραφίας "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." Το Βραβείο αναγνωρίζει υψηλότατου επιπέδου δημοσιογραφία η οποία έχει συμβάλλει στην ενίσχυση της κοινής αντίληψης για το ωφέλη της ποικιλομορφίας και τον αγώνα κατά των διακρίσεων στην απασχόληση. Από το Μάρτιο έως το Δεκέμβριο 2004, διαδικτυακοί και έντυποι δημοσιογράφοι από τις 25 Χώρες Μέλη κλήθησαν να υποβάλλουν άρθρα σχετικά με τις διακρίσεις και την προώθηση της ποικιλομορφίας στον εργασιακό χώρο. Όλες οι συμμετοχές κρίθηκαν βάσει της ειδησεογραφικής τους αξίας, σχετικότητα με το θέμα, πολυπλοκότητα της έρευνας, πρωτοτυπία της θεματολογίας και αξία για το κοινό. Το Βραβείο της ΕΕ θα απονεμηθεί στις Βρυξέλλες στις 2 Μαΐου 2005. Προετοιμασία για το Βραβείο Δημοσιογραφίας της επόμενης χρονιάς έχει ξεκινήσει από τις αρχές Απριλίου.
Το Ευρώ-Φορτηγό Πληροφόρησης περιοδεύει για δεύτερη συνεχή χρονιά στην Ευρώπη για να πληροφορήσει τους πολίτες σχετικά με την Ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία κατά των διακρίσεων στον εγρασιακό χώρο και για να ενισχύσει την κοινή αντίληψη για θέματα διακρίσεων. Στην ενσωματωμένη σκηνή επιφανείας 50 τ.μ. θα εκτυλίσσεται ένα πρόγραμμα ψυχαγωγίας που θα περιλαμβάνει εθνικά μουσικά συγκροτήματα, παραστάσεις χορού, προβολή ταινιών και συζητήσεις. Φέτος το φορτηγό θα επισκεφθεί Βέλγιο, την Ολλανδία, την Πορτογαλία, την Ισπανία, τη Μάλτα, τη Σλοβενία, την Κύπρο, την Ελλάδα, τη Γερμανία, τη Λιθουανία, τη Λετονία, τη Εσθονία, τη Φινλανδία, το Λουξεμβούργο και την Αυστρία. Το 2004 το φορτηγό επισκέφθηκε την Ουγγαρία, Σλοβακία, Τσεχία, Πολωνία, Λετονία, Δανία, Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, Ιρλανδία, Γαλλία και Ιταλία.
Λαμβάνοντας μέρος σε ένα μαραθώνιο βιώνετε την ποικιλομορφία: χιλιάδες κόσμος από διαφορετικές προελεύσεις και ηλικίες, με διαφορετικoύς τρόπους ζωής και με διαφορετικούς στόχους μπορούν να συμμετέχουν σε οποιονδήποτε από τους μαραθωνίους στην Ευρώπη και να να αφιερώσουν την συμμετοχή τους "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." Το 2004, πάνω από 3200 δρομείς στήριξαν δημόσια την ποικιλομορφία φορώντας την ιδιαίτερη κίτρινη μπλούζα με το λογότυπο της εκστρατείας. Φέτος Φέτος, οι δρομείς θα πάρουν μέρος σε μαραθώνιους στην Λιθουανία, Ιταλία, Βέλγιο, Πολωνία, Ολλανδία, Αυστρία, Γερμανία και Σλοβακία. Φορώντας το κίτρινο Τ-shirt κάνει την παρουσία τους αισθητή στους θεατές και τα ΜΜΕ, περνώντας έτσι το μήνυμα τους. Η ομάδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Επτιροπής "Running for Europe" – (πάνω από 500 δρομείς, συμπεριλαμβανομένων και δύο επιτρόπων) θα στηρίξει την εκστρατεία στις 29 Μαΐου στον αγώνα των 20 χλμ. στις Βρυξέλλες.
Περισσότερες πληροφορίες για την εκστρατεία στην ιστοσελίδα
www.stop-discrimination.info
"Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων."
Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή (Γενική Γραμματεία Απασχόλησης, Κοινωνικών Υποθέσεων και Ίσων Ευκαιριών) στα πλαίσια του Κοινωνικού Προγράμματος Δράσης κατά των Διακρίσεων, έχει ξεκινήσει μια πενταετή Πανευρωπαϊκή εκστρατεία πληροφόρησης (2003-2007) για την καταπολέμηση των διακρίσεων λόγω εθνικότητας και φυλής, θρησκείας, ηλικίας, αναπηρίας και σεξουαλικού προσανατολισμού.
Η εκστρατεία "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." εγκαινιάστηκε στις 16 Ιουνίου 2003. Σχεδιάστηκε έτσι ώστε να πληροφορεί τους πολίτες σχετικά με τα δικαιώματα τους σύμφωνα με τη νομοθεσία της ΕΕ κατά των διακρίσεων , καθώς και για να προωθεί τα ωφέλη της ποικιλομορφίας στον εργασιακό χώρο.
Η ποικιλομορφία και ο διάλογος δεν αποτελούν μόνο τα βασικά μηνύματα αλλά και και της κατευθυντήριες αρχές της εκστρατείας, η οποία περιλαμβάνει Πανευρωπαϊκές, εθνικές και τοπικές παραμέτρους. Οι παράμετροι αυτές αναπτύσσονται σε συνεργασία με εθνικούς συνεργάτες, Μη Κυβερνητικές Οργανώσεις, υπουργεία, συνδικαλιστικές οργανώσεις, συνδέσμους εργοδοτών σε κάθε Χώρα Μέλος ΕΕ. Η εκστρατεία χρησιμοποιεί μια μεγάλη γκάμα επικοινωνιακών εργαλείων και προϊόντων που στοχεύουν τις αρχές, συνδικαλιστικές οργανώσεις, συνδέσμους εργοδοτών, ΜΚΟ και τα μέσα ενημέρωσης.
Η εκστρατεία "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." προσδίσει ιδιαίτερη σημασία στο πρωτότυπο και ξεχωριστό χαρακτήρα των εκδηλώσεων. Μια σειρά από δραστηριότητες, σεμινάρια, και συνεχείς εκδηλώσεις στα ΜΜΕ αποτελούν κομμάτι της θεματολογείας της εκστρατείας σε τοπικό και εθνικό επίπεδο. Το 2004 η εκστρατεία έδωσε το παρόν σε 300 εκδηλώσεις σε όλη την ΕΕ.
Συν των πρωτοβουλιών που λαμβάνει η εκστρατεία και στις 25 χώρες, υπάρχει και ένας μεγάλος αριθμός δραστηριοτήτων που καλύπτουν όλη την ΕΕ:
Μια από τις κυριότερες δραστηριότητες στο πλαίσιο της εκστρατείας είναι το Βραβείο Δημοσιογραφίας "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." Το Βραβείο αναγνωρίζει υψηλότατου επιπέδου δημοσιογραφία η οποία έχει συμβάλλει στην ενίσχυση της κοινής αντίληψης για το ωφέλη της ποικιλομορφίας και τον αγώνα κατά των διακρίσεων στην απασχόληση. Από το Μάρτιο έως το Δεκέμβριο 2004, διαδικτυακοί και έντυποι δημοσιογράφοι από τις 25 Χώρες Μέλη κλήθησαν να υποβάλλουν άρθρα σχετικά με τις διακρίσεις και την προώθηση της ποικιλομορφίας στον εργασιακό χώρο. Όλες οι συμμετοχές κρίθηκαν βάσει της ειδησεογραφικής τους αξίας, σχετικότητα με το θέμα, πολυπλοκότητα της έρευνας, πρωτοτυπία της θεματολογίας και αξία για το κοινό. Το Βραβείο της ΕΕ θα απονεμηθεί στις Βρυξέλλες στις 2 Μαΐου 2005. Προετοιμασία για το Βραβείο Δημοσιογραφίας της επόμενης χρονιάς έχει ξεκινήσει από τις αρχές Απριλίου.
Το Ευρώ-Φορτηγό Πληροφόρησης περιοδεύει για δεύτερη συνεχή χρονιά στην Ευρώπη για να πληροφορήσει τους πολίτες σχετικά με την Ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία κατά των διακρίσεων στον εγρασιακό χώρο και για να ενισχύσει την κοινή αντίληψη για θέματα διακρίσεων. Στην ενσωματωμένη σκηνή επιφανείας 50 τ.μ. θα εκτυλίσσεται ένα πρόγραμμα ψυχαγωγίας που θα περιλαμβάνει εθνικά μουσικά συγκροτήματα, παραστάσεις χορού, προβολή ταινιών και συζητήσεις. Φέτος το φορτηγό θα επισκεφθεί Βέλγιο, την Ολλανδία, την Πορτογαλία, την Ισπανία, τη Μάλτα, τη Σλοβενία, την Κύπρο, την Ελλάδα, τη Γερμανία, τη Λιθουανία, τη Λετονία, τη Εσθονία, τη Φινλανδία, το Λουξεμβούργο και την Αυστρία. Το 2004 το φορτηγό επισκέφθηκε την Ουγγαρία, Σλοβακία, Τσεχία, Πολωνία, Λετονία, Δανία, Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, Ιρλανδία, Γαλλία και Ιταλία.
Λαμβάνοντας μέρος σε ένα μαραθώνιο βιώνετε την ποικιλομορφία: χιλιάδες κόσμος από διαφορετικές προελεύσεις και ηλικίες, με διαφορετικoύς τρόπους ζωής και με διαφορετικούς στόχους μπορούν να συμμετέχουν σε οποιονδήποτε από τους μαραθωνίους στην Ευρώπη και να να αφιερώσουν την συμμετοχή τους "Για την ποικιλομορφία. Κατά των διακρίσεων." Το 2004, πάνω από 3200 δρομείς στήριξαν δημόσια την ποικιλομορφία φορώντας την ιδιαίτερη κίτρινη μπλούζα με το λογότυπο της εκστρατείας. Φέτος Φέτος, οι δρομείς θα πάρουν μέρος σε μαραθώνιους στην Λιθουανία, Ιταλία, Βέλγιο, Πολωνία, Ολλανδία, Αυστρία, Γερμανία και Σλοβακία. Φορώντας το κίτρινο Τ-shirt κάνει την παρουσία τους αισθητή στους θεατές και τα ΜΜΕ, περνώντας έτσι το μήνυμα τους. Η ομάδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Επτιροπής "Running for Europe" – (πάνω από 500 δρομείς, συμπεριλαμβανομένων και δύο επιτρόπων) θα στηρίξει την εκστρατεία στις 29 Μαΐου στον αγώνα των 20 χλμ. στις Βρυξέλλες.
Περισσότερες πληροφορίες για την εκστρατεία στην ιστοσελίδα
www.stop-discrimination.info
20 key facts employers need to know about age legislation and retirement
20 key facts employers need to know about age legislation and retirement
Ten main points
Age Regulations came into force on1 October 2006. Pension schemes are covered by the regulations from 1 December 2006.
The regulations prohibit discrimination in employment and vocational training. This includes access to help and guidance, recruitment, promotion, development, termination, perks and pay.
The regulations cover people of all ages, both old and young.
All employers, providers of vocational training, trade unions, professional associations, employer organisations and trustees, and managers of occupational pension schemes will have new obligations to consider.
Goods, facilities and services are not included in these regulations.
Upper age limits for unfair dismissal and redundancy are removed.
A national default retirement age of 65 is in force, making compulsory retirement below 65 unlawful (unless objectively justified). This will be reviewed in 2011.
All employees will have the 'right to request' to work beyond the default retirement age of 65 or any other retirement age set by the company and all employers have a 'duty to consider' request from employees to work beyond 65.
Occupational pensions are covered by the regulations from 1 December 2006. However, the regulations will generally allow pension schemes to work as they do now. See regulations for more details.
The regulations do not affect state pensions.
Ten answers to your questions
Who does the law cover?
All workers including self employed, contract workers, office holders, the police and members of trade organisations.
People who apply for work and, in some instances, people who have left work. People taking part in or applying for employment related vocational training including all courses at Further Education and Higher Education institutions.
Who isn’t covered by the regulations?
Members of the regular armed forces, full-time and part-time reservists.
Unpaid volunteers.
What does vocational training cover?
All forms of training and retraining courses, practical work experience and guidance that contributes to employability, training provided by employers or private and voluntary sector providers, and all forms of vocational training at further, higher and other adult education institutions.
What do the regulations cover?
They cover direct and indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation.
Employers can be held responsible for the actions of employees in all four cases.
Are there any circumstances when treatment on grounds of age will be lawful?
Exemptions will be allowed on Genuine Occupational Requirement (GOR), a statutory requirement - for example bar staff serving alcohol must be at least 18 - or if there is an objective justification.
The 'test of objective justification' means employers will have to show evidence that they are pursuing a legitimate aim and that it is a proportionate means of achieving that aim.
My employees' pay and benefits vary according to length of service. Can this continue?
Benefits based on length of service requirement of 5 years or less, the '5 year exemption', will be exempted and will be able to continue.
After the 5 year exemption, employers must be able to show that there will be an advantage from rewarding loyalty, encouraging the motivation or recognising the experience of workers by awarding benefits on the basis of length of service.
How does the legislation impact on the National Minimum Wage?
Employers will be able to follow the age bands and minimum wage levels used in the national minimum wage legislation.
What should I know about the default retirement age?
The default retirement age is set at 65 for men and women. It means mandatory retirement before that age is unlawful unless a lower age can be exceptionally objectively justified. It does not mean you need to set a retirement age at 65 either - you can operate with no retirement age, or set a retirement age of 65 or higher. All employees will have the 'right to request' to work beyond any retirement age.
Employers will have new time-bound responsibilities to inform employees of their 'right to request' and they will have a 'duty to consider' all such applications.
Where an extension of work is agreed, the 'right to request' and 'duty to consider' will remain in place when retirement is next considered.
What will the new regulations say about occupational pension schemes?
Occupational pension schemes were included from 1 December 2006.
Personal pensions not provided by the employer (except the employer’s own contribution) are not covered by the draft regulations.
Employers will be able to provide different pension schemes to employees of different ages or with different lengths of service and use minimum and maximum ages for admission to pension schemes and for the payment of pensions.
What should I do now?
Review your employment policies and practices.
Seek advice if you have concerns. If you do not have access to your own legal advice, Age Positive guidance is for information only. Employers are advised to refer to the regulations or contact ACAS, the nominated agency to give advice and guidance on age issues.
Ten main points
Age Regulations came into force on1 October 2006. Pension schemes are covered by the regulations from 1 December 2006.
The regulations prohibit discrimination in employment and vocational training. This includes access to help and guidance, recruitment, promotion, development, termination, perks and pay.
The regulations cover people of all ages, both old and young.
All employers, providers of vocational training, trade unions, professional associations, employer organisations and trustees, and managers of occupational pension schemes will have new obligations to consider.
Goods, facilities and services are not included in these regulations.
Upper age limits for unfair dismissal and redundancy are removed.
A national default retirement age of 65 is in force, making compulsory retirement below 65 unlawful (unless objectively justified). This will be reviewed in 2011.
All employees will have the 'right to request' to work beyond the default retirement age of 65 or any other retirement age set by the company and all employers have a 'duty to consider' request from employees to work beyond 65.
Occupational pensions are covered by the regulations from 1 December 2006. However, the regulations will generally allow pension schemes to work as they do now. See regulations for more details.
The regulations do not affect state pensions.
Ten answers to your questions
Who does the law cover?
All workers including self employed, contract workers, office holders, the police and members of trade organisations.
People who apply for work and, in some instances, people who have left work. People taking part in or applying for employment related vocational training including all courses at Further Education and Higher Education institutions.
Who isn’t covered by the regulations?
Members of the regular armed forces, full-time and part-time reservists.
Unpaid volunteers.
What does vocational training cover?
All forms of training and retraining courses, practical work experience and guidance that contributes to employability, training provided by employers or private and voluntary sector providers, and all forms of vocational training at further, higher and other adult education institutions.
What do the regulations cover?
They cover direct and indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation.
Employers can be held responsible for the actions of employees in all four cases.
Are there any circumstances when treatment on grounds of age will be lawful?
Exemptions will be allowed on Genuine Occupational Requirement (GOR), a statutory requirement - for example bar staff serving alcohol must be at least 18 - or if there is an objective justification.
The 'test of objective justification' means employers will have to show evidence that they are pursuing a legitimate aim and that it is a proportionate means of achieving that aim.
My employees' pay and benefits vary according to length of service. Can this continue?
Benefits based on length of service requirement of 5 years or less, the '5 year exemption', will be exempted and will be able to continue.
After the 5 year exemption, employers must be able to show that there will be an advantage from rewarding loyalty, encouraging the motivation or recognising the experience of workers by awarding benefits on the basis of length of service.
How does the legislation impact on the National Minimum Wage?
Employers will be able to follow the age bands and minimum wage levels used in the national minimum wage legislation.
What should I know about the default retirement age?
The default retirement age is set at 65 for men and women. It means mandatory retirement before that age is unlawful unless a lower age can be exceptionally objectively justified. It does not mean you need to set a retirement age at 65 either - you can operate with no retirement age, or set a retirement age of 65 or higher. All employees will have the 'right to request' to work beyond any retirement age.
Employers will have new time-bound responsibilities to inform employees of their 'right to request' and they will have a 'duty to consider' all such applications.
Where an extension of work is agreed, the 'right to request' and 'duty to consider' will remain in place when retirement is next considered.
What will the new regulations say about occupational pension schemes?
Occupational pension schemes were included from 1 December 2006.
Personal pensions not provided by the employer (except the employer’s own contribution) are not covered by the draft regulations.
Employers will be able to provide different pension schemes to employees of different ages or with different lengths of service and use minimum and maximum ages for admission to pension schemes and for the payment of pensions.
What should I do now?
Review your employment policies and practices.
Seek advice if you have concerns. If you do not have access to your own legal advice, Age Positive guidance is for information only. Employers are advised to refer to the regulations or contact ACAS, the nominated agency to give advice and guidance on age issues.
Τετάρτη
Δικαστική απόφαση-«καταπέλτης» για την εφαρμογή της σαρίας στη Θράκη
Νέα δεδομένα για τις μουσουλμάνες
Ίσα κληρονομικά δικαιώματα με τους άνδρες θα μπορούν να διεκδικούν οι μουσουλμάνες
Απόφαση-«χαστούκι» για την -κατά πανευρωπαϊκή πρωτοτυπία- συνεχιζόμενη εφαρμογή της σαρίας στη Θράκη έλαβε το Μονομελές Πρωτοδικείο της Ροδόπης. Κόντρα στον ιερό ισλαμικό νόμο, οι γυναίκες της μουσουλμανικής μειονότητας θα μπορούν στο εξής να διεκδικούν ίσα κληρονομικά δικαιώματα με τους άντρες.
Όπως αναφέρει την Τετάρτη η εφημερίδα Τα Νέα, η απόφαση του
Πρωτοδικείου δικαιώνει μουσουλμάνα φαρμακοποιό που προσέφυγε στη
Δικαιοσύνη εναντίον του αδελφού της, διεκδικώντας ίσο μερίδιο από την πατρική περιουσία.
Σύμφωνα με τη σαρία, η πατρική περιουσία διανέμεται ως εξής: η χήρα
κληρονομεί τον άνδρα της κατά ποσοστό 1/8 εξ αδιαιρέτου και τα 7/8
παίρνουν τα παιδιά του κατά τρόπο τέτοιο, ώστε ο κάθε γιος να λαμβάνει διπλάσιο μερίδιο από κάθε κόρη. Για τον υπολογισμό αυτό αρχικά αφαιρείται το μερίδιο της χήρας και ό,τι απομένει διαιρείται διά του διπλάσιου αριθμού των γιων, αφού προστεθεί σε αυτόν και ο αριθμός των θυγατέρων κληρονόμων.
Η απόφαση του Πρωτοδικείου Ροδόπης δημιουργεί νέα δεδομένα, καθώς,
όπως λέει ο δικηγόρος της ενάγουσας, Σωτήρης Πουπουζής, πρώτη φορά
αμφισβητεί ευθέως δικαστική απόφαση του μουφτή, η οποία εκδίδεται με
βάση τον ισλαμικό νόμο.
Στην απόφασή του, ο δικαστής σημειώνει, μεταξύ άλλων, ότι «οι
δικαιοδοτικές αρμοδιότητες του μουφτή, οι οποίες είναι σαφές από το
γράμμα και το πνεύμα της Συνθήκης της Λωζάννης ότι εφαρμόζονται
αποκλειστικά και μόνο επί της συγκεκριμένης μοναδικής ελληνικής
μουσουλμανικής μειονότητας, δεν θα ήταν δυνατόν να λειτουργήσουν προς την κατεύθυνση της παραβίασης ατομικών δικαιωμάτων των μουσουλμάνων,τα οποία προστατεύονται ρητά από το Σύνταγμα όσο και από την ευρωπαϊκή Σύμβαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων της Ρώμης και το συμπληρωματικό Πρωτόκολλο των Παρισίων».
Όπως επισημαίνεται στην ίδια απόφαση, η εφαρμογή αναχρονιστικών
διατάξεων που ίσχυαν σε μεταβατικές περιόδους ιστορικά και πολιτειακά δεν μπορεί να αφαιρέσει δικαιώματα και να αντιμετωπίσει δυσμενώς τις Ελληνίδες μουσουλμάνες, κατά παρέκκλιση μάλιστα της συνταγματικής αρχής της ισότητας των φύλων και της ισονομίας των πολιτών.
Ίσα κληρονομικά δικαιώματα με τους άνδρες θα μπορούν να διεκδικούν οι μουσουλμάνες
Απόφαση-«χαστούκι» για την -κατά πανευρωπαϊκή πρωτοτυπία- συνεχιζόμενη εφαρμογή της σαρίας στη Θράκη έλαβε το Μονομελές Πρωτοδικείο της Ροδόπης. Κόντρα στον ιερό ισλαμικό νόμο, οι γυναίκες της μουσουλμανικής μειονότητας θα μπορούν στο εξής να διεκδικούν ίσα κληρονομικά δικαιώματα με τους άντρες.
Όπως αναφέρει την Τετάρτη η εφημερίδα Τα Νέα, η απόφαση του
Πρωτοδικείου δικαιώνει μουσουλμάνα φαρμακοποιό που προσέφυγε στη
Δικαιοσύνη εναντίον του αδελφού της, διεκδικώντας ίσο μερίδιο από την πατρική περιουσία.
Σύμφωνα με τη σαρία, η πατρική περιουσία διανέμεται ως εξής: η χήρα
κληρονομεί τον άνδρα της κατά ποσοστό 1/8 εξ αδιαιρέτου και τα 7/8
παίρνουν τα παιδιά του κατά τρόπο τέτοιο, ώστε ο κάθε γιος να λαμβάνει διπλάσιο μερίδιο από κάθε κόρη. Για τον υπολογισμό αυτό αρχικά αφαιρείται το μερίδιο της χήρας και ό,τι απομένει διαιρείται διά του διπλάσιου αριθμού των γιων, αφού προστεθεί σε αυτόν και ο αριθμός των θυγατέρων κληρονόμων.
Η απόφαση του Πρωτοδικείου Ροδόπης δημιουργεί νέα δεδομένα, καθώς,
όπως λέει ο δικηγόρος της ενάγουσας, Σωτήρης Πουπουζής, πρώτη φορά
αμφισβητεί ευθέως δικαστική απόφαση του μουφτή, η οποία εκδίδεται με
βάση τον ισλαμικό νόμο.
Στην απόφασή του, ο δικαστής σημειώνει, μεταξύ άλλων, ότι «οι
δικαιοδοτικές αρμοδιότητες του μουφτή, οι οποίες είναι σαφές από το
γράμμα και το πνεύμα της Συνθήκης της Λωζάννης ότι εφαρμόζονται
αποκλειστικά και μόνο επί της συγκεκριμένης μοναδικής ελληνικής
μουσουλμανικής μειονότητας, δεν θα ήταν δυνατόν να λειτουργήσουν προς την κατεύθυνση της παραβίασης ατομικών δικαιωμάτων των μουσουλμάνων,τα οποία προστατεύονται ρητά από το Σύνταγμα όσο και από την ευρωπαϊκή Σύμβαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων της Ρώμης και το συμπληρωματικό Πρωτόκολλο των Παρισίων».
Όπως επισημαίνεται στην ίδια απόφαση, η εφαρμογή αναχρονιστικών
διατάξεων που ίσχυαν σε μεταβατικές περιόδους ιστορικά και πολιτειακά δεν μπορεί να αφαιρέσει δικαιώματα και να αντιμετωπίσει δυσμενώς τις Ελληνίδες μουσουλμάνες, κατά παρέκκλιση μάλιστα της συνταγματικής αρχής της ισότητας των φύλων και της ισονομίας των πολιτών.
Σάββατο
Θα θέλαμε μια ξεκάθαρη απάντηση
Από το ARCADIA - It hurts!(http://skinious.blogspot.com/2008/03/blog-post_5718.html) Τα κακώς και τα καλώς κείμενα...
Αξιότιμοι Κύριοι του ΥΠΕΞ και της ΓΕΝ. ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΕΙΑ ΝΕΑΣ ΓΕΝΙΑΣ,Θα θέλαμε μια ξεκάθαρη απάντηση στο κάτωθι ερώτημα:Σύμφωνα με τα γραφόμενα στο site του Ελληνικού παραρτήματος του ΠΑΡΑΤΗΡΗΤΗΡΙΟΥ των ΣΥΜΦΩΝΙΩΝ του ΕΛΣΙΝΚΙ, ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΙΤΕ ένα από τους χορηγούς του.Θα θέλαμε να μας διευκρινίσετε εάν αυτό αληθεύει.Το σχετικό απόσπασμα σας αναφέρει σαν σπόνσορες μαζί με ΦΙΛΟΣΚΟΠΙΑΝΕΣ οργανώσεις (Search for Common Ground Macedonia, Macedonian Human Rights Movement of Canada). Για την ακρίβεια, το site του ΠτΣτΕ αναφέρει (ΔΕΙΤΕ ΤΟ ΕΔΩ):"Greek Helsinki Monitor and Minority Rights Group - Greece would like to acknowledge the sponsorship of Open Society Institute, European Union's PHARE, Euromosaic and Equal programs, Austrian Government -Federal Chancellery, Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, Nikos Dimou, "Artos Zois" Foundation, European Roma Rights Center, Berghof Foundation for Conflict Research, Aspen Institute Berlin, International Helsinki Federation, Minority Rights Group International, Alternative Information Network, Search for Common Ground Macedonia, Macedonian Human Rights Movement of Canada, Communication and Political Research Society, Greek Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Greek General Secretariat for Youth, and a few others."ΑΠΑΙΤΟΥΜΕ ΝΑ ΜΑΘΟΥΜΕ ΑΝ ΜΕ ΤΑ ΛΕΦΤΑ ΜΑΣ ΧΡΗΜΑΤΟΔΟΤΟΥΝΤΑΙ ΤΕΤΟΙΕΣ ΑΝΘΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΕΣ ΟΡΓΑΝΩΣΕΙΣ!
Αξιότιμοι Κύριοι του ΥΠΕΞ και της ΓΕΝ. ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΕΙΑ ΝΕΑΣ ΓΕΝΙΑΣ,Θα θέλαμε μια ξεκάθαρη απάντηση στο κάτωθι ερώτημα:Σύμφωνα με τα γραφόμενα στο site του Ελληνικού παραρτήματος του ΠΑΡΑΤΗΡΗΤΗΡΙΟΥ των ΣΥΜΦΩΝΙΩΝ του ΕΛΣΙΝΚΙ, ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΙΤΕ ένα από τους χορηγούς του.Θα θέλαμε να μας διευκρινίσετε εάν αυτό αληθεύει.Το σχετικό απόσπασμα σας αναφέρει σαν σπόνσορες μαζί με ΦΙΛΟΣΚΟΠΙΑΝΕΣ οργανώσεις (Search for Common Ground Macedonia, Macedonian Human Rights Movement of Canada). Για την ακρίβεια, το site του ΠτΣτΕ αναφέρει (ΔΕΙΤΕ ΤΟ ΕΔΩ):"Greek Helsinki Monitor and Minority Rights Group - Greece would like to acknowledge the sponsorship of Open Society Institute, European Union's PHARE, Euromosaic and Equal programs, Austrian Government -Federal Chancellery, Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, Nikos Dimou, "Artos Zois" Foundation, European Roma Rights Center, Berghof Foundation for Conflict Research, Aspen Institute Berlin, International Helsinki Federation, Minority Rights Group International, Alternative Information Network, Search for Common Ground Macedonia, Macedonian Human Rights Movement of Canada, Communication and Political Research Society, Greek Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Greek General Secretariat for Youth, and a few others."ΑΠΑΙΤΟΥΜΕ ΝΑ ΜΑΘΟΥΜΕ ΑΝ ΜΕ ΤΑ ΛΕΦΤΑ ΜΑΣ ΧΡΗΜΑΤΟΔΟΤΟΥΝΤΑΙ ΤΕΤΟΙΕΣ ΑΝΘΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΕΣ ΟΡΓΑΝΩΣΕΙΣ!
Το Υπουργείο Παιδείας στέλνει για «επιμόρφωση» εκπαιδευτικούς στο Ισραήλ
Με τη διαδικασία του «εξαιρετικά επείγοντος» το Υπουργείο «Εθνικής» Παιδείας και Θρησκευμάτων ανακοίνωσε τη διεξαγωγή σεμιναρίου για καθηγητές φιλολόγους μέσης εκπαίδευσης (ΠΕ02) με θέμα το «Ολοκαύτωμα». Το σεμινάριο αυτό που θα λάβει χώρα στην Ιερουσαλήμ από 5 έως 11 Ιουλίου 2008, διοργανώνεται από το International School for Holocaust Studies at Yad Vashem. Δικαίωμα συμμετοχής έχουν όσοι μόνιμοι καθηγητές έχουν τριετή τουλάχιστον υπηρεσία και γνωρίζουν πολύ καλά την αγγλική γλώσσα (επίπεδο Γ1 ή Advanced), η οποία και θα είναι η επίσημη γλώσσα του σεμιναρίου. Ελάχιστος αριθμός συμμετοχής για την πραγματοποίηση του σεμιναρίου είναι τα δέκα (10) άτομα και καταληκτική ημερομηνία για αιτήσεις είναι η 20η Μαρτίου 2008. Για την αποστολή των Ελλήνων εκπαιδευτικών στο Ισραήλ θα επιβαρυνθεί ο κρατικός προϋπολογισμός, δηλαδή ο φορολογούμενος ελληνικός λαός. (Βλ. http://www.ypepth.gr/el_ec_category1757.htm).
Εδώ ανακύπτουν κάποια ερωτήματα:
– Ποιος φορέας ή πρόσωπο, με ποιες διαδικασίες και βάσει ποιών κριτηρίων απεφάσισε την αποστολή Ελλήνων εκπαιδευτικών στο Ισραήλ και μάλιστα δαπάναις του ελληνικού δημοσίου;
– Οι συμμετάσχοντες στο συνέδριο θα μοριοδοτηθούν;
– Γιατί επελέγη το Ισραήλ, ένα κράτος το οποίο βαρύνεται με τη συστηματική εθνοκάθαρση των γειτονικών του λαών (π.χ. των Παλαιστινίων), ως τόπος διεξαγωγής ενός σεμιναρίου με τέτοιο περιεχόμενο;
– Ο (θρησκευτικής προέλευσης) όρος «Ολοκαύτωμα» (Shoah), που είναι και ο τίτλος του σεμιναρίου, περιλαμβάνει και τους μη Εβραίους που υπήρξαν θύματα των ναζιστικών στρατοπέδων συγκέντρωσης (π.χ. Τσιγγάνους, Σλάβους, κομμουνιστές) ή αφορά αποκλειστικά τον «περιούσιο λαό τους Θεού»;
– Γιατί δεν διεξάγονται αναλόγου περιεχομένου επιδοτούμενα από το Υπουργείο Παιδείας σεμινάρια, που αναφέρονται και σε άλλους λαούς - θύματα της θηριωδίας του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου;
Θα ήταν π.χ. μία πολύ καλή ιδέα η διοργάνωση σεμιναρίου για Έλληνες εκπαιδευτικούς στη Μόσχα με θέμα τον «Μεγάλο Πατριωτικό Πόλεμο» και τη θυσία 20.000.000 Σοβιετικών -κυρίως Ρώσων- που έχασαν τη ζωή τους όχι μόνο στα πεδία των μαχών, αλλά και στα γερμανικά στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης. Θα ήταν επίσης ενδιαφέρον να διοργανωθεί στο Βελιγράδι επιδοτούμενο σεμινάριο με θέμα τη σφαγή εκατοντάδων χιλιάδων Σέρβων από τους φιλοναζί Κροάτες Ουστάσι στο στρατόπεδο συγκέντρωσης του Γιασένοβατς κατά την περίοδο 1941-1945. Είναι βεβαίως απορίας άξιον πως οι κατά τα άλλα «αντιφασίστες», «αντιναζί» και «αντιρατσιστές» που αποτελούν το κατεστημένο αυτού του τόπου, δεν δείχνουν το ανάλογο ενδιαφέρον και για τα υπόλοιπα θύματα των Γερμανών του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου. Δεν γνωρίζουμε την αιτία, αλλά υποψιαζόμαστε ότι κάτι τέτοιο μάλλον δεν θα ήταν “politically correct”..
Το εξοργιστικό από την όλη υπόθεση είναι ότι το αυτονόητο φαντάζει αδιανόητο, ότι έχει επικρατήσει η λογική των δύο μέτρων και των δύο σταθμών. Έτσι π.χ. δεν μπορούμε να μιλήσουμε άνετα για τη συστηματική σφαγή και τον ξεριζωμό των Ελλήνων της Μικράς Ασίας και του Πόντου για να μην κατηγορηθούμε για «σωβινιστές», δεν μπορούμε ούτε ακόμα να εκφράσουμε τον αποτροπιασμό μας για τη γενοκτονία και των Αρμενίων και των Ασσυρίων από τους «προοδευτικούς» Νεότουρκους για να μην θίξουμε τη ΝΑΤΟϊκή «σύμμαχό» μας Τουρκία. Τη στιγμή που στα «ρεπούσεια» σχολικά βιβλία ιστορίας απαλείφεται οτιδήποτε μπορεί να δημιουργήσει «μη πολιτικά ορθή» εικόνα στους μικρούς μαθητές για τους γείτονές μας (και πρώην δυνάστες μας) στο όνομα της «φιλίας» και της «συναδέλφωσης» των λαών, τη στιγμή που στα ελληνικά πανεπιστήμια έχει επικρατήσει η μεταμοντέρνα - αποδομητική και αναθεωρητική σχολή ιστορίας τύπου Αντώνη Λιάκου, η επιλεκτική εμμονή στην υπερπροβολή του «Ολοκαυτώματος» των Εβραίων θεωρείται ύποπτη και σκανδαλώδης, ιδίως δε όταν αμφισβήτησή του από τον οποιονδήποτε σε δυτικά κράτη επισύρει ποινές καθείρξεως.
Οι Έλληνες εκπαιδευτικοί λοιπόν δεν έχουν κανένα λόγο να συμμετάσχουν σε τέτοιου είδους σεμινάρια. Δεν υπάρχει κανένας λόγος να υποστούν μία ενδεχόμενη προπαγανδιστική διαδικασία δημιουργίας τύψεων για όσα τράβηξαν οι Εβραίοι κατά τη διάρκεια του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου, δεδομένου ότι ο ελληνικός λαός πολέμησε τον Άξονα πληρώντας βαρύ τίμημα (πάνω από 500.000 νεκρούς). Εξάλλου, ως γνωστόν, το κράτος του Ισραήλ δεν ταυτίζεται με το σύνολο των ανά την υφήλιο Εβραίων. Θα πρέπει εδώ να αποσυνδεθούν αυτά τα δύο, ώστε να μην θυματοποιείται το Ισραήλ και να μην του δίνεται συγχωροχάρτι για τα εγκλήματά του κατά των λαών της Παλαιστίνης και του Λιβάνου. Ο ελληνικός λαός δεν είναι υπόλογος για όσα αποτρόπαια έγιναν κατά τη διάρκεια του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου, ούτε έχει καμία διάθεση να ζητήσει από κανέναν κάποιου είδους «εξιλέωση» για όλα αυτά. Και βεβαίως δεν έχει καμία υποχρέωση να επιβαρύνεται οικονομικά με τη διεξαγωγή σεμιναρίων που δεν τον αφορούν ή τουλάχιστον δεν πραγματεύονται φλέγοντα γι’ αυτόν ζητήματα.
Αντιθέτως υπόλογοι είναι οι Ισραηλινοί και οι προστάτες τους Αμερικανοί, οι μεν πρώτοι για τη συστηματική προσπάθεια εξόντωσης και εκτοπισμού των Παλαιστινίων από το πατρογονικά τους εδάφη, οι δε δεύτεροι για τη γενοκτονία των αυτοχθόνων Ινδιάνων της βόρειας Αμερικής, τη μεγαλύτερη γενοκτονία στην ιστορία της ανθρωπότητας (σύμφωνα με τον Eric Hobsbowm το 1830 υπήρχαν 60.000.000 Ινδιάνοι, ενώ το 1890 μόλις 230.000, μείωση δηλαδή κατά 99,6%!). Για ακόμη άλλη μία φορά οι ιμπεριαλιστές χρησιμοποιούν δύο μέτρα και δύο σταθμά. Γι’ αυτό και για το ολοκαύτωμα των θυμάτων του ιμπεριαλισμού δεν γίνεται κανένα σεμινάριο ή συνέδριο, ίσως γιατί για κάποιους η ζωή των «μη εκλεκτών από Θεό» λαών έχει μικρότερη αξία από αυτή των Εβραίων. Εμείς πάντως θα αντιπροτείναμε στους υποψηφίους για συμμετοχή στο εν λόγω σεμινάριο να πάνε να επισκεφθούν τη Ραμάλα, τη Τζενίν και τη λωρίδα της Γάζας να δουν ιδίοις όμμασι το σημερινό καθημερινό «Ολοκαύτωμα» του παλαιστινιακού λαού, να μάθουν τι εστί ισραηλινή κατοχή. Οι Έλληνες εκπαιδευτικοί οφείλουν να σταθούν στο ύψος τους και επιδείξουν αλληλεγγύη στον σκληρά δοκιμαζόμενο παλαιστινιακό και λιβανέζικο λαό. Δεν θα πρέπει να νομιμοποιούν με την παρουσία τους την κατοχή, ούτε να ενισχύουν ηθικά δολοφόνους μικρών παιδιών μέσα από την οποιαδήποτε συνεργασία μαζί τους. Ζούμε πλέον στο 2008 και ο Αδόλφος Χίτλερ έχει πεθάνει εδώ και 63 χρόνια. Ο χασάπης Αριέλ Σαρόν όμως ζει ακόμα, έστω και σε κώμα.. Εδώ βρίσκεται το πραγματικό «αυγό του φιδιού». Αυτό θα πρέπει να πολεμήσουμε όλοι οι λαοί ενωμένοι. Λευτεριά στην Παλαιστίνη!
Εδώ ανακύπτουν κάποια ερωτήματα:
– Ποιος φορέας ή πρόσωπο, με ποιες διαδικασίες και βάσει ποιών κριτηρίων απεφάσισε την αποστολή Ελλήνων εκπαιδευτικών στο Ισραήλ και μάλιστα δαπάναις του ελληνικού δημοσίου;
– Οι συμμετάσχοντες στο συνέδριο θα μοριοδοτηθούν;
– Γιατί επελέγη το Ισραήλ, ένα κράτος το οποίο βαρύνεται με τη συστηματική εθνοκάθαρση των γειτονικών του λαών (π.χ. των Παλαιστινίων), ως τόπος διεξαγωγής ενός σεμιναρίου με τέτοιο περιεχόμενο;
– Ο (θρησκευτικής προέλευσης) όρος «Ολοκαύτωμα» (Shoah), που είναι και ο τίτλος του σεμιναρίου, περιλαμβάνει και τους μη Εβραίους που υπήρξαν θύματα των ναζιστικών στρατοπέδων συγκέντρωσης (π.χ. Τσιγγάνους, Σλάβους, κομμουνιστές) ή αφορά αποκλειστικά τον «περιούσιο λαό τους Θεού»;
– Γιατί δεν διεξάγονται αναλόγου περιεχομένου επιδοτούμενα από το Υπουργείο Παιδείας σεμινάρια, που αναφέρονται και σε άλλους λαούς - θύματα της θηριωδίας του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου;
Θα ήταν π.χ. μία πολύ καλή ιδέα η διοργάνωση σεμιναρίου για Έλληνες εκπαιδευτικούς στη Μόσχα με θέμα τον «Μεγάλο Πατριωτικό Πόλεμο» και τη θυσία 20.000.000 Σοβιετικών -κυρίως Ρώσων- που έχασαν τη ζωή τους όχι μόνο στα πεδία των μαχών, αλλά και στα γερμανικά στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης. Θα ήταν επίσης ενδιαφέρον να διοργανωθεί στο Βελιγράδι επιδοτούμενο σεμινάριο με θέμα τη σφαγή εκατοντάδων χιλιάδων Σέρβων από τους φιλοναζί Κροάτες Ουστάσι στο στρατόπεδο συγκέντρωσης του Γιασένοβατς κατά την περίοδο 1941-1945. Είναι βεβαίως απορίας άξιον πως οι κατά τα άλλα «αντιφασίστες», «αντιναζί» και «αντιρατσιστές» που αποτελούν το κατεστημένο αυτού του τόπου, δεν δείχνουν το ανάλογο ενδιαφέρον και για τα υπόλοιπα θύματα των Γερμανών του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου. Δεν γνωρίζουμε την αιτία, αλλά υποψιαζόμαστε ότι κάτι τέτοιο μάλλον δεν θα ήταν “politically correct”..
Το εξοργιστικό από την όλη υπόθεση είναι ότι το αυτονόητο φαντάζει αδιανόητο, ότι έχει επικρατήσει η λογική των δύο μέτρων και των δύο σταθμών. Έτσι π.χ. δεν μπορούμε να μιλήσουμε άνετα για τη συστηματική σφαγή και τον ξεριζωμό των Ελλήνων της Μικράς Ασίας και του Πόντου για να μην κατηγορηθούμε για «σωβινιστές», δεν μπορούμε ούτε ακόμα να εκφράσουμε τον αποτροπιασμό μας για τη γενοκτονία και των Αρμενίων και των Ασσυρίων από τους «προοδευτικούς» Νεότουρκους για να μην θίξουμε τη ΝΑΤΟϊκή «σύμμαχό» μας Τουρκία. Τη στιγμή που στα «ρεπούσεια» σχολικά βιβλία ιστορίας απαλείφεται οτιδήποτε μπορεί να δημιουργήσει «μη πολιτικά ορθή» εικόνα στους μικρούς μαθητές για τους γείτονές μας (και πρώην δυνάστες μας) στο όνομα της «φιλίας» και της «συναδέλφωσης» των λαών, τη στιγμή που στα ελληνικά πανεπιστήμια έχει επικρατήσει η μεταμοντέρνα - αποδομητική και αναθεωρητική σχολή ιστορίας τύπου Αντώνη Λιάκου, η επιλεκτική εμμονή στην υπερπροβολή του «Ολοκαυτώματος» των Εβραίων θεωρείται ύποπτη και σκανδαλώδης, ιδίως δε όταν αμφισβήτησή του από τον οποιονδήποτε σε δυτικά κράτη επισύρει ποινές καθείρξεως.
Οι Έλληνες εκπαιδευτικοί λοιπόν δεν έχουν κανένα λόγο να συμμετάσχουν σε τέτοιου είδους σεμινάρια. Δεν υπάρχει κανένας λόγος να υποστούν μία ενδεχόμενη προπαγανδιστική διαδικασία δημιουργίας τύψεων για όσα τράβηξαν οι Εβραίοι κατά τη διάρκεια του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου, δεδομένου ότι ο ελληνικός λαός πολέμησε τον Άξονα πληρώντας βαρύ τίμημα (πάνω από 500.000 νεκρούς). Εξάλλου, ως γνωστόν, το κράτος του Ισραήλ δεν ταυτίζεται με το σύνολο των ανά την υφήλιο Εβραίων. Θα πρέπει εδώ να αποσυνδεθούν αυτά τα δύο, ώστε να μην θυματοποιείται το Ισραήλ και να μην του δίνεται συγχωροχάρτι για τα εγκλήματά του κατά των λαών της Παλαιστίνης και του Λιβάνου. Ο ελληνικός λαός δεν είναι υπόλογος για όσα αποτρόπαια έγιναν κατά τη διάρκεια του Β΄ Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου, ούτε έχει καμία διάθεση να ζητήσει από κανέναν κάποιου είδους «εξιλέωση» για όλα αυτά. Και βεβαίως δεν έχει καμία υποχρέωση να επιβαρύνεται οικονομικά με τη διεξαγωγή σεμιναρίων που δεν τον αφορούν ή τουλάχιστον δεν πραγματεύονται φλέγοντα γι’ αυτόν ζητήματα.
Αντιθέτως υπόλογοι είναι οι Ισραηλινοί και οι προστάτες τους Αμερικανοί, οι μεν πρώτοι για τη συστηματική προσπάθεια εξόντωσης και εκτοπισμού των Παλαιστινίων από το πατρογονικά τους εδάφη, οι δε δεύτεροι για τη γενοκτονία των αυτοχθόνων Ινδιάνων της βόρειας Αμερικής, τη μεγαλύτερη γενοκτονία στην ιστορία της ανθρωπότητας (σύμφωνα με τον Eric Hobsbowm το 1830 υπήρχαν 60.000.000 Ινδιάνοι, ενώ το 1890 μόλις 230.000, μείωση δηλαδή κατά 99,6%!). Για ακόμη άλλη μία φορά οι ιμπεριαλιστές χρησιμοποιούν δύο μέτρα και δύο σταθμά. Γι’ αυτό και για το ολοκαύτωμα των θυμάτων του ιμπεριαλισμού δεν γίνεται κανένα σεμινάριο ή συνέδριο, ίσως γιατί για κάποιους η ζωή των «μη εκλεκτών από Θεό» λαών έχει μικρότερη αξία από αυτή των Εβραίων. Εμείς πάντως θα αντιπροτείναμε στους υποψηφίους για συμμετοχή στο εν λόγω σεμινάριο να πάνε να επισκεφθούν τη Ραμάλα, τη Τζενίν και τη λωρίδα της Γάζας να δουν ιδίοις όμμασι το σημερινό καθημερινό «Ολοκαύτωμα» του παλαιστινιακού λαού, να μάθουν τι εστί ισραηλινή κατοχή. Οι Έλληνες εκπαιδευτικοί οφείλουν να σταθούν στο ύψος τους και επιδείξουν αλληλεγγύη στον σκληρά δοκιμαζόμενο παλαιστινιακό και λιβανέζικο λαό. Δεν θα πρέπει να νομιμοποιούν με την παρουσία τους την κατοχή, ούτε να ενισχύουν ηθικά δολοφόνους μικρών παιδιών μέσα από την οποιαδήποτε συνεργασία μαζί τους. Ζούμε πλέον στο 2008 και ο Αδόλφος Χίτλερ έχει πεθάνει εδώ και 63 χρόνια. Ο χασάπης Αριέλ Σαρόν όμως ζει ακόμα, έστω και σε κώμα.. Εδώ βρίσκεται το πραγματικό «αυγό του φιδιού». Αυτό θα πρέπει να πολεμήσουμε όλοι οι λαοί ενωμένοι. Λευτεριά στην Παλαιστίνη!
Κυριακή
ΟΧΙ , λοιπόν, στην παραχώρηση του όρου Άνω Μακεδονία
Eίναι σαφές ότι βαδίζουμε ολοταχώς προς το ΒΕΤΟ κατά της ένταξης των Σκοπίων στην Ατλαντική Συμμαχία. Αφού ασκήσουμε αυτό το δικαίωμά μας ας καθήσουμε ήρεμα όλοι μαζί, ηγεσία και λαός, και ας ξανασκεφθούμε. Είναι σωστό να δίνουμε τη μάχη οχυρωμένοι πίσω από το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία; Το λέω αυτό διότι από πολλά χείλη πολιτικών και από γραφίδες δημοσιογράφων αυτή την πρόταση ακούω και διαβάζω. Νομίζουν καλοπροαίρετα όσοι υποστηρίζουν αυτή την ονομασία ότι θα διασφαλίσει τα εθνικά μας συμφέροντα. Πιστεύω ότι έχουμε αυτοπαγιδευθεί πίσω από το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία και δεν βλέπουμε τα προβλήματα. Θυμίζω ορισμένα:
1. Το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία, ως προτεινόμενο επίσημο όνομα του γειτονικού κρατιδίου, δεν μας συμφέρει από πλευράς ιστορικής –αρχαιολογικής. Είναι οδυνηρή παραχώρηση ιστορικών τίτλων που ανήκουν από την πρώιμη αρχαιότητα στην σημερινή ελληνική περιοχή της Δυτικής Μακεδονίας. Η κ. Γεωργία Καραμήτρου-Μεντεσίδη, Δρ Αρχαιολογίας και υπεύθυνη των ανασκαφών της Αιανής Κοζάνης, καταγράφει τις ιστορικές μαρτυρίες σε ένα πολύ τεκμηριωμένο άρθρο της στην εβδομαδιαία εφημερίδα ΚΟΖΑΝΗ (www.efkozani.gr) στίς 25-2-2008. Η εκλεκτή αρχαιολόγος μάς θυμίζει ότι οι Αρχαίοι Έλληνες ονόμαζαν Άνω Μακεδονία την περιοχή που αντιστοιχεί στους σημερινούς νομούς Φλωρίνης ( αρχαία Λυγκηστίς και μέρος της Πελαγονίας), Καστορίας ( αρχαία Ορεστίς), Κοζάνης (αρχαία Ελίμεια και Εορδαία) καί Γρεβενών (αρχαία Τυμφαία). Η Άνω Μακεδονία μνημονεύεται για πρώτη φορά στον Ηρόδοτο και συγκεκριμένα σε δύο χωρία, στο 7.134.4 και στο 8.137-139. Σχετικές αναφορές του όρου υπάρχουν και στον Θουκυδίδη και στον Στράβωνα. Οι Άνω Μακεδόνες-σημερινοί Δυτικομακεδόνες- είχαν καθοριστική συμμετοχή στην εκστρατεία του Μεγάλου Αλεξάνδρου, όπως ο ταξίαρχος Κοίνος ο Πολεμοκράτους, αρχηγός της Ελιμειώτιδος Φάλαγγος. Αυτόν τον ιστορικό και αρχαιολογικό πλούτο είμαστε διατεθειμένοι να παραχωρήσουμε σε ένα πολυεθνικό και θνησιγενές κατασκεύασμα του τιτοϊκού ολοκληρωτισμού;
2. Διαφωνώ με την παραχώρηση του όρου Άνω Μακεδονία, διότι και αυτό το όνομα όπως και κάθε άλλο σύνθετοι όνομα ενισχύει και νομιμοποιεί τον σκοπιανό αλυτρωτισμό. Υποτίθεται ότι κάνουμε τόσες συζητήσεις και τόσες διπλωματικές προσπάθειες για να ακυρώσουμε το εθνικιστικό ιδεολόγημα του μακεδονισμού που έχει ως όχημα το όνομα του κράτους. Η παραχώρηση του ονόματος Άνω Μακεδονία με την υπογραφή μας πλέον –εδώ είναι το κλειδί- θα τους δώσει το δικαίωμα να διακηρύσσουν διεθνώς ότι αυτοί είναι η Άνω Μακεδονία που θα έλθει να «ελευθερώσει» τα καταπιεσμένα αδέλφια στην Κάτω Μακεδονία, δηλαδή στην «Μακεδονία του Αιγαίου», όπως οι ίδιοι ονομάζουν την Βόρειο Ελλάδα. Κακά τα ψέμματα. Κάθε σύνθετη ονομασία ενθαρρύνει την σκοπιανή προπαγάνδα. Τουλάχιστον τώρα δεν έχουν την υπογραφή μας. Αν υπογράψουμε, όμως, νομιμοποιούμε αυτά που μας ενοχλούσαν και θα συνεχίσουν ακόμη πιο έντονα να μας ενοχλούν.
3. Η Ελλάς δεν πρέπει να παραχωρήσει το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία για λόγους εθνολογικούς. Έστω –υπόθεση εργασίας - ότι δέχονται να λέγονται διεθνώς και έναντι πάντων Άνω Μακεδονία. Αυτό θα είναι το όνομα του κράτους. Το έθνος όμως δεν θα λέγεται ανωμακεδονικό, θα λέγεται σκέτο «μακεδονικό» και μάλιστα με την συναίνεσή μας πλέον. Κανείς δεν μιλά για λαό Μεγαλοβρετανών ή για Μεγαλοβρετανούς υπηκόους . Όλοι τους λένε απλά Βρετανούς αν και η χώρα λέγεται Μεγάλη Βρετανία. Θα έχουμε από τη μία πλευρά ένα κράτος που θα διαφημίζεται διεθνώς και με ελληνική αποδοχή ως κράτος (Ανω) Μακεδόνων, και από την άλλη μία ελληνική γεωγραφική και διοικητική περιοχή που θα προσπαθεί να θυμίζει στους ξένους ότι λέγεται Μακεδονία, αλλά δεν θα πείθει σχεδόν κανένα. Παντού θα ακούεται η διεθνής ονομασία Άνω Μακεδονία και μετά από λίγα χρόνια θα εκπέσει ο αδύναμος όρος (Άνω) και θα παραμείνει ο ισχυρός (Μακεδονία). Εμείς δε οι πραγματικοί Μακεδόνες δεν αποκλείεται να υποχρεωθούμε να δηλώνουμε Κατωμακεδόνες για να μην ενοχλούμε το κρατίδιο που θα χρησιμοποιεί διεθνώς τον όρο Μακεδονία και μάλιστα –ό μή γένοιτο- με δική μας υπογραφή. Είμαστε έτοιμοι να μετονομάσουμε τα ιδρύματά μας σε Αεροδρόμιο Κάτω Μακεδονίας, Πανεπιστήμιο Κάτω Μακεδονίας, Μουσείο Κατωμακεδονικού Αγώνος κλπ; Μήπως και εγώ πρέπει να δηλώνω Κατωμακεδών για να συμφωνώ με την «πολιτική ορθότητα»; Εάν δεν θέλουμε κάτι τέτοιο τότε ας απορρίψουμε το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία για τα Σκόπια.
4. Εξάλλου πιστεύω ότι η διάθεσή μας να τους δώσουμε το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία αποτελεί λάθος διαπραγματευτικό. Τον Δεκέμβριο του 1991 και τον Ιούνιο του 1992 κερδίσαμε δύο αποφάσεις της Ευρ. Ενώσεως που υποδήλωναν ότι το νεογέννητο κράτος των Σκοπίων πρέπει να αναζητήσει όνομα χωρίς τον όρο Μακεδονία. Δυστυχώς μόνοι μας υποχωρήσαμε από αυτές τις αποφάσεις και δεν τις αξιοποιήσαμε. Τώρα δεχόμαστε την σύνθετη ονομασία, Τα Σκόπια βλέποντας ότι κάναμε ήδη ένα βήμα πίσω περιμένουν να κάνουμε άλλο ένα τέτοιο βήμα και να δεχθούμε την διπλή ονομασία που τους βολεύει. Δηλαδή ένα όνομα που θα χρησιμοποιεί μόνο η Ελλάδα και το όνομα «Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας» για κάθε άλλη χρήση. Γι΄αυτό η σκοπιανή ηγεσία φαίνεται σήμερα αδιάλλακτη. Διότι τους δώσαμε μηνύματα υποχωρητικότητος και περιμένουν την επόμενη ευγενική χειρονομία μας!
ΟΧΙ , λοιπόν, στην παραχώρηση του όρου Άνω Μακεδονία και σε οποιαδήποτε σύνθετη ονομασία.
1. Το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία, ως προτεινόμενο επίσημο όνομα του γειτονικού κρατιδίου, δεν μας συμφέρει από πλευράς ιστορικής –αρχαιολογικής. Είναι οδυνηρή παραχώρηση ιστορικών τίτλων που ανήκουν από την πρώιμη αρχαιότητα στην σημερινή ελληνική περιοχή της Δυτικής Μακεδονίας. Η κ. Γεωργία Καραμήτρου-Μεντεσίδη, Δρ Αρχαιολογίας και υπεύθυνη των ανασκαφών της Αιανής Κοζάνης, καταγράφει τις ιστορικές μαρτυρίες σε ένα πολύ τεκμηριωμένο άρθρο της στην εβδομαδιαία εφημερίδα ΚΟΖΑΝΗ (www.efkozani.gr) στίς 25-2-2008. Η εκλεκτή αρχαιολόγος μάς θυμίζει ότι οι Αρχαίοι Έλληνες ονόμαζαν Άνω Μακεδονία την περιοχή που αντιστοιχεί στους σημερινούς νομούς Φλωρίνης ( αρχαία Λυγκηστίς και μέρος της Πελαγονίας), Καστορίας ( αρχαία Ορεστίς), Κοζάνης (αρχαία Ελίμεια και Εορδαία) καί Γρεβενών (αρχαία Τυμφαία). Η Άνω Μακεδονία μνημονεύεται για πρώτη φορά στον Ηρόδοτο και συγκεκριμένα σε δύο χωρία, στο 7.134.4 και στο 8.137-139. Σχετικές αναφορές του όρου υπάρχουν και στον Θουκυδίδη και στον Στράβωνα. Οι Άνω Μακεδόνες-σημερινοί Δυτικομακεδόνες- είχαν καθοριστική συμμετοχή στην εκστρατεία του Μεγάλου Αλεξάνδρου, όπως ο ταξίαρχος Κοίνος ο Πολεμοκράτους, αρχηγός της Ελιμειώτιδος Φάλαγγος. Αυτόν τον ιστορικό και αρχαιολογικό πλούτο είμαστε διατεθειμένοι να παραχωρήσουμε σε ένα πολυεθνικό και θνησιγενές κατασκεύασμα του τιτοϊκού ολοκληρωτισμού;
2. Διαφωνώ με την παραχώρηση του όρου Άνω Μακεδονία, διότι και αυτό το όνομα όπως και κάθε άλλο σύνθετοι όνομα ενισχύει και νομιμοποιεί τον σκοπιανό αλυτρωτισμό. Υποτίθεται ότι κάνουμε τόσες συζητήσεις και τόσες διπλωματικές προσπάθειες για να ακυρώσουμε το εθνικιστικό ιδεολόγημα του μακεδονισμού που έχει ως όχημα το όνομα του κράτους. Η παραχώρηση του ονόματος Άνω Μακεδονία με την υπογραφή μας πλέον –εδώ είναι το κλειδί- θα τους δώσει το δικαίωμα να διακηρύσσουν διεθνώς ότι αυτοί είναι η Άνω Μακεδονία που θα έλθει να «ελευθερώσει» τα καταπιεσμένα αδέλφια στην Κάτω Μακεδονία, δηλαδή στην «Μακεδονία του Αιγαίου», όπως οι ίδιοι ονομάζουν την Βόρειο Ελλάδα. Κακά τα ψέμματα. Κάθε σύνθετη ονομασία ενθαρρύνει την σκοπιανή προπαγάνδα. Τουλάχιστον τώρα δεν έχουν την υπογραφή μας. Αν υπογράψουμε, όμως, νομιμοποιούμε αυτά που μας ενοχλούσαν και θα συνεχίσουν ακόμη πιο έντονα να μας ενοχλούν.
3. Η Ελλάς δεν πρέπει να παραχωρήσει το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία για λόγους εθνολογικούς. Έστω –υπόθεση εργασίας - ότι δέχονται να λέγονται διεθνώς και έναντι πάντων Άνω Μακεδονία. Αυτό θα είναι το όνομα του κράτους. Το έθνος όμως δεν θα λέγεται ανωμακεδονικό, θα λέγεται σκέτο «μακεδονικό» και μάλιστα με την συναίνεσή μας πλέον. Κανείς δεν μιλά για λαό Μεγαλοβρετανών ή για Μεγαλοβρετανούς υπηκόους . Όλοι τους λένε απλά Βρετανούς αν και η χώρα λέγεται Μεγάλη Βρετανία. Θα έχουμε από τη μία πλευρά ένα κράτος που θα διαφημίζεται διεθνώς και με ελληνική αποδοχή ως κράτος (Ανω) Μακεδόνων, και από την άλλη μία ελληνική γεωγραφική και διοικητική περιοχή που θα προσπαθεί να θυμίζει στους ξένους ότι λέγεται Μακεδονία, αλλά δεν θα πείθει σχεδόν κανένα. Παντού θα ακούεται η διεθνής ονομασία Άνω Μακεδονία και μετά από λίγα χρόνια θα εκπέσει ο αδύναμος όρος (Άνω) και θα παραμείνει ο ισχυρός (Μακεδονία). Εμείς δε οι πραγματικοί Μακεδόνες δεν αποκλείεται να υποχρεωθούμε να δηλώνουμε Κατωμακεδόνες για να μην ενοχλούμε το κρατίδιο που θα χρησιμοποιεί διεθνώς τον όρο Μακεδονία και μάλιστα –ό μή γένοιτο- με δική μας υπογραφή. Είμαστε έτοιμοι να μετονομάσουμε τα ιδρύματά μας σε Αεροδρόμιο Κάτω Μακεδονίας, Πανεπιστήμιο Κάτω Μακεδονίας, Μουσείο Κατωμακεδονικού Αγώνος κλπ; Μήπως και εγώ πρέπει να δηλώνω Κατωμακεδών για να συμφωνώ με την «πολιτική ορθότητα»; Εάν δεν θέλουμε κάτι τέτοιο τότε ας απορρίψουμε το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία για τα Σκόπια.
4. Εξάλλου πιστεύω ότι η διάθεσή μας να τους δώσουμε το όνομα Άνω Μακεδονία αποτελεί λάθος διαπραγματευτικό. Τον Δεκέμβριο του 1991 και τον Ιούνιο του 1992 κερδίσαμε δύο αποφάσεις της Ευρ. Ενώσεως που υποδήλωναν ότι το νεογέννητο κράτος των Σκοπίων πρέπει να αναζητήσει όνομα χωρίς τον όρο Μακεδονία. Δυστυχώς μόνοι μας υποχωρήσαμε από αυτές τις αποφάσεις και δεν τις αξιοποιήσαμε. Τώρα δεχόμαστε την σύνθετη ονομασία, Τα Σκόπια βλέποντας ότι κάναμε ήδη ένα βήμα πίσω περιμένουν να κάνουμε άλλο ένα τέτοιο βήμα και να δεχθούμε την διπλή ονομασία που τους βολεύει. Δηλαδή ένα όνομα που θα χρησιμοποιεί μόνο η Ελλάδα και το όνομα «Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας» για κάθε άλλη χρήση. Γι΄αυτό η σκοπιανή ηγεσία φαίνεται σήμερα αδιάλλακτη. Διότι τους δώσαμε μηνύματα υποχωρητικότητος και περιμένουν την επόμενη ευγενική χειρονομία μας!
ΟΧΙ , λοιπόν, στην παραχώρηση του όρου Άνω Μακεδονία και σε οποιαδήποτε σύνθετη ονομασία.
Τρίτη
Τι γίνεται με την ισότητα των δύο φύλων;
Οι διακρίσεις λόγω φύλου καλύπτονται από ιδιαίτερη νομοθεσία. Αυτό οφείλεται στο ότι η δράση κατά των διακρίσεων λόγω του φύλου έχει μακρά ιστορία σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο που ανάγεται στις αρχές της Ευρωπαϊκής Κοινότητας. Υπάρχει πληθώρα ευρωπαϊκής νομοθεσίας σχετικά με το θέμα αυτό και διατίθεται οικονομική ενίσχυση μέσω του κοινοτικού προγράμματος για την ισότητα των φύλων (2001-2005). Περισσότερες πληροφορίες σχετικά με το θέμα αυτό διατίθενται στη διεύθυνση:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/equ_opp/index_en.htm
Ποια θα είναι τα καθήκοντα των εργοδοτών όσον αφορά τα άτομα με αναπηρίες;
Οι εργοδότες θα έχουν καθήκον να προβαίνουν σε «εύλογες προσαρμογές» όσον αφορά τους υποψηφίους ή τους εργαζομένους με αναπηρίες. Ζητείται από τους εργοδότες να λάβουν τα ενδεδειγμένα μέτρα που θα επιτρέπουν σε άτομα με αναπηρίες την πρόσβαση στην απασχόληση και την κατάρτιση, εκτός εάν αυτό συνεπάγεται δυσανάλογη επιβάρυνση για τον εργοδότη. Οι «εύλογες προσαρμογές» μπορεί να περιλαμβάνουν π.χ. την πρόσβαση με αναπηρικό καροτσάκι, την προσαρμογή του ωραρίου εργασίας, την προσαρμογή του εξοπλισμού του γραφείου ή απλώς την ανακατανομή των καθηκόντων στα μέλη μιας ομάδας. Για να διαπιστωθεί η δυσανάλογη επιβάρυνση πρέπει να λαμβάνεται ιδίως υπόψη το οικονομικό και οποιοδήποτε άλλο κόστος επιφέρουν, το μέγεθος και οι οικονομικοί πόροι του οργανισμού και η δυνατότητα λήψης δημοσίας χρηματοδότησης ή άλλου είδους ενίσχυσης.
Εγγραφή σε:
Αναρτήσεις (Atom)