The Greek Ombudsman has presented its first annual report on the application and promotion of equal treatment for men and women. The report outlines the various types of complaints recorded by the Ombudsman in 2008 relating to discrimination in the area of employment. It also reveals that maternity and parenthood remain important causes of discrimination of women in the labour market. Several representative case examples are outlined below.
Role and mission of Ombudsman
The Greek Ombudsman (Συνήγορος του Πολίτη, StP) is a constitutionally established independent body, which started its operations in 1998 and provides its services to all citizens free of charge. The Ombudsman mediates in the context of Greek public administration. Its main competence is to examine statements in relation to the violation of citizens’ rights by public service bodies and to intervene for the resolution of disputes between citizens and public administration.
In 2008, the Gender Equality Unit (Ο Συνήγορος για την Ίση Μεταχείριση) was set up to examine accounts of violation by employers in the public and private sector of the principle of equal treatment for men and women. Monitoring implementation of this principle is a special competence conferred on the Ombudsman by Law 3488/2006, thereby transposing Council Directive 2002/73/EC 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 into Greek law.
The Ombudsman also participates in the European Network of Equality Bodies EQUINET, which groups together independent national gender equality bodies and operates under the aegis of the European Commission.
Main findings of 2008 progress report
At the beginning of 2009, the Ombudsman presented its first annual report (in Greek, 790Kb PDF) on the application and promotion of equal treatment for men and women in Greece.
Discrimination of working women
According to the Ombudsman’s progress report for 2008, of all the complaints submitted:
- 34.29% involve cases of indirect discrimination;
- 14.29% involve cases of direct discrimination;
- 15.71% involve cases of unfavourable treatment due to maternity leave;
- 12.85% involve cases of unfavourable treatment due to parental leave taken in order to bring up and care for a child;
- 8.57% involve cases of unfavourable treatment due to pregnancy;
- 5.71% involve cases of discrimination due to marital status;
- 4.29% involve cases of sexual harassment;
- 2.86% involve cases of unfavourable treatment due to gender;
- 1.43% involve cases of multiple discrimination.
It appears, therefore, that maternity and parenthood are important reasons for discrimination of women in the area of employment.
Case examples
The mediation cases outlined below are representative examples of cases handled by the Ombudsman in relation to discrimination in employment in 2008.
Maternity leave counts as period of employment
Two women applied for jobs with open-ended employment contracts at Olympic Airways S.A. They had worked with the company as seasonal employees since 1997 on fixed-term employment contracts. However, neither woman was among the successful applicants, since the period of time during which they were absent on pregnancy and maternity leave was not counted as time worked. The Ombudsman stated that the period during which maternity leave is taken constitutes a legitimate reason for suspension but not termination of an employment relationship. Therefore, maternity leave is considered to count as time of actual employment regarding all rights associated with length of service. In any case, maternity leave does not interrupt the continuity of an employment relationship.
Obligation to have completed military service when hired
A citizen was excluded from a recruitment procedure at a bank because he failed to submit in due course a certificate that he had completed his military service. Based on current legislation and case law, all male Greek nationals are obliged to serve a certain period of time in the military in peacetime. In the complaint to the Ombudsman, the citizen argued that the obligation to submit this certificate in order to take part in recruitment procedures constitutes unequal treatment against male applicants. However, the Ombudsman stated that the obligation for male citizens only to complete military service in peacetime does not constitute unequal treatment against men. In explanation of this view, the Ombudsman cited a decision by the Supreme Administrative Court (Συμβούλιο Επικρατείαζ) whereby the discrimination established by the law on military service with regard to the obligation to serve in the military ‘is justified due to the differences between the two sexes, which in principle allow them to be treated differently in respect of this issue in peacetime’.
Payment of additional tuition
In this case, the complainant was chosen by lot to attend a specialised post-graduate course at the Hellenic Open University (Ελληνικό Ανοιχτό Πανεπιστήμιο) and, for that purpose, paid the required amount of the tuition fee. However, due a high-risk pregnancy obliging her to remain in bed, she could not attend the course. Several months later, she asked to attend the course without repaying the tuition fee, but her request was turned down by the Hellenic Open University. The Ombudsman pointed out to the university that this behaviour constitutes unfavourable treatment due to pregnancy regarding access to vocational education courses and that this is forbidden as direct discrimination on grounds of gender.
Deprivation of special allowance for motherhood protection
A working mother submitted an application to the Labour Force Employment Organisation (Οργανισμός Απασχόλησης Εργατικού Δυναμικού, OAED) in order to receive the special six-month allowance for the protection of motherhood under Law 3655/2008 (GR0809019I). Her application was turned down on the ground that mothers working for non-profit organisations and associations do not fall under the provisions of the law. The Ombudsman commented that the above decision by OAED was illegal, since it was supported by an arbitrary interpretation of the provision regarding the allowance. The law includes employment with all types of organisations or undertakings and therefore also with non-profit bodies.
Dismissal of pregnant woman employed under a fixed-term contract
The Ombudsman cooperated with the Greek Labour Inspectorate (Σώμα Επιθεώρησης Εργασίας, SEPE) in a dismissal case of a pregnant woman by an employer running a family business. The dismissed woman was employed under a two-year fixed-term contract during which she became pregnant. A short time after she informed her employer of the pregnancy, the employer terminated the employment contract, arguing that the employee was not behaving in a polite manner to the shop’s customers. The Ombudsman pointed out that, in accordance with case law and the principle of terminating an employment contract as a last resort, if the employee did indeed exhibit the behaviour for which the employer reproached her, the employer should have issued a written warning to the employee before proceeding with her dismissal.
Sofia Lampousaki, Labour Institute of Greek General Confederation of Labour (INE/GSEE)