61 / 121
59
Cases in the area of employment
1. sending a letter in triplicate to IMPEFE managers;
2. sending the FSG enterprise mediator to speak with the director of the office following the meeting
of the Local Employment Pact held on 2 May 2013. At that meeting the enterprise mediator pro-
posed inclusion of the Roma community as a beneficiary group in the aid to foster entrepreneurial
activity and permanent contracts (aid types I and III) of the 9th Call already published for 2013 and in
successive calls. Out interlocutors were open to taking the Roma community into consideration in
future calls.
For the ongoing call, the person responsible promised to study the possibility of amending it but warned that
he would come up against operational difficulties. Since the “Board” would have to approve any amendment, the
earliest a change could be put through would be September which would not leave much time to be effective.
In the end, the Roma community was not considered in the 2013 Call but, to our surprise, was not considered in
the 2014 Call either. We have therefore concluded that their failure to include the Roma community this year is
intentional.
15.
Sabadell.
Employment.
Direct discrimination.
We spoke on the phone to a restaurant manager about setting
up a practical learning internship for kitchen help but he was not very keen on the idea after having discovered
that the Acceder programme worked with Roma.
He claimed that the cook told him that he “didn’t want any Gypsies in his kitchen”.
We told him about our mission and the stereotypes and prejudices that are holding back the Roma community.
It so happens that in this case the internship was for a young man from North Africa and since the restaurant
manager had had positive experiences in the past with North Africans, the collaboration has gone forward.
16.
Don Benito.
Employment.
Direct discrimination.
The FSG enterprise mediator at the Don Benito office told
us that when he signed the agreement for the warehouse worker course, the school we engaged to teach the
course initially agreed that the practical internship part would be at a company close to Don Benito. However,
during the course the school director informed us that the company had pulled out of the agreement and there-
fore our students would not be allowed to do their practical training on their premises.
We believe that this is a case of direct discrimination insofar as they decided to pull out because the future
interns were Roma.
17.
Don Benito.
Employment.
Direct discrimination.
An FSG enterprise mediator for the Acceder employment
programme in Don Benito told us of her visit to the practical forklift operator training forming part of the ware-
house worker course. She asked if some of the classes could be conducted inside the warehouse and the girl in
the office said no because she didn’t want the students to see what was in the warehouse and she only allowed
photographs to be taken of a non-Roma student operating the forklift in the warehouse. The enterprise mediator
was insulted by the way she was treated.
She only wanted to report the case but didn’t want to take any further action since the practical training was
going well and she didn’t want the students to suffer from possible reprisals.
This is a clear case of racial-ethnic discrimination based on negative prejudices and stereotypes against these
Roma students doing their practical training.
18.
Mérida.
Employment.
Direct discrimination.
The FSG labour counsellor saw an Internet advert for an insurance
salesperson so she called for further information. The person who placed the advert was looking for five candi-
dates to put together a team as he was being promoted to coordinator in two weeks time.