Vezi raport EN

ACTIVITY REPORT | 2020 28  Examples based on case-law on findings made by the NCCD Steering Board persons with disabilities shall not be excluded services to provide psycho-pedagogical assistance (1) and (2) of GO 137/2000 and sanctioned from the mainstream educational system on according to the student’s needs. the respondent with a fine in amount of disability grounds. The school did not provide RON 10,000. reasonable accommodation of its educational Thus, the NCCD Steering Board noted conditions and did not create specialist support that the act is discrimination, pursuant Decision 799/2020 to Art. 2 (1) and (4), to Art. 4 and to Art. 11 Direct discrimination Criterion „Residence”. the „residence” criterion limits the participation against all potential applicants who did not Access to employment. ofpersons who do not live in the proximity of apply for the job, discouraged by the residence the dental facility. criterion announced by the employer. The claimant, a dental practitioner, files and claim against a discriminatory job advertise- Further, after the admission of the three appli- Thus, the NCCD Steering Board noted that ment imposing a condition that the applicant’s cants, based on the file selection, the respond- the act was discriminatory, pursuant to residence should be as close as possible to the ent introduced another criterion based on the Art. 2 (1) and to Art. 6 (a) of GO 137/2000 employer’s headquarters. average grades obtained in the bachelor’s degree and sanctioned the respondent with a fine examination, therefore creating the condition in amount of RON 5,000. Having analysed the case, the NCCD Steering of objectivity in the selection of applicants, but Board noted the fact that the introduction of the act of discrimination had been committed Decision 738/2020 Direct discrimination Criterion „Age” and „Gender”. Equal The claimant, employed for 19 years by the re- the legal retirement age. The management re- opportunities in economic activities spondent, expressed her intention to continue fused, without any motivation for such decision. her activity for another year after having reached The respondent showed that the decision not to and in employment and profession. ACTIVITY REPORT | 2020 29  Examples based on case-law on findings made by the NCCD Steering Board approve the application to extend the employ- treatment in terms of discrimination related to 2 (1) and to Art. 7 (a) of GO 137/2000 and ment had been made by the manager, and the the period of extended employment for women, sanctioned the respondent with a fine in resolution had been made pursuant to factual which discrimination is rooted in the different amount of RON 1,000. circumstances and to the specific legislation retirement age for men and women. applicable. Decision 174/2020 The NCCD Steering Board noted that the The NCCD Steering Board notes a differentiated act was discriminatory, pursuant to Art. Direct discrimination Criterion: „Disability”. Equal the failure to ensure access of persons be published on their webpage for 3 months and opportunities in economic activities with locomotor disabilities to the swim- recommended that the swimming pool should ming pool is discrimination pursuant to be accommodated within 6 months. and in employment and profession. Art. 2 (1) corroborated to Art. 10 (f) of GO The claimant claims that persons with disabilities no. 137/2000, and to Art. 21, Art. 62 and At the same time, the NCCD Steering Board are not enabled access to the swimming pool. Art. 63 of Law no. 448/2006 and to Art. 9, applied the sanction of warning against the Art. 19 and Art. 30 of the Convention on manager of the institution and recommended The NCCD Steering Board notes that the swim- the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, that the rights of persons with disabilities should ming pool is located on the upper floor of the because it created a difference on the be respected in the future in the exercise of Didactic Swimming Pool and the access of per- grounds of „disability”, which had the professional duties. sons with locomotor disabilities is only possible effect of limiting equal exercise of the on the ground floor. The inspection performed right of access to services. Decision 263/2020 by AJPIS-Tulcea found several deficiencies, and requested remedial actions, deadlines, personnel The NCCD Steering Board sanctioned the re- in charge and implementation monitoring. spondent with a fine in amount of RON 2,000. At the same time, the NCCD Steering Board Thus, the NCCD Steering Board found that ordered that the summary of the decision should ACTIVITY REPORT | 2020 30  Examples based on case-law on findings made by the NCCD Steering Board Direct discrimination Personal dignity. Statements. the Nazi ideology. Having regard to the nature created a difference on the grounds of of the case, the NCCD Steering Board analysed being part of the German community A series of articles published by the newspaper the boundaries between freedom of speech and and it had the goal and the effect of the „Justițiarul” and by the webpage www.justitiarul. the right to dignity. limitation of equal exercise of the right ro compare the Democratic Forum of Germans to dignity. in Romania (F.D.G.R.), led by Klaus Iohannis, The NCCD Steering Board found that the to a Nazi organisation, and there were countless differentiation created by the respondent Thus, the NCCD Steering Board sanctioned attacks in the media, which were covered jointly is related to the ethnic background, more the respondent with a fine in amount of by other journalists and TV channels. specifically the ethnicity of F.D.G.R. mem- RON 3,000. bers, therefore the act of the respondent The NCCD Steering Board noted that the respond- to post and keep those texts posted is Decision 479/2020 ent published a series of articles which promoted discrimination pursuant to Art. 2 (1) and the idea that F.D.G.R. would be a continuator of to Art. 15 of GO no. 137/2000, because it Direct discrimination Criterion „Religion”. The NCCD Steering Board rejected the lack The NCCD Steering Board noted that the change Personal dignity. of passive legal standing of Google Bucharest of the Cathedral name in the application tag because the opinion issued by the National produces offensive effects against an entire NCCD acted on its own motion on the replacement Authority for Management and Regulation in community, more specifically the community of the name of the People’s Salvation Cathedral Communications indicates that the company of Orthodox Christians, having regard to the in Google Maps with the name „People’s Stupor in Romania is a branch of Google Ireland fact that the application produces effects at na- Cathedral”, appreciating that the tag change is a Limited, which makes available Google tional/European/international level, as it can breach of the dignity of the Christian Orthodox services in EEA (European Economic Area) be accessed anywhere, and the general public Community in Romania. and Switzerland. cannot distinguish between Google Ireland ACTIVITY REPORT | 2020 31  Examples based on case-law on findings made by the NCCD Steering Board Limited or Google Bucharest S.R.L., seen in the scope of Art. 2 (1) and (4), and Art. 15 of GO on the Google webpage in Romanian a public perception as Google. 137/2000 and sanctioned the respondent summary of the decision. with a fine in amount of RON 10,000 and Thus, the NCCD Steering Board noted that the obligation to publish in the media and Decision 517/2020 the act subject to analysis fall under the Direct discrimination Criterion: „Disability” – advanced group but, after his mother reported that children. However, the practice showed that the ADHD. Field: Education he suffered from an Autism spectrum disorder, options to integrate and include children with implicitly from attention deficit, the respondent deficiencies in the mainstream education provides The complaint targets the rejection behaviour decided not to accept the child, and justified that multiple benefits for equal opportunities. against a child diagnosed with an Autism spectrum the student needs „one to one” classes. disorder who participated in English classes, but Thus, the NCCD Steering Board noted that the coordinating teacher no longer wanted to deliver The NCCD Steering Board indicated that persons the act is discrimination, pursuant to Art. such services because the child had an attention with disabilities had been educated for a long period 2 (4) and (4), to Art. 4 and corroborated to deficit, and the teacher considered that such classes of time in segregated facilities, as special education, Art. 11 (1) of GO 137/2000 and sanctioned are not adequate for the child. separated from the mainstream education. There the respondent with a fine in amount of was this conviction that only special schools can RON 3,000. The NCCD Steering Board noted that the student provide appropriate conditions, both in terms of was accepted to the class and included in an teacher training and of meeting the needs of these Decision 565/2020 Direct discrimination Criterion: „Age”. Employment NCCD is notified on an act of discrimination use in the selection and recruitment processes, and profession committed by a limitation of the right to access of methods to grant higher scores to applicants the position of air traffic controller, due to the younger than 30 years old. Thus, the final scores ACTIVITY REPORT | 2020 32  Examples based on case-law on findings made by the NCCD Steering Board of applicants younger than 30 are increased by based on the criterion of applicant’s age. Thus, The NCCD Steering Board noted that the adding 0.67% for each year between the age of the scoring method against the „age” criterion is act was discriminatory, pursuant to Art. 18 to 30, while the scores of all other applicants a method to provide higher scores for applicants 2 (1) and to Art. 6 of GO 137/2000 and are lowered by deducting 0.67%, for each year younger than 30 years old. The NCCD Steering sanctioned the respondent with a fine in after the age of 30 years old. Board noted that this condition is not ground- amount of RON 11,000. ed, is not a genuine and relevant professional The NCCD Steering Board noted that the discrim- requirement, and the goal is not legitimate. Decision 597/2020 ination which caused the different treatment was Direct discrimination Criterion: „Disability”. Access locomotor disabilities is discrimination, because Art. 2 (1) corroborated to Art. 10 (g) of GO to public services denied. it creates a difference on the grounds of disability, 137/2000 and sanctioned the respondent with the effect of limiting equal exercise of the right with a fine in amount of RON 10,000. The The claimant and her underage daughter with to benefit from the services provided by transport NCCD Steering Board also ordered the respondent locomotor disability, a wheelchair user, were hu- companies and of other rights of persons with to publish a summary of the decision in a local daily miliated by a taxi driver, who refused to take the locomotor disabilities provided by the national newspaper and recommended the respondent to order due to the daughter’s disability. and European legislation. make available at least one vehicle accommodated for the needs of persons with locomotor disabilities. The NCCD Steering Board noted that the refusal The NCCD Steering Board noted that the of taxi drivers/companies to transport person with act is discrimination, pursuant to Decision 598/2020 Direct discrimination Criteria: „Motherhood” and „Gender” The claimant, an attorney-at-law which provided agreement before the 2-year duration lapsed, Employment and profession. services for the bank – the respondent – claims after being informed on her pregnancy. that the respondent terminated her service ACTIVITY REPORT | 2020 33  Examples based on case-law on findings made by the NCCD Steering Board The NCCD Steering Board notes that although knowledge, should have been aware of the legal a), Art. 9 (1, b), Art. 10 (1) and (2) of Law the company had organisational changes, duties deriving from their position, to safeguard 202/2002 and sanctioned the respondent equal opportunities and non-discrimination. with a fine in amount of RON 10,000, the respondent concluded a service agreement appreciated as effective, dissuasive and with another (male) attorney-at-law. Thus, the NCCD Steering Board noted proportionate to the social danger. that the act is discrimination, pursuant The NCCD Steering Board noted that the respond- to Art. 2 (1) and to Art. 7(a) and (g) of GO Decision 622/2020 ent, as beneficiary and having specialist legal 202/2002 corroborated with Art. 7 (1, Direct discrimination Criterion „Religion”. Access and from the restrictions provided by military this practice appears to be neutral, it actually to public services. ordinances although, a week before, other rec- touches upon a right, more specifically the right ognised religious denominations had celebrated to facilitate liturgic pract