Within the framework of the European Community Action Programme to Combat Discrimination 2005/2006 EBU organised a Capacity Building Seminar on Non-discrimination and Equal Opportunities for All which was held in Tirrenia 1st and 2nd April 2006.
1. The Council
Directive 2000/78/EC Establishing a General Framework for Equal Treatment in Employment and Occupation.
2. Communication on theSituation of Disabled People in the Enlarged European Union : the European Action Plan 2006-2007.
3. Communication on Non-discrimination and Equal Opportunities for All.
4. Communication on
a Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and the Council on the European Year of Equal Opportunities for All.
- providing information on a selected number of key issues relating to the
non-discrimination strategy of the European Union;
- carrying out an in-depth analysis of the implementation of these issues and
discussing proposals for action;
- building up participants’ capacities for understanding and analysing major
issues of European policies and explaining them back home to their national
target audiences.
The programme had been prepared by Dr Rodolfo Cattani, Chair of the EBU
Commission for Liaising with the European Union. Participants had received and
studied a wide range of technical documents relating to the issues.
DR CATTANI summarized the Directive on Equal Treatment in Employment and
provided an analysis of its key issues. The main objective of the Directive is
to prohibit discrimination relating to access to work on the grounds of
disability as well as on other grounds. It defines and specifies four types of
discrimination which are prohibited a) direct discrimination b) indirect
discrimination c) harassment and d) instruction to discriminate. Each of the
types was illustrated by a number of examples. Other aspects on which DR CATTANI
commented included the enforcement procedure, obligations of the Member States
and the important concepts of “positive action” and “reasonable accommodation”.
An extensive debate ensued which for a good part revolved about a useful
definition of disability and the concepts “reasonable accommodation” and
“positive action” in which participants expressed the following views:
Defining Disability
While it was noted with some regret that a definition was absent in the
Directive, the majority of the participants were concerned about the EDF
approach to establish a broad definition built exclusively on the basis of a
social model. The social model sees disability predominantly as a social
construct. It acknowledges the discriminatory barriers in society and demands
that society must be modified to include and accommodate the needs of all
persons, including people with disabilities. The social model has introduced a
new way of thinking about disability which is set off sharply against the
medical model of disability and its view of the disabled person as the problem.
Within this frame of reference disabled people are to be adapted to fit into the
world as it is. If this is not possible, then they are shut away in some
specialised institution or isolated at home, where only our most basic needs are
met.
LORD COLIN LOW, President of the European Blind Union, in his assessment of the
medical and social models, felt that disability was not purely a medical issue.
On the other hand he warned that the advocates of a radical social model were
going too far when they said that disability only consisted of barriers that
were erected exclusively by society. Blindness was a severe disadvantage in
itself. Thus it was certainly necessary to take some aspects of the condition
into account.
MR. JOHN HEILBRUNN, Member of the Commission for Liaising with the EU, picking
up this argument commented on the situation of disabled people in Denmark.
Authorities in Denmark were saying that blind people are not disabled because
they were able to move around independently and safely. Hence they were not
entitled to mobility-related benefits. Mr. Heilbrunn warned that the social
model involved great dangers when taken to extreme limits. He suggested to
develop a more reasonable model which could be generated by mixing both
antagonistic approaches.
MR. BRANISLAV MAMOJKA, Second Vice-Chair in the Cabinet of the EBU Commission
for Liaising thought that other grounds of discrimination such as sex and race
comfortably fit in a social definition of disability. It was necessary, however,
that at least some of the medical criteria were retained.
Reasonable Accommodation and Positive Action
The concept refers to the measures employers are required take to remove
barriers, for instance by adapting the workplace, providing assistive equipment
the disabled worker needs to perform his work, by introducing flexible working
schedules or providing training. However, such measures are not absolute in that
they must not place a disproportionate burden on the employer.
In the ensuing discussion participants analysed the concepts in their
relationship to the rights based approach. The general view was that “reasonable
accommodation” was about entitlements of the individual whereas a rights based
approach was linked to the rights of groups of persons. EBU ought to put its
strength in the rights based approach. EDF should be supported in their view
that “reasonable accommodation” must be included in the transposition of the
directive. Failure to provide “reasonable accommodation” should be considered as
discrimination and should be named and shamed as such. In this context the
importance of effective sanctions was highlighted. The absence of effective
sanctions weakened legislation.
Similarly, participants agreed on finding that “positive measures” had to be an
integral part of the transposition of the directive in EU Member States.
Legislation was not enough but needed to be supported by positive measures such
as the purchase of equipment making the work place accessible and others. There
was a general view that both concepts, i.e. “reasonable accommodation” and
“positive action” referred to employers’ obligations while such limitation was
wrong; it should also be a responsibility of governments. Member States which
did not include “reasonable accommodation” and “positive measures” in the
transposition of the Employment Directive should be taken to the court.
MR CATTANI summarized the main issues of the Communication on the Situation
of Disabled People in the Enlarged European Union. He stressed that the Action
Plan rested on three pillars: a) EU antidiscrimination legislation, b) the
elimination of barriers to the environment and c) mainstreaming disability
issues in Community policies. The Action Plan identifies a number of objectives
for the period 2006 to 2007, such as raising employment and activity rates of
disabled people and promoting the accessibility of goods and services.
Participants welcomed the fact that the focus was on the active inclusion of
disabled people. They agreed on finding that the EU Member States should take
full account of the EU Action Plan. They also identified an important role for
national NGOs in monitoring the implementation of national action plans.
Analysing further details of the EU Action Plan it was also noted with
appreciation that the EU obviously was willing to reinforce its efforts to bring
disabled people back into labour. Some few months before when the EU Commission
had announced its plan to restart the Lisbon Agenda concerns had been voiced by
the disability movement that the needs of disabled people might be forgotten.
Participants also considered and assessed the report on the situation of
disabled people contained in the Communication. They were concerned to learn
that not much improvement had been achieved over the last few years. Especially
the gap between employment rates of disabled people and non-disabled people was
still considerable and continued to merit attention. The European Year of People
with Disabilities 2003 had helped to raise awareness of the needs of disabled
people, but had not done much to change the situation.
DR. CATTANI summarized the main issues of the Communication. He stressed that
the document analysed the political context of non discrimination, presented the
results of a consultation regarding the Green Paper on Equality and Non-
Discrimination for All in the EU and develops a strategy for taking the issue of
non- discrimination forward. A central part of this strategy was to ensure
effective legal protection against discrimination in the EU and to reinforce
this by positive action.
The Communication had to be seen within the context of human rights. At EU and
international level non-discrimination was increasingly considered as a human
right. The EU had been very active over the last few years to establish a legal
framework to combat discrimination. Important elements of this framework were
the legislation covering gender equality, equal opportunity in employment, and
race discrimination.
In the debate which ensued participants agreed that non-discrimination in
employment was vital. However, there were other important issues such as access
to seamless transport that were not covered by the existing directives. For this
reason disabled people need to have a disability specific directive. In
reviewing the outcome of the non-discrimination legislation of the EU
participants felt that the directives did not have the impact on the everyday
lives of disabled people that had been expected or hoped for. Unemployment of
people with disabilities was still soaring; racial discrimination had become
even worse in some countries than before the directive had been issued.
In this connection DR. CATTANI reported that the transposition of the Employment
Directive had even increased the uncertainty for disabled workers in Italy by
restricting guaranteed employment to short-term labour contracts. The employment
directive had not solved the problems of disabled people.
Mr. TONY ASTON was concerned that there was little activity by the EU to address
the needs of older people with disabilities. The great majority of them were
over 65. They are the people that EBU represent. EBU was reactive, it should
become proactive, thinking ahead and devising a strategy for elderly people with
visual impairment. Commenting on the EU Green Book on Demographic Change Tony
Aston warned that a time bomb was ticking. In future there would be more people
in retirement than employed. This would have a significant impact on the social
networks; more people would claim benefits. From an economic perspective the
consequences were disastrous. The elderly might not get the services they need.
Health would also be suffering as people would need more care from the state
which would cost a lot of money. Tony Aston said that a down spiralling had been
set off and EBU had to be very much aware of the impact of these processes. The
EU representatives were aware of it, though this was not reflected in the
strategy. EBU should raise this issue with the EU and be clearer about their
strategy.
JOHN HEILBRUNN thought that employment was an issue important for all blind
organisations to consider. So it was no wonder that a lot of work was being
focused on creating jobs and income for people with disabilities. However, the
social needs
of elderly people with disabilities should also be addressed. In addition there
were other issues such as mobility and transport which were important for
elderly people too.
DR CATTANI stated that those blind people who became blind in old age were the
most vulnerable members of society. They were those who were farest off from the
associations. The blind organisations had to take care of them as well. However,
it was very difficult to reach them. They were dependent on their families.
Often the family did not want them to get involved in the activities maintained
by the associations. UCI was already moving into the direction suggested by Tony
Aston and was making considerable efforts to address the special needs of this
vulnerable group.
DR CATTANI presented a paper by EDF which provided some background
information on the European Year, its objectives and the co-funding for events,
campaigns and research. The European Year and the 10th anniversary of Art 13 of
the Amsterdam Treaty coincide. The combination of these two events might be
favourable in the view of EDF to undertake a fresh attempt to reintroduce the
issue of a specific disability directive and to strengthen the rights based
approach in disability policies.
In the debate which ensued there was agreement that EBU should become involved
in the activities of the European Year 2007 and use it as a good opportunity to
raise the profile of EBU and make blind and partially sighted people become
visible.
Participants regretted that attention towards the issue of disability at EU
level seemed to become weaker. Also, while the spirit of the Communication from
the Commission was much advanced, Member States often blocked initiatives and
watered down legislation which could make a real difference. However, they
appreciated the efforts undertaken by the EU over the last few years to tackle
the issue of discrimination of people with disabilities.
This seminar took a close look at the issue of Non-Discrimination and Equal
Opportunities for All. Participants studied, discussed and assessed the EU
strategy to take this matter forward and arrived at the following conclusions:
1. The existing definition of disability is insufficient and one-sided in that
it focuses exclusively on the social model of disability. Disability clearly has
medical aspects which need to be taken into account when defining disability.
EBU should ask EDF to reconsider its definition and use a more balanced approach
for its future work.
2. EBU welcomes and supports the view held by EDF that “reasonable
accommodation” must be included in the transposition of the Directive.
3. EBU is recommended to take a close look at the EU Employment Strategy and its
potentials for bringing blind and partially sighted people back into labour.
4. EBU is recommended to raise the issue of the impact of the demographic
changes on the lives of blind and partially sighted people and devise a clear
strategy which responds actively to the challenges related to these processes.
5. EBU is recommended to use the European Year 2007 to raise its profile and
visibility of blind and partially sighted people at the European level.
Berlin, 6 September 2006
Hans Kaltwasser
Secretary of the Cabinet of the EBU Liaising Commission