Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Latvia (Ratification: 1992)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (FTUCL) communicated with the Government’s reports.

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Prohibited grounds of discrimination. Legislation. The Committee notes from the Government’s website that article 2 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons – Economic Operators of 2012 was amended in 2021 to introduce article 2(2) expanding the prohibition on discrimination to also include “access to economic activity” including starting, expanding or equipping an economic activity or starting or expanding any other type of activity. It notes with regret that the Government did not seize this opportunity to prohibit discrimination based on colour and social origin with respect to self-employment, as requested by the Committee for several years. The Committee notes the Government’s repeated indication, in its report, that it has no plan to extend the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination, as the legal framework includes the ground of colour. The Committee notes the Government indications that the Ombudsman’s Office has not received any applications regarding discrimination against self-employed persons. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to provide information on (i) any measures taken to ensure the protection of self-employed workers against discrimination on the grounds of colour and social origin, both in law and practice; and (ii) the application of section 2(1) of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons-Economic Operators in practice, including any violations detected or dealt with by the labour inspectorate or other competent authorities.

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Discrimination based on sex. Sexual harassment. The Committee notes the finding of the Central Statistical Bureau’s “Survey on Gender-Based Violence” conducted in 2021, that 11 per cent of women (5 per cent of men) disclosed having encountered some form of sexual harassment at work. According to the Survey, the most common experience of sexual violence in the workplace has been among women aged 18-29, where 15.5 per cent experienced sexual harassment over the course of their entire working life. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government that during the reporting period the State Labour Inspectorate and the Ombudsman’s Office had not received any applications or complaints on sexual harassment in the workplace. The Committee notes the observation in the 2022 European Commission country report on gender equality, that the major problem on the issue of sexual harassment relates to the fact that sexual harassment cases are very rare, which testifies that this is still a latent problem. The victims of sexual harassment are unable or unwilling to bring their case before the justice system (Country report on gender equality, Latvia, 2022, page 18). The Committee again notes with regret that the Government did not provide information on the measures taken to raise awareness specifically about sexual harassment and the complaints mechanisms available. In light of the above, the Committee asks the Government: (i) to examine whether the applicable substantive and procedural provisions allow claims of discrimination to be brought successfully in practice, and to keep it informed of any development in this regard; (ii) to step up its efforts at raising awareness of workers, employers, and their respective organizations about sexual harassment at work and the legal procedures available; and (iii) to continue providing information on the number of complaints and cases of sexual harassment detected or dealt with by the labour inspectorate, the courts or any other competent authorities, as well as the penalties imposed and compensation awarded.

Article 2. Equality of opportunity and treatment of women and men. The Committee notes the measures adopted by the Government to reduce vertical and horizontal gender segregation in the labour market and combat gender stereotypes, including by improving women’s participation in non-traditional fields of study and professions, and adopting measures to achieve better conciliation between work and family responsibilities. It takes note for example: (1) the actions undertaken by the State Education Development Agency to combat stereotypes about occupations and sectors suitable for women and men, particularly through gender-responsive career days attended by 500,000 students so far; (2) the approval of the Plan for Promotion of Equal Rights and Opportunities for Women and Men for 2021–23 (the new plan for 2024–27 is in the process of development); (3) the 2022 amendments to the Labour Law to transpose the legal provisions of the European Union Directive (EU) 2019/1158 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on work-life balance for parents and carers; (4) the 95 awareness-raising measures implemented between 2020 and 2022 including in cooperation of the Employers' Confederation and the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (FTUCL) to promote better work-life balance, equal share of care responsibilities between men and women, and flexible work organization all with the goal of promoting equal opportunities for women and men in the labour market; and (5) the FTUCL 2020 study on the practical application of legal provisions for balancing work and private life, the availability of work-life balance opportunities, and existing practice in collective agreements, and the resulting roadmap for trade union leaders at company level to ensure the implementation of practical work-life balance measures. The Committee notes the results of a 2022 survey of the Ministry of Welfare which showed the most frequently mentioned obstacles to use of parental leave at the workplace include problems with substitutability at work, the employer’s negative attitude, the lack of a supportive internal culture at the workplace, and fear of losing one’s job; and that about one-fifth of the respondents encountered prejudices or stereotypes in person or amongst their immediate social circle, mainly related to the involvement of men in childcare. The Committee notes from the Annex number 3 to the Governments report, the steady and sometimes increasing occupational segregation of women in sectors such as, education (82 per cent share of employment), human health and social work activities (86 per cent share), other service activities (82 per cent share), and accommodation and food service activities (72 per cent share). The Committee asks the Government to continue: (i) to strengthen its efforts to address vertical and horizontal gender segregation in the labour market and gender stereotypes, including by improving women’s participation in non-traditional fields of study and professions, and through addressing negative gender roles and stereotypes surrounding the roles and aspirations of men and women in the society in general; and (ii) to provide statistical information on the distribution of men and women, disaggregated by economic sector and occupation, both in the public and private sectors.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. Roma. The Committing notes from the Governments report, the data of the State Employment Agency (SEA) indicating that the number of unemployed Roma decreased at the end of 2022 compared to the previous year (from 608 to 524 persons). It further notes that in 2022, 321 unemployed Roma were recipients of SEA support measures; most often in paid temporary public works (212), subsidized workplaces (33), non-formal education (including the Latvian language) training, measures to increase competitiveness, and summer employment for students. In 2022, 179 unemployed Roma people found work, which is slightly more than in the previous year (173), but still less than at the pre-pandemic level (247 in 2019). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that at the end of 2022, 473 unemployed Roma (90 per cent of all unemployed Roma) had a low level of education (primary education or education lower than basic education). In this regard, it notes that at the end of 2022, the SEA initiated a new training programme for the unemployed with basic education entitled “Support for persons with low reading and writing skills”. It notes that 14 educational institutions were approved for the implementation of the measure, but that the programme is delayed due to low participation. The Committee notes the various projects undertaken by the State Education Development Agency to improve the professional competence and competitiveness of adults, including Roma men and women and to expand learning opportunities to employed persons with a low level of education. The Committee welcomes the detailed information and statistics about the participation in active labour market policy measures and regarding the “Latvian Roma Platform” implemented by the Ministry of Culture from 2016–25 as a mechanism for coordination and implementation of the Plan for the Implementation of Measures of the Roma Strategic Framework for 2022–23. It notes that development of the new 2024–27 Plan is underway. The Committee notes that in 2021, the Cabinet of Ministers approved the Education Development Guidelines 2021–27 which includes such measures as to provide a sufficient number of teachers and support staff for children in need due to different circumstances; and to support and involve Roma pupils in education. The Committee notes that from 2017–23 the State Education Quality Service has implemented the European Social Fund project “Support to Reduce Early School Leaving” involving 599 education institutions and 37 state vocational education institutions and that within the project, an individual support plan is created for each student (43,334 students so far) exposed to the risk of early school leaving, including many Roma children. Support includes, inter alia, compensation for public transportation, meals, accommodation, and individual learning items. The Committee notes the various programmes for youth and adults aimed promoting inclusion and reducing discrimination including for Roma people, such as the National Youth Policy Program, Project No. 9.1.4.4./16/I/001 “Promoting Diversity”, and the “Motivation program for people who have faced obstacles getting involved in employment or education because of their gender, nationality or disability”. The Committee notes that a study from the Ombudsman’s Office, “Situation of Roma in Latvia” (2021/2022) was undertaken which included recommendations. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the results of all the measures taken to ensure Roma people can access equal treatment and opportunity in education, training and employment, in the framework of the National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy Implementation Plan for 2022–23, the Plan for the Implementation of Measures of the Roma Strategic Framework for 2022–23 and the National Youth Policy Program and the Motivation program for people who have faced obstacles getting involved in employment or education. It asks the government to provide information on the findings, recommendations and measures adopted related to the study of the Ombudsman, “Situation of Roma in Latvia” (2021/2022); and the measures to combat stereotypes and stigma against Roma in the general population. Finally, it also asks the Government to provide statistical data on the participation of Roma in education, professional and vocational training courses, as well as in the labour market.

General observation on discrimination based on race, colour and national extraction adopted in 2018. The Committee notes the numerous measures taken by the Government to combat discrimination based on national extraction, such as for example the inclusive participation foreseen in the Guidelines for the Development of a Cohesive and Active Civil Society 2021–27 which provides for engagement of all national minorities; the planned educational and awareness-raising measures for employers on the principles of diversity and equal opportunities in practice; that the development of an e-learning programme in foreseen, which will include at least six modules covering the following grounds for non-discrimination: gender, age, disability, ethnicity, religion and is aimed at policy planning and implementing specialists; the independent assessment of the implementation of the Action Plan for the Reduction of Racism and Anti-Semitism for 2023; and the development of the next Action Plan for the Reduction of Racism and Anti-Semitism (2024–27). It further notes that, in 2021, the Ministry of Culture updated the Statutes of both the Advisory Committee of Ethnic Minority Organization Representatives, and the Advisory Council for the Promotion of Participation of Roma; both advisory bodies are involved in decision-making process and policy planning process. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the measures undertaken to reduce discriminatory attitudes and stereotypes based on the race, colour or national extraction of men and women workers and to facilitate their participation in education, vocational training programmes and access to a wider range of employment opportunities. It requests the Government to provide information on the findings of the independent assessment of the implementation of the Action Plan for the Reduction of Racism and Anti-Semitism for 2023. The Committee also asks the Government to provide statistical data on the participation of ethnic and racial minorities in education, professional and vocational training courses, as well as in the labour market.

Enforcement. The Committee notes the statistical information provided in the Governments report, in particular that the State Labour Inspectorate (SLI) received 73 applications in 2022 related to discrimination provisions in the Labour Code, and that the SLI imposed administrative penalties in 10 cases, mostly related to unequal pay or benefits. It notes that the Ombudsman’s Office received 19 applications of alleged violations of equal treatment in employment in 2022. The Committees notes that no applications were brought on the grounds of ethnic or national origin, race, language, property status, or sexual orientation during the 2020–22 reporting period, nor on sexual harassment in the workplace or equal pay. The Committee notes the awareness-raising and training measures undertaken by the SLI and Ombudsman during the reporting period. For example, the Government indicates that: (1) the SLI organizes, twice a year, internal training on compliance with Labour Law issues related to discrimination and the application of equal rights principles for all newly hired employees; (2) the Ombudsman provided an opinion to the Latvian Association of Young Scientists regarding possible discrimination of women-scientists on the grounds of pregnancy, limiting their possibilities to take pregnancy related leave; (3) the Ombudsman recommended to the Ministry of Health to develop amendments to the regulations for the recertification of medical practitioners in order to eliminate indirect discrimination based on gender; and (4) a number of trainings and seminars were attended by judges from 2020–23 on EU anti-discrimination law and EU gender equality law. The Committee welcomes the information provided on the work of the SLI and Ombudsman. However, it notes the low number of claims of discrimination brought to these institutions. The Committee recalls where no cases or complaints, or very few, are being lodged, this is likely to indicate a lack of an appropriate legal framework, lack of awareness of rights, lack of confidence in or absence of practical access to procedures, or fear of reprisals (see 2023 General Survey “Achieving Gender Equality at Work”, paragraph 870). In that respect, the Committee notes the Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that the Ombudsman’s Office lacks sufficient resources to fully exercise its mandate, including with regard to investigating and resolving complaints of discrimination (E/C.12/LVA/CO/2, 30 March 2021, paragraph 6). It further notes the observation of the EU Country Report on Non-Discrimination, Latvia (2022), that a three-month time limit in filing discrimination complaints before the courts in employment cases may be a significant barrier for victims of discrimination and that there continues to be no national coordination on non-discrimination issues. The EU Country report also observed that since 2004, case law has remained limited concerning discrimination on grounds of race/ethnic origin (zero cases), disability (3 cases), age (3 cases), religion (zero cases), and sexual orientation (zero cases); that the average amount of moral compensation awarded in known discrimination cases is EUR 1 428, which cannot be considered effective, proportionate and dissuasive; and that cases of forward-looking remedies, such as orders to ensure future compliance remain rare (EU Country report on Non-Discrimination, Latvia, 2022, page 98). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to: (i) enhance the capacity of labour inspectors, Ombudsman and other relevant authorities to identify and address issues of discrimination in employment and occupation; and (ii) consider undertaking a study as to legal and practical obstacles workers face in accessing means of redress in cases of discrimination. It also asks the Government to continue to provide information on any cases of discrimination detected or dealt with by the labour inspectorate, the Ombudsperson, the courts or any other competent authorities, as well as the sanctions imposed, and remedies provided.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

Article 1(2) of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. Inherent requirements of the job. The Committee recalls that, for many years, it has been expressing concern at the discriminatory impact that the language requirements set out in the Law on State Language of 1999 may have on the employment or occupational opportunities of minority groups, in particular the large Russian-speaking minority. Section 6(2) of the Law provides that employees of private institutions, organizations and enterprises, and self-employed persons, shall use the official language if their activities affect the “lawful interests of the public”. The Committee observed that this requirement affects a large number of posts and occupations (public security, health, morality, health care, protection of consumer rights and employment rights, safety in the workplace and supervision of public administration). Consequently, the Committee requested the Government to consider drawing up a list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law on State Language, so as to limit it to cases where language is an inherent requirement of the job. It notes with regret the absence of information in the report of the Government on measures taken to limit the list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under the Law. The Committee notes that, in the 2020 survey published by the Ombudsman entitled, ‘On the prevalence of discrimination in employment: comparative report 2011 and 2020’, it was found that Russian speakers participating in the study stressed ethnic origin and language proficiency more frequently than other respondents as the most widespread ground of discrimination in employment. It also takes note of: (1) the Constitutional court cases from 2019 and 2020 which found the Law on State Language to be constitutional; (2) the detailed information provided by the Government on the various Latvian language learning programmes and courses provided to children and adults by some municipalities, the State Employment Agency and the Latvian Language Agency (LLA); and (3) the Government plans to provide schools, affected by the reform, with a wide range of support measures aimed at improving Latvian language skills, including through extra training for 4,040 pedagogical staff from 2022 to 2026; professional development courses and master classes for teachers on successful inclusion; tailor-made supporting materials for minority students; and digitization of materials for teaching Latvian as second language. The Committee further notes that the LLA will continue to provide freely available materials of methodology for teaching Latvian as a second or foreign language and implements various support measures for educational institutions, and that a learning and teaching Latvian resource page is now available online. Finally, it notes that Language acquisition courses for different audiences and methodology courses for teachers are organized every year. The Committee again wishes to underline that discrimination based on national extraction can occur when legislation, imposing a state language for employment in public and private sector activities, is interpreted and implemented too broadly and disproportionately and adversely affects the employment and occupational opportunities of minority language groups. It wishes to recall once again that, to come within the scope of the exception provided for in Article 1(2) of the Convention, any limitation regarding access to employment must be required by the characteristics of the particular job, and in proportion to its inherent requirements (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 764 and 827–831). The Committee urges once again the Government to take the necessary steps to avoid any undue limitation on employment and occupational opportunities for any group by limiting the number of occupations in which proficiency in Latvian is considered to be an inherent requirement of the job. It further asks the Government to continue providing information on activities carried out to ensure that its national legislation regarding the language of instruction does not create in practice direct or indirect discrimination in access to education and employment for minority groups, in particular the large Russian-speaking minority.

Articles 1(2) and 4. Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. Inherent requirements of the job. Activities prejudicial to the security of the State. For many years, the Committee has been referring to the mandatory requirements set out in the Law on the State Civil Service of 2000, which provides that, in order to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position, the person concerned may not be or have been “in a permanent staff position, in the state security service, intelligence or counterintelligence service of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics (USSR), the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or “a member of organizations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that the Law applies to any state civil service position and to employment by specified services irrespective of the level of responsibility, and has requested the Government to amend section 7(8) and (9) of the Law or to take steps to clearly stipulate and define the functions to which these provisions apply. The Committee recalls the Government’s repeated statement that the purpose of such restrictions is to prevent persons from entering the public service who are not loyal to the State and who could constitute a threat to national security. It recalls the 2019 Ministry of Justice report on the necessity and appropriateness of the restrictions imposed by the Law on the State Civil Service on former employees of the Latvian SSR National Security Committee, which acknowledged that, while such restrictions should be maintained in order to “ensure a loyal, professional and politically neutral State civil service”, it would be more appropriate for a democratic country to assess the individual circumstances in each case and adopt a decision based on such assessment of the degree of past cooperation, the nature of the work, etc. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Justice will be making another assessment report next year and that there are no plans now to amend this section given the current national security matters. The Committee notes the Government’s continued indication that data regarding the application of section 7(8) and (9) of the State Civil Service Law is not available and that no information is available about relevant cases when an application has been rejected pursuant to this section. The Committee takes note of the Government’s understandable concerns over state security and would like to again draw its attention to the fact that the Law applies to any state civil service position irrespective of the level of responsibility. It again recalls that, to come under the scope of the exception provided for in Article 1(2) of the Convention, any limitation regarding access to employment should be interpreted strictly in order to avoid any undue limitations on the protection which the Convention seeks to guarantee. It adds that criteria such as political opinion may be considered as an inherent requirement, under Article 1(2) of the Convention, only for certain posts involving special responsibilities directly concerned with developing government policy. Moreover, for measures not to be discriminatory under Article 4 of the Convention, they must: (1) affect an individual on account of activities he or she is justifiably suspected or proven to have undertaken, and that such measures become discriminatory when taken simply by reason of membership of a particular group or community; (2) refer to activities qualifiable as prejudicial to the security of the State; and (3) be sufficiently well defined and precise to ensure that they do not become instruments of discrimination on the basis of political opinion. In addition to these substantive conditions, the legitimate application of this exception must respect the right of the person affected by the measures to appeal to a competent body established in accordance with national practice (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 832–835). The Committee once again reiterates its request to the Government to take the necessary steps to amend section 7(8) and (9) of the Law on the State Civil Service to limit their scope of application to specific functions and positions in the State civil service, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention. It further requests the Government; (i) to provide information on any progress made in that regard and the findings of the next Ministry of Justice report on the necessity and appropriateness of the restrictions imposed by the Law on the State Civil Service on former employees of the Latvian SSR National Security Committee; and, in the meantime, (ii) to consider taking steps to collect data on the application of section 7(8) and (9) in practice, including on the number of persons whose applications have been rejected pursuant to this section, the reasons for these decisions and the functions concerned, as well as any appeals lodged against such decisions.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Prohibited grounds of discrimination. Legislation. The Committee previously noted that section 2(1) of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons – Economic Operators of 2012 prohibits discrimination with respect to self-employment on a number of grounds, except colour and social origin. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that, for now, it does not consider amending the Law to include specifically the grounds of colour and social origin. It further notes the Government’s repeated statement that the ground of race, covered by the Law, includes the ground of colour, being interpreted in accordance with Article 1.1 of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, according to which “racial discrimination” shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin. The Committee however notes that, in its 2018 concluding observations, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) expressed concern at the absence in the national legislation of a specific definition prohibiting racial discrimination that is fully in accordance with Article 1 of the Convention (CERD/C/LVA/CO/6-12, 25 September 2018, paragraph 10). It further notes with regret that the Government did not provide information on the measures taken to ensure protection against discrimination based on colour and social origin in practice. The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken to ensure the protection of self-employed workers against discrimination on the grounds of colour and social origin, both in law and practice. It further asks the Government to provide information on the application of section 2(1) of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons-Economic Operators in practice, including any violations detected or dealt with by the labour inspectorate or other competent authorities.

Discrimination based on sex. Sexual harassment. The Committee recalls that section 29(7) of the Labour Law prohibits harassment, including sexual harassment, as a form of discrimination. It notes however, from the 2020 European Commission country report on gender equality, that sexual harassment cases are very rare, which testifies that this is still a latent problem as victims of sexual harassment are unable or unwilling to bring their case before the justice system (Country report on gender equality, Latvia, 2020, page 18). The Committee further notes that, in its 2020 concluding observations, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) remained concerned about the fact that the State Labour Inspectorate (SLI) had not received any complaints about sexual harassment in the workplace (CEDAW/C/LVA/CO/4-7, 10 March 2020, paragraph 35(e)). The Committee wishes to recall that where no cases or complaints about an issue (such as sexual harassment at work), or very few, are being lodged, this is likely to indicate a lack of an appropriate legal framework, lack of awareness of rights, lack of confidence in or absence of practical access to procedures, or fear of reprisals (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 870). The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken to raise awareness of workers, employers, and their respective organizations about sexual harassment at work and the legal procedures available. It also asks the Government to provide information on the number of complaints and cases of sexual harassment detected or dealt with by the labour inspectorate, the courts or any other competent authorities, as well as the penalties imposed and compensation awarded.

Article 2. Equality of opportunity and treatment of women and men. The Committee previously noted that, while women represented a significant percentage of the workforce, the persistence of the gender segregation in the labour market continued to be a challenge. Referring to its previous comments where it noted the elaboration of the “Guidelines for ensuring equal opportunities and rights for women and men, 2016–20”, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that such guidelines were replaced by the Plan for the Promotion of Equal Rights and Opportunities for Women and Men for 2018–2020, approved by Order of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 298 of 4 July 2018. It notes more particularly that the new Plan sets as specific directions for activities: (1) the promotion of economic independence and equal opportunities for women and men in the labour market; (2) the promotion of equal educational opportunities for boys and girls, and men and women; (3) the strengthening of the capacity of authorities on gender equality issues; as well as (4) public awareness raising on gender equality issues. In its supplementary information, the Government adds that a new plan is currently being developed for 2021–23 and would aim, in particular, at promoting gender equality in the labour market and tackling gender stereotypes. The Government further indicates that an information campaign was carried out in 2020 to combat gender biases in employment in order to reduce the gender segregation of the labour market. As regards the conciliation between work and family responsibilities, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that paternity leave has been extended to ten working days in 2019, and new flexible childcare facilities for parents employed under non-standard working time conditions were introduced in 2018. In its supplementary information, the Government states that, in October 2019, an awareness-raising campaign was launched in order to strengthen the father’s role in family and society by minimizing stereotypes of traditional gender roles in society, which remains one of the main barriers to equality between women and men. The Government adds that, in March 2020, the Ministry of Welfare in cooperation with the Employers’ Confederation of Latvia (ECL) and the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (FTUCL) launched a joint project “Balance for all – B4A” for 2020–2022, in order to better conciliate work and family responsibility. The Committee welcomes this information, as well as the activities undertaken in collaboration with the social partners. It however notes, from the statistical information of the Central Statistical Bureau (CSB) provided by the Government that, while the employment rate for women without a child was estimated at 84.2 per cent, it was estimated at 70.3 per cent for women with a child under 3 years of age (compared to 91.4 per cent for men). Moreover, twice as many women as men were working part-time in 2018, mainly for family reasons (10.8 per cent for women compared to 5.3 per cent for men). The Committee further notes, from the additional information provided by the Government, that horizontal gender segregation of the labour market persists, as in 2019, women were still concentrated in education, health and social work, and food and accommodation (representing more than 80 per cent of the workers employed in such sectors), while men were still concentrated in construction and mining (representing 92.3 per cent and 82.1 per cent of the workers, respectively). Moreover, only 6 per cent of women work in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) occupations, compared to 30 per cent of men, such proportions remaining unchanged since 2005. The Committee notes that, as acknowledged by the Government in its 2018 report under the national-level review of implementation of the Beijing Declaration, gender segregation in the choice of vocational education and higher education remains as 92 per cent of academic-year graduates in the field of education and health and social work were women in 2017/2018, while 74 per cent of graduates in engineering, manufacturing and construction were men (page 7). As regards vertical gender segregation, the Committee notes from Eurostat, that, in 2019, the largest share of women among managerial positions in the European Union countries was recorded in Latvia where women represent 54.8 per cent of managers. It further notes that women represented 31.7 per cent of board members and 28.6 per cent of senior executives. Concerning the public service, the Government states that there is stable vertical gender segregation with women being mostly concentrated in lowest positions. While welcoming the share of women among managerial positions in the private sector, the Committee notes with concern the persistent gender segregation in education and employment. It further notes that, in its 2020 concluding observations, the CEDAW expressed specific concerns at: (1) the persistence of discriminatory gender stereotypes messaging and calls for adherence to traditional roles and values for women; (2) the ongoing vertical and horizontal gender occupational segregation; and (3) the unequal sharing of family responsibilities between women and men (CEDAW/C/LVA/CO/4-7, 10 March 2020, paragraphs 21 and 35). The Committee asks the Government to strengthen its efforts to address vertical and horizontal gender segregation in the labour market and gender stereotypes, including by improving women’s participation in non-traditional fields of study and professions, as well as better conciliation between work and family responsibilities. It asks the Government to provide information on the concrete measures taken to this end, in particular in the framework of the Plan for the Promotion of Equal Rights and Opportunities for Women and Men for 2018–2020 or any other forthcoming plan, as well as on any assessment made of their impact. The Committee also asks the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the distribution of men and women, disaggregated by economic sector and occupation, both in the public and private sectors.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. Roma. The Committee previously noted that the Plan for Implementation on National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy Guidelines 2012–18 (Action Plan of the Guidelines) aimed to implement support measures for Roma integration, including to increase their levels of education and employment. It requested the Government to report on the implementation of the plan, in particular in relation to the levels of educational attainment of Roma children, the participation of Roma in vocational training and other skills development programmes, and their levels of employment. Noting that the Action Plan of the Guidelines ended in 2018, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that Roma integration measures are currently implemented in the context of the National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy Implementation Plan for 2019–2020, in cooperation with the Advisory Council for the Implementation of Roma Integration, as well as other Roma representatives or experts on Roma issues. The Committee notes that awareness-raising activities were carried out, in particular in the framework of the Latvian Roma Platform, in order to promote dialogue between Roma and representatives of local government and diversity at the enterprise level, as well as to exchange good practices on integration of Roma, in particular into the labour market. The Government adds that, from July 2016 until May 2019, more than 930 participants have been involved in Latvian Roma Platform projects’ activities implemented by the Ministry of Culture. The Committee welcomes this information. As regards educational attainment of Roma children, the Committee welcomes the decrease in the drop-out rate of Roma children from schools from 15.9 per cent in 2013/2014 to 7.5 per cent in 2016/2017, and notes that the Education Development Guidelines for 2014–2020 set as a specific objective to reduce this proportion to 7 per cent in 2020. It however notes that, in 2016/2017, 34.2 per cent of Roma children were enrolled in special needs programmes, which represents a 7 per cent increase compared with 2013/2014. In that regard, the Committee notes that, in its 2019 report, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) highlighted that the situation of the Roma community is still of grave concern, especially in the areas of: (1) education, where a disproportionately high number of Roma children are placed in special needs programmes; (2) employment, where the very low levels of formal education among Roma, as well as frequently reported cases of anti-Roma prejudice and discrimination from potential employers result in high rates of unemployment among Roma and related socio-economic exclusion; and (3) professional and vocational training courses, where despite such courses are offered by the State Employment Agency (SEA) to all unemployed persons, they usually require participants to have completed compulsory primary school, a requirement which excludes a large number of Roma. Indeed, according to SEA data of August 2015, the educational level of 67.4 per cent of registered unemployed Roma was lower than the compulsory primary education and 20 per cent of them did not possess reading and writing skills (CRI(2019)1, 5 March 2019, paragraphs 65, 69–71) . While noting from the statistical data provided by the Government in its supplementary information, that 6,892 Roma were registered in Latvia on 1 January 2020, the Committee observes that, in its report, ECRI also highlighted that many Roma do not volunteer information about their ethnic origin to the authorities due to persistent stigmatization and prejudice against Roma in the public sphere (paragraph 64). The Committee also notes that, in its their concluding observations, several UN treaty-bodies recently expressed concerns about: (1) the continued stigma and socio-economic discrimination against members of the Roma community, especially Roma women, who continue to face discrimination in education and employment; and (2) the suppression of a post in the Office of the Ombudsperson for a Roma consultant, who was tasked with promoting Roma integration (CEDAW/C/LVA/CO/4-7, 10 March 2020, paragraphs 35 and 41(b); and CERD/C/LVA/CO/6-12, 25 September 2018, paragraph 22). The Committee asks the Government to strengthen its efforts to combat stigma and discrimination against Roma people in order to ensure them equal treatment and opportunity in education, training and employment. It asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken to that end, in particular in the framework of the National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy Implementation Plan for 2019-2020, as well as on any study or report available on their impact. The Committee also asks the Government to provide statistical data on the participation of Roma in education, professional and vocational training courses, as well as in the labour market.

General observation of 2018. With regard to the above issues, and in more general terms, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to its general observation on discrimination based on race, colour and national extraction which was adopted in 2018. In the general observation, the Committee notes with concern that discriminatory attitudes and stereotypes based on the race, colour or national extraction of men and women workers continue to hinder their participation in education, vocational training programmes and access to a wider range of employment opportunities, resulting in persisting occupational segregation and lower remuneration received for work of equal value. Furthermore, the Committee considers that it is necessary to adopt a comprehensive and coordinated approach to tackling the obstacles and barriers faced by persons in employment and occupation because of their race, colour or national extraction, and to promote equality of opportunity and treatment for all. Such an approach should include the adoption of interlocking measures aimed at addressing gaps in education, training and skills, providing unbiased vocational guidance, recognizing and validating the qualifications obtained abroad, and valuing and recognizing traditional knowledge and skills that may be relevant both to accessing and advancing in employment and to engaging in an occupation. The Committee also recalls that, in order to be effective, these measures must include concrete steps, such as laws, policies, programmes, mechanisms and participatory processes, remedies designed to address prejudices and stereotypes and to promote mutual understanding and tolerance among all sections of the population.

The Committee draws the Government’s attention to its general observation of 2018 and requests the Government to provide information in response to the questions raised in that observation.

Enforcement. The Committee notes, from the statistical information provided by the Government, that the number of applications on unequal treatment in employment relationships sent to the SLI increased from 28 applications in 2018 to 69 in 2019. Moreover, in 2019, the SLI detected nine violations and provided 116 consultations on unequal treatment. In its supplementary information, the Government indicates that comparative statistical data between March/June 2019 and March/June 2020 showed an increase in the number of consultations provided by the SLI during the emergency situation resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government adds that, from 1 June 2019 to 1 June 2020, the Office of the Ombudsperson received 17 applications relating to discrimination and unequal treatment. In that regard, the Committee notes that, in 2020, the Ombudsperson conducted a comparative study 2011/2020 on the “Prevalence of Discrimination in the Employment Environment in Latvia” which showed an increase in the level of public awareness on discrimination issues. However according to the study, 21 per cent of employees indicated that they have personally experienced discriminatory treatment in the workplace over the last three years, and 44 per cent have noticed a job advertisement with biased requirements regarding the age and gender of the candidates over the last five years. As regards judicial decisions, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that no statistics are available as discrimination cases are not registered as such by national courts. The Committee however notes, from the 2020 European Commission country report on gender equality, that there is insufficient activity on discrimination in practice from the supervisory bodies, in particular the SLI which lacks capacity to proactively address violations of gender equality rights, since the priority issues are the fight against undeclared work and the violation of health and safety rules. The European Commission also highlighted that discrimination claims are still rare in Latvia, which may be explained by: (1) litigation costs which are too expensive for the majority of the working population; (2) low amount of the administrative sanctions imposed by the SLI and of the compensations awarded by national courts; and (3) strict time limits for bringing a discrimination claim before a court in employment cases – three months compared to a two-year limit in other cases of labour disputes (sections 31(1) and 95(5) of the Labour Law) (Country report on gender equality, Latvia, 2020, pages 62, 64, 67 and 68; and Country report on non-discrimination, Latvia, 2019, pages 11, 60 and 91). Regarding time limits, the Committee refers to its comments on the application of the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), where it noted that similar concerns were expressed by the FTUCL, in its observations, regarding unequal pay claims. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to: (i) enhance the capacity of labour inspectors and other relevant authorities to identify and address issues of discrimination in employment and occupation; and (ii) ensure that workers have appropriate access to justice and means of redress in cases of discrimination. It also asks the Government to continue to provide information on any cases of discrimination detected or dealt with by the labour inspectorate, the Ombudsperson, the courts or any other competent authorities, as well as the sanctions imposed and remedies provided.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

Article 1(2) of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. Inherent requirements of the job. For a number of years, the Committee has been expressing concern at the discriminatory impact that the language requirements of the Law on State Language of 1999 may have on the employment or occupational opportunities of minority groups, in particular the large Russian-speaking minority. It recalled that section 6(2) of the Law provides that employees of private institutions, organizations and enterprises and self-employed persons shall use the official language if their activities affect the “lawful interests of the public” and observed that this requirement affects a large number of posts and occupations (public security, health, morality, health care, protection of consumer rights and employment rights, safety in the workplace and supervision of public administration). The Committee requested the Government to consider drawing up a list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law on State Language so as to limit it to cases where language is an inherent requirement of the job. The Committee observes that, according to the January 2017 data of the Central Statistical Bureau (CSB), the ethnic distribution of the Latvian population included 25.4 per cent Russians. It notes with regret the absence of measures taken by the Government to limit the list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under the Law. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report and additional information that several amendments have been introduced between 2017 and 2020 in Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 733 of 2009, which prescribes the required level of proficiency in Latvian for each profession or occupation, pursuant to section 6(5) of the Law. The Government indicates that the purpose of the amendments is principally to: (1) harmonize the professions and occupations listed in the regulation with the titles and codes of professions included in the classification of occupations; and (2) provide a transitional period until 1 July 2021 for the persons whose state language proficiency for the performance of their professional and office duties has been increased by at least one level. In this regard, the Government recalls that, after passing the Latvian language examination successfully, people will receive a proficiency certificate to prove to the employer and educational institutions their ability to communicate in Latvian. However, if a person fails to master one level of the language courses, she or he will lose the opportunity to apply for the next level and will only have a second chance to apply for the same level once a year. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the various Latvian language learning programmes and courses provided to children and adults by some municipalities, the State Employment Agency (SEA) and the Latvian Language Agency (LVA). In this regard, it notes more particularly that, between 2016 and 2018, 587 third-country nationals received Latvian language training to facilitate their integration into the labour market, in the framework of the project of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund implemented by the LVA. It further notes the Government’s statement that one of the objectives of the National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy Implementation Plan 2019–20 is to strengthen Latvian language literacy in society.

In its supplementary information, the Government indicates that a gradual switch to Latvian as the sole language of instruction has been started and, to that end, amendments were introduced in 2018 in the Law on Education of 1998 and the Law on General Education of 1999. The Government states that the implementation of the reform regarding the language of instruction will be supported by new teaching and learning materials, including training for teachers, in order to help them successfully implement the new competence-based education content in Latvian. In that regard, the Committee notes that in 2018 the LVA launched a project aiming to support 3,500 teachers by 2021, including teachers with ethnic minority background, in order to help them develop their Latvian language skills for professional purposes. However, the Committee notes that, in their concluding observations, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) express concern at the education reform, which will create undue restrictions on access to education in minority languages. The CERD also expresses specific concern at section 6 of the Law on State Language, which may result in direct and indirect discrimination against minorities in access to employment in public and private institutions (CEDAW/C/LVA/CO/4-7, 10 March 2020, paragraph 33, and CERD/C/LVA/CO/6-12, 25 September 2018, paragraph 16). The Committee wishes to recall that discrimination based on national extraction can occur when legislation imposing a State language for employment in public and private sector activities is interpreted and implemented too broadly and, as such, disproportionately and adversely affects the employment and occupational opportunities of minority language groups. Furthermore, it recalls that, in order to come within the scope of the exception provided for in Article 1(2) of the Convention regarding inherent requirements of a particular job, any limitation regarding access to employment must be required by the characteristics of the particular job, and in proportion to its inherent requirements. Such exception must be interpreted restrictively so as to avoid undue limitation of the protection that the Convention is intended to provide (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraphs 764 and 827–831). In light of the persistent large number of posts and occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law on State Language, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary steps to avoid any undue limitation on employment and occupational opportunities for any group by limiting the number of occupations in which proficiency in Latvian is considered to be an inherent requirement of the job. It further asks the Government to continue providing information on Latvian language classes and activities carried out to ensure that its national legislation, including the ongoing reform regarding the language of instruction, does not create in practice direct or indirect discrimination in access to education and employment for minority groups, in particular the large Russian-speaking minority.

Articles 1(2) and 4. Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. Inherent requirements of the job. Activities prejudicial to the security of the State. For a number of years, the Committee has been referring to the mandatory requirements set out in the Law on the State Civil Service of 2000, which provides that, in order to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position, the person concerned may not be or have been “in a permanent staff position, in the state security service, intelligence or counterintelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or “member of organizations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the Law applies to any state civil service position and to employment by specified services irrespective of the level of responsibility, and requested the Government to amend sections 7(8) and 7(9) of the Law or to take steps to clearly stipulate and define the functions to which these sections apply. The Committee notes the Government’s repeated statement that the purpose of such restrictions is to prevent persons from entering the public service who are not loyal to the State and who could constitute a threat to national security. The Government adds that in April 2019 the Ministry of Justice prepared a report on the necessity and appropriateness of the restrictions imposed by the Law on the State Civil Service on former employees of the Latvian SSR National Security Committee and concluded that such restrictions should be maintained in order to “ensure a loyal, professional and politically neutral State civil service, which ensures legal, stable, efficient and transparent operation of the public administration”. Observing that the report of the Ministry of Justice highlights that it would however be more appropriate for a democratic country to assess the individual circumstances in each case and adopt a decision based on such assessment of the degree of past cooperation, the nature of the work, etc., the Committee notes the Government’s indication that such information is not available and such a recommendation would thus be impossible to implement. With regard to the number of persons dismissed or whose applications have been rejected pursuant to sections 7(8) and 7(9) of the Law on the State Civil Service, the Government states that such data is not available for now. While understanding the Government’s concerns and noting its explanations, the Committee again draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the Law applies to any state civil service position and to employment by specified services irrespective of the level of responsibility. It recalls that, to come under the scope of the exception provided for in Article 1(2) regarding the inherent requirements of a particular job or in Article 4 on the security of the State, any limitation regarding access to employment should be interpreted strictly in order to avoid any undue limitations on the protection which the Convention seeks to guarantee. More particularly, it recalls that criteria such as political opinion may be taken into account as an inherent requirement, under Article 1(2), only for certain posts involving special responsibilities directly concerned with developing government policy. Moreover, for measures not to be discriminatory under Article 4 of the Convention, they must: (1) affect an individual on account of activities he or she is justifiably suspected or proven to have undertaken, and that such measures become discriminatory when taken simply by reason of membership of a particular group or community; (2) refer to activities qualifiable as prejudicial to the security of State; and (3) be sufficiently well defined and precise to ensure that they do not become instruments of discrimination on the basis of political opinion. In addition to these substantive conditions, the legitimate application of this exception must respect the right of the person affected by the measures to appeal to a competent body established in accordance with national practice (2012 General Survey, paragraphs 832–835). The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary steps to amend sections 7(8) and 7(9) of the Law on the State Civil Service in order to limit their scope of application to specific functions and positions in the State civil service, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention. It asks the Government to provide information on any progress made in that regard. In the meantime, the Committee asks the Government to provide any available data on the application of sections 7(8) and 7(9) in practice, including on the number of persons whose applications have been rejected pursuant to these sections, the reasons for these decisions and the functions concerned, as well as any appeals lodged against such decisions.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of colour and social origin. The Committee recalls that the Law on the prohibition of discrimination against natural persons engaged in economic activity prohibits discrimination on a number of grounds, including race and ethnic origin, but not colour and social origin. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that any differential treatment in economic activity can be brought before the Ombudsperson, the courts or the labour inspectorate. It further notes the reference by the Government to European Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of race and ethnic origin, which the Government indicates it has transposed into national law. The Committee points out that no definition of these expressions is contained in the Directive. It also notes the Government’s reference to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the overlapping nature of the concepts of race and ethnicity, which include characteristics such as colour. The Committee agrees with the ECHR and points out that the ECHR made reference to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) which indicates that, for the purposes of the CERD, the term “racial discrimination” shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin. The Committee recalls that social origin refers to situations in which an individual’s membership of a class, socio-occupational category or caste affects his or her occupational future, either because he or she is denied access to certain jobs or activities, or is assigned only certain jobs (see the General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 802). The Committee emphasizes that, in the context of employment and occupation, Article 1(1)(a) specifically includes the grounds of colour and social origin, along with race and national extraction, to fully ensure that such characteristics and status, even within the same race or ethnic minority groups, are an unacceptable basis of discrimination. The Committee asks the Government to confirm that the ground of race is interpreted in accordance with the CERD and to take the necessary measures to ensure that the application of the legislation with regard to employment and occupation protects against discrimination on the grounds of colour and social origin, including through the monitoring of complaints and cases of discrimination, the dissemination of public information materials and training activities for employers and workers, and to report on the outcomes of such measures. It further trusts that the Government will consider amending the legislation to include specifically the grounds of social origin and colour for purposes of clarity and conformity with the Convention.

Article 2. Equality of opportunity and treatment of women and men. The Committee notes that, while women make up a significant percentage of the workforce, gender segregation in the labour market (within sectors and professions) continues to be a challenge. Although the Government describes a number of initiatives it has taken to address the segregated labour market, the Committee notes that many of these measures appear to be aimed generally at promoting employment and competitiveness, but do not seem to expressly encourage or support either men or women to acquire skills or take up employment or professions in non-traditional areas. It notes the activities undertaken in the framework of projects aimed at promoting gender equality, including addressing gender stereotypes, diversity training and piloting childcare for employees with irregular hours. It notes that gender equality indicators on promotion, gender division in management and equal pay have been included and are being monitored in the “Sustainability Index” of undertakings. The Committee also notes that studies have been undertaken to provide a better understanding of the causes of the labour market inequalities faced by women, including the emphasis in one project on Roma women, and it trusts that these findings will inform policy-making and future programme development. It further notes that “Guidelines for ensuring equal opportunities and rights for women and men, 2016–20”, have been drawn up and that labour market segregation and issues of remuneration differences will be included as one of the action points in the Guidelines. Recalling the Gender Equality Action Plan 2012–13, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the concrete results achieved under the plan and any evaluation undertaken on its implementation. It also asks the Government to provide information on the implementation of new Guidelines, including activities and their outcomes, and to supply a copy of the adopted Guidelines with its next report. Further, the Committee asks the Government to report on the results and achievements of the various projects, including the preparation of equality plans at the workplace level, childcare provision, the proportion of women in management, the proportions of women and men entering non-traditional sectors and professions, and on the participation of Roma, as well as other minority women, in education, training and employment promotion opportunities.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. Roma. The Committee notes that the Plan for Implementation on National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy Guidelines 2012–18 (Action Plan of the Guidelines) aims to integrate into society persons at risk of social exclusion and to implement support measures for Roma integration, including to increase their levels of education and employment. It notes that activities to implement the Action Plan of the Guidelines have included awareness-raising campaigns to promote tolerance, and training seminars for civil servants and local government staff and employers, on tolerance and social exclusion, the management of diversity and intercultural competences. It also notes from the Conclusions of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) on the Implementation of the Recommendations in Respect of Latvia (CRI (2015)5) that, outside the Action Plan, the authorities provided a large number of free Latvian language courses through the National Employment Agency. It notes that, at the time of reporting, a new action plan for 2016–18 was under elaboration based on the study “Roma in Latvia” conducted in 2015. The Government reports that the results of the study showed both improvements in the Roma situation in fundamental areas, pointed to obstacles and challenges, and revealed that, despite the progress of Roma in the labour market (32.4 per cent of Roma perceive themselves as economically active, as opposed to 10 per cent in 2003), Roma continue to be discriminated against in the labour market and their employment opportunities are not equal to other groups due to their low educational levels and socio-economic status. The number of employed Roma persons is three times lower than the average in the country. On the positive side, attendance by Roma children at basic school has increased, but is still considered to be too low. The Committee also notes the concern expressed by the ECRI over the continuation of Roma segregated schools, despite the recommendation of the Ombudsman in 2013 to teach the language or culture of Roma or other national/ethnic minorities in addition to the general school curriculum and not to use this as a reason for segregating Roma into separate classes. It further notes from the summary report of the recent Latvian Roma Platform meeting held on 29 May 2017 the recommendation that greater efforts should be made to address education, employment, employability and entrepreneurship among the Roma population. The Committee asks the Government to report on the implementation of the Action Plan of the Guidelines for the period up to 2018, including any measures adopted and activities undertaken and the results achieved in relation to the levels of educational attainment of Roma children, the participation of Roma in vocational training and other skills development programmes, and their levels of employment. Taking into account the findings of the study “Roma in Latvia”, the Committee trusts that the Government will be in a position to undertake action directed at reducing discrimination against Roma men and women in access to training and jobs and to promote equal access to more and better employment opportunities. The Committee asks the Government to continue providing statistics on the Roma population.

Enforcement. The Committee notes that access to the Ombudsperson has been improved with the website now providing information in Latvian, Russian and English. The Committee notes that the Government has provided a detailed summary of the infringements detected and addressed by the labour inspectorate and the Ombudsperson relating to discrimination and unequal treatment, and notes the statistics on court judgments relating to gender issues. The Committee notes that no infringements were found by the labour inspectorate in the 23 complaints made in 2016 and recalls that labour inspectors participated in a training course on discrimination and differential treatment in 2014. The Committee asks the Government to continue providing the summary information on the complaints and the decisions and outcomes of the judicial authorities, the Office of the Ombudsperson and the labour inspectorate, and to continue to build the capacity of labour inspectors to detect cases of discrimination and unequal treatment.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Article 1(2) of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. For a number of years the Committee has been expressing its concern over the discriminatory impact that the language requirements of the Law on State Language 1999 might have on the employment or occupational opportunities of minority groups, including the large Russian-speaking minority. The Committee recalls that section 6(2) of the Law on State Language requires that employees of private institutions, organizations and undertakings (companies), and self-employed persons shall use the official language if their activities “affect the lawful interests of the public” (public security, health, morality, health care, protection of consumer rights and employment rights, safety in the workplace, or supervision of public administration). The Committee also recalls that pursuant to section 6(5) of the Law on State Language, the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 733 of 2009 prescribes the level of proficiency of the Latvian language requirements. The Committee had previously noted that this provision affects a large number of occupations and posts. It had asked the Government to review and revise the list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law so as to limit it to cases where language is an inherent requirement of the job. The Government has replied that no such list exists. Noting that the “lawful interests of the public” even with the limits prescribed in section 6(2) of the Law on State Language 1999 is a broad concept, the Committee asks the Government to consider drawing up a list of occupations (or indicators) which are considered to fall within the scope of section 6(2) thereby clarifying where Latvian language proficiency is considered to be an inherent requirement of the job. In this regard, the Committee emphasizes that the concept of inherent requirements of a particular job provided for in the Convention must be interpreted restrictively so as to avoid any undue limitation on employment and occupational opportunities for any group. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on Latvian language classes and activities carried out in the country to benefit minority groups including the Russian minority.

Articles 1(2) and 4. Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. The Committee has been drawing attention to the mandatory requirement in the State Civil Service Act 2000 which provides that to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position, the person concerned must not be or have not been “in a permanent staff position, in the state security service, intelligence or counterintelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or “members of organisations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee notes the Government’s explanation that the restrictions are intended to ensure a loyal and politically neutral civil service and that they continue to be relevant and necessary. The Government further indicates that these provisions do not apply to all persons in the state administration but only to state civil servants who are persons that carry out functions of national significance such as policy development or the coordination of a sector of activity, or distribute resources or draft laws, and that at the end of 2015 there were only 11,725 such persons. While understanding the Government’s concerns and noting its explanations, the Committee draws attention to the fact that the law applies to any state civil service position and to employment by specified services whatever the level of responsibility. The Committee once again recalls that political opinion may be taken into account as an inherent requirement, under Article 1(2) of the Convention for posts involving special responsibilities in relation to developing government policy. It once again recalls that for measures not to be discriminatory under Article 4 of the Convention, they must firstly affect an individual on account of activities he or she is justifiably suspected of having, or has been proven to have, undertaken. These measures become discriminatory when simply based on membership of a particular group or community. Moreover they must refer to activities that can be considered as prejudicial to the security of the State and the individual concerned shall have the right to appeal to a competent body in accordance with national practice (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraphs 832–835). The Committee recalls that the principle of proportionality must apply and the exception under Article 4 should be interpreted strictly. The Committee trusts the Government will soon be able to report that it has amended sections 7(8) and 7(9) of the State Civil Service Act or taken other steps to clearly stipulate and define the functions to which these sections apply. It further asks the Government to provide information on the application of sections 7(8) and 7(9) in practice, including information on the number of persons dismissed or whose application has been rejected pursuant to these sections, the reasons for these decisions and the functions concerned, as well as information on the appeal procedure available to the affected persons and any appeals lodged and their results.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of colour and social origin. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the adoption of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons Engaged in Economic Activity which prohibits discrimination with respect to self-employment on several grounds except colour and social origin. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the grounds of race and ethnic origin, both of which are covered by the Law, include the ground of colour. The Government indicates that thus far the competent authorities have received no information on cases of discrimination against self-employed persons on the ground of social origin. The Committee recalls that the grounds of colour and race, while generally examined together, should not be considered to be identical, as colour differences may exist between people of the same “race” (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 762). The Committee requests the Government to ensure that emerging forms of discrimination that may lead to discrimination in employment and occupation based on colour and social origin are adequately monitored in order to assess whether the protection afforded by the legislation remains appropriate and effective. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which protection against discrimination based on colour and social origin is ensured in practice. The Government is also requested to provide information on the practical application of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons Engaged in Economic Activity.

Article 2. Equality of opportunity and treatment of women and men. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the adoption of the Gender Equality Action Plan 2012–14, which includes measures to address occupational gender segregation and to promote access to childcare services. In this respect, the Committee notes from the statistical data provided by the Government for 2013 that women represent 79 per cent of workers in the education sector, 86 per cent in the health and social services sector, and over 75 per cent of persons employed as clerks and in the services and sales sectors. The Government indicates that in the framework of the Action Plan, the Gender Equality Council approved recommendations in July 2013 on balancing the number of men and women in all levels of education, including pre-school, general, vocational and higher education. The Committee further notes that the Ministry of Welfare and the Ministry of Economics, in cooperation with the social partners, initiated a project in December 2013 to improve the balance of men and women in decision-making positions, which will include research on gender equality in the private sector and related awareness-raising activities. Measures are also being taken to combat stereotypes and improve the participation of women in non-traditional professions. Regarding measures to promote access to childcare, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the extension of the benefits paid to parents of young children. The Committee requests the Government to continue taking measures to address vertical and horizontal occupational sex segregation in employment and occupation, including through improving women’s access to a wide variety of vocational training courses and education fields, and increasing their participation in a wider range of jobs and occupations, including decision-making positions. Please provide information on the concrete results achieved through these measures, including the outcome of the research on gender equality in the private sector undertaken in the context of the project initiated in December 2013.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. Roma. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the activities and institutions implementing policies for Roma inclusion. The Committee also notes the statistical information provided by the Government on the participation of Roma in training and public employment projects. However, these data do not allow the Committee to assess whether the number of Roma who participate in the training is in proportion to the number of Roma in the total population. The Committee further notes that a survey on “The Situation of Roma in Latvia” with respect to education and employment will be carried out in 2015. The Committee notes that guidelines for a monitoring system have been established as part of the “Different People: Diverse Experience: One Latvia” project, in connection with the Guidelines on National Identity, Civil Society and Integration Policy for 2012–18. The Advisory Council for the Implementation of Roma Integration, which includes representatives from Roma non-governmental organizations, has also proposed recommendations for the national policy on Roma inclusion, which have been examined and assessed by government institutions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the policy on Roma inclusion has finally been adopted and to provide specific information on the impact of the measures taken to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in education, vocational training, employment and occupation for minority groups, including Roma, and the obstacles encountered. In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the results of the survey on “The Situation of Roma in Latvia”, as well as statistical information disaggregated by sex concerning the proportion of Roma in the total population and their participation in employment, sectors of occupation, their participation in education and vocational training and their unemployment rate.

Parts III and IV of the report form. Enforcement. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that between January 2013 and June 2014 labour inspectors received 43 complaints related to discrimination, on the basis of which administrative penalties were imposed on 17 persons or entities, and that enforcement measures were applied in relation to section 32 of the Labour Law on discriminatory job advertisements. Moreover, labour inspectors participated in a training course focused on discrimination and differential treatment in May 2014. The Committee further notes the awareness-raising activities carried out by the Ombudsman concerning, among others, the rights of persons with disabilities. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the complaints received by labour inspectors and the Office of the Ombudsman, as well as the cases filed with the judicial authorities concerning discrimination in employment and occupation, and the sanctions imposed.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 1(2) of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. Inherent requirements of the job. The Committee has been referring for a number of years to certain provisions of the Law on State Language of 1999 concerning language requirements that may have a discriminatory impact on minority groups in employment and occupation (in particular on Russian-speaking minorities). In this respect, the Committee noted that the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) had indicated that the occupations in the private sector which “affect the lawful interests of the public” for which official language shall be used in accordance with section 6(2) of the Law on State Language, concerned over 1,000 professions (CRI(2012)3, 21 February 2012, paragraph 62). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the level of the language proficiency is defined by Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 733 Regarding the Amount of the Knowledge of the Official Language, 2009. The Government further indicates that the requirements of language proficiency have been discussed with experts from the High Commissioner on National Minorities of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and recognized as being adequate and that the knowledge of Latvian is limited to the professions involving lawful public interest. The Government provides information on the language courses and activities carried out from 2009 to 2013 which have mainly benefited the Russian minority. The Committee notes, however, that the United Nations Human Rights Committee, in its concluding observations, expressed concern regarding the discriminatory effects of the language proficiency requirement on the employment of minority groups (CCPR/C/LVA/CO/3, 11 April 2014, paragraph 7). Recalling that the concept of inherent requirements must be interpreted restrictively so as to avoid undue limitation of the protection provided by the Convention, the Committee again requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that language requirements do not, in practice, deprive ethnic minority groups of equality of opportunity and treatment in employment and occupation. In this context, the Committee once again requests the Government to review and revise the list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law on State Language so as to limit it to cases where language is an inherent requirement of the job. Please provide information on any measures taken in this respect.

Articles 1(2) and 4. Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. Inherent requirements of the job. Activities prejudicial to the security of the State. The Committee has been referring to the mandatory requirement set out in the State Civil Service Act, 2000, which provides that to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position the person concerned “is not or has not been in a permanent staff position, in the state security service, intelligence or counterintelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or the persons concerned “are not or have not been members of organizations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the restrictions are intended to ensure a loyal and politically neutral civil service, which in turn will ensure stable and politically neutral state administration, and that there is no intention to repeal this restriction. The Government indicates that in 2013, 18 persons were dismissed from civil service positions due to the mandatory requirements for civil servants. While understanding the Government’s concerns regarding the requirement for all government unit members to be loyal to the State, the Committee would like to recall that for measures not to be deemed discriminatory under Article 4 of the Convention, they must firstly affect an individual on account of activities he or she is justifiably suspected or proven to have undertaken. These measures become discriminatory when simply based on membership of a particular group or community. In addition they must refer to activities that can be considered as prejudicial to the security of the State and the individual concerned shall have the right to appeal to a competent body in accordance with national practice (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraphs 832–835). The Committee recalls that this exception should be interpreted strictly. Recalling that political opinion may be taken into account as an inherent requirement, under Article 1(2) of the Convention, only for certain posts involving special responsibilities directly concerned with developing government policy, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to clearly specify and define the functions in respect of which section 7(8) and 7(9) of the State Civil Service Act, 2000, would apply. Bearing in mind the conditions in which Article 4 of the Convention can be invoked, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application of section 7(8) and 7(9) in practice, including any available data on the number of persons dismissed or whose application has been rejected pursuant to these sections, indicating the reasons for this decision, and the functions concerned, as well as information on the appeal procedure available to the affected persons and any appeals lodged.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Measures to address discrimination in employment and occupation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in 2012, information and awareness-raising campaigns on discrimination were carried out by the Office of the Ombudsperson. In its report, the Government refers to a study on “Discrimination at the workplace” carried out in 2011 by the Ombudsperson to determine the extent of discrimination in Latvia and improve awareness of workers in this respect. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken by the Office of the Ombudsperson or any other competent authority to prevent and address discrimination in employment and occupation. Please also communicate a copy of the study on “Discrimination at the workplace” or a summary of its main findings and recommendations as well as information on any follow-up measures taken.

Equality of opportunity and treatment of women and men. The Committee welcomes the adoption of the Gender Equality Action Plan 2012–14 which focuses on minimizing the gender-specific roles and stereotypes to address occupational gender segregation and promoting access to childcare services. In this respect, the Government indicates that the number of places for children from one-and-a-half to four years in pre-school educational institutions, in particular in the largest cities of the country, is insufficient. The Committee also notes from the Government’s report that the proportion of women benefiting from active labour market policy measures, including in vocational training, exceeds 50 per cent in almost all measures offered by the State Employment Agency (SEA). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken within the framework of the Gender Equality Action Plan to address occupational gender segregation and develop childcare services and the results achieved. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the activities of the Gender Equality Council in the field of employment and occupation.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. The Committee welcomes the detailed information provided by the Government regarding numerous recent projects implemented with minority non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to promote mutual tolerance and prevent discrimination based on ethnic origin, language, culture or religion. It further notes that since 2012, the Ministry of Culture, in cooperation with other authorities, has been implementing the National Identity, Civic Society and Integration Policy Guidelines 2012–18. With respect to the situation of the Roma, the Committee notes the creation of the Advisory Council for the Implementation of Roma Integration and the Government’s indication that special attention will be paid to improve the level of education of Roma children and their parents, since their low level of education constitutes a major obstacle to their access to employment. The Committee also notes that the Office of the Ombudsperson that has been cooperating with Roma NGOs to address discrimination against the Roma indicates, in its annual report of 2012, that the necessary measures to prevent Roma exclusion have not been taken. The Ombudsperson also provided recommendations such as the need to develop a specific action plan to improve the situation of the Roma and to involve representatives of the Roma community in all projects concerned. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the assessment of and the results achieved by the initiatives taken to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in education, training, employment and occupation for minority groups, including the Roma. The Government is asked to provide information on the implementation of the National Identity, Civic Society and Integration Policy Guidelines and the project “Different People. Diverse Experience. One Latvia” mentioned by the Government, and the activities carried out by the Advisory Council for the Implementation of Roma Integration in the field of education for both adults and children, employment and occupation. Please also provide information on any measures taken to follow up the recommendations made by the Office of the Ombudsperson to address discrimination against the Roma.

Enforcement. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Office of the Ombudsperson has examined 36 cases related to discrimination in employment. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that the labour inspectors participated in 2012 in a training which dealt with detecting and proving discrimination and that an additional similar training was planned for 2013. The Committee also notes from the Government’s report that 67 violations related to the prohibition of discrimination and the principle of equal treatment were detected by the labour inspectors (in comparison with 35 in 2011 and six in 2012). The Committee also welcomes the amendment of section 95 of the Labour Law on 4 March 2010 extending from one to three months the period during which a worker can bring a claim of discrimination before a court. The Committee asks the Government to continue and strengthen its efforts to develop the capacity of labour inspectors to detect and address discrimination cases, and to provide information on the steps taken in this respect. It asks the Government to continue to provide information on the enforcement of anti-discrimination provisions in employment and occupation by the Labour Inspectorate and the Office of the Ombudsperson, including information on the number, nature and outcome of discrimination complaints. It also asks the Government to provide information on the impact of the amendment to section 95 of the Labour Law on the number of judicial claims of discrimination dealt with by the courts.

[The Government is asked to reply in details to the present comments in 2014.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Legislative developments. The Committee welcomes the adoption on 29 November 2012 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons Engaged in Economic Activity which prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, religious, political or other convictions, sexual orientation, disability, race or ethnic origin with respect to access to self-employment. The Committee requests the Government to examine the possibility of including colour and social origin in the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons Engaged in Economic Activity and to provide information on the application of the law in practice, including any violations detected by or brought to attention of labour inspectors or other competent authorities.

Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. The Committee welcomes the amendment of the Labour Law on 21 June 2012, to include a new provision according to which “it is prohibited to indicate a skill of specific foreign language in a job advertisement, except when it is justifiably necessary for the performance of work duties” (section 32(21)) and therefore improves equal opportunities for minority language groups. The Committee recalls that for a number of years, it has expressed concern, over certain provisions of the Law on State Language of 1999, which might have a discriminatory effect on the employment or work of minority groups. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the numerous Latvian language courses offered to children and adults of minority groups by the Latvian Language Agency (LLA). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the number of violations for not mastering the official language to the extent necessary to perform professional duties or duties of office remained relatively stable from 2005 to 2012 (between 529 and 544). The Committee however notes that the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) indicates that the list of occupations in the private sector which “affect the lawful interests of the public” – which means occupations in which the official language shall be used in accordance with section 6(2) of the Law on State Language – has been repeatedly expanded and now includes over 1,000 professions. According to the ECRI “the progressive tightening of the regulations on language use and raising of the sanctions for violations of the Law on State Language is creating an inquisitorial climate which is very likely to deteriorate inter-ethnic relations (notably with the Russian speaking population), as well as affect migrants’ ability to integrate in Latvian society” (CRI(2012)3, 9 December 2011, paragraph 62). The Committee considers that discrimination based on national extraction can occur when legislation imposing a State language for employment in public and private sector activities is interpreted and implemented too broadly, and as such disproportionately and adversely affects the employment and occupational opportunities of minority language groups (General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 764). Furthermore, it recalls that any limitation regarding access to employment must be required by the characteristics of the particular job, and be in proportion to its inherent requirements. The Committee asks the Government to take measures to ensure that workers from minority groups are effectively protected against discrimination in employment and occupation, including measures to ensure that the level of language proficiency required does not disproportionately affect them as regards access to employment and occupation, both in the private and public sectors. The Committee also asks the Government to assess the impact of such limitations on the employment of members of minority groups, and to review and revise the list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law on State Language to ensure that the language prerequisite is based on the inherent requirements of the particular job. The Government is asked to provide information on the measures taken in this respect.

Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. The Committee recalls its previous comments regarding the provisions of the State Civil Service Act, 2000, which sets out as mandatory requirements in order to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position that the person concerned “is not or has not been in a permanent staff position in the state security service, intelligence or counter-intelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or “who are not or have not been the members of organizations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is no list of the organizations referred to in section 7(9) of the Act. It also notes the Government’s explanation that these provisions which take into account the historical situation in Latvia, intend to ensure a loyal and politically neutral state administration. The Committee remains concerned that such broad exclusions from being a candidate for any civil service position as provided by section 7(8) and (9) are not sufficiently well defined and delimited, and could result in discrimination in employment and occupation on the basis of political opinion. It further recalls that political opinion may be taken into account as an inherent requirement only for certain posts involving special responsibilities directly concerned with developing government policy. The Committee urges the Government to revise section 7 of the State Civil Service Act to ensure that any requirements to apply for a position in the public service are based on the inherent requirements of the particular job, as strictly defined. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on the application of sections 7(8) and (9) of the State Civil Service Act in practice, including any available data on the number of candidates to a civil servant position whose application has been rejected on the basis of these provisions and the functions concerned.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2014.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Legislative developments. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that substantial amendments to the Labour Law 2001 were adopted in March 2010. The Committee notes that the definitions of direct and indirect discrimination have been amended, so that “any less favourable treatment due to the granting of prenatal or maternity leave, or leave to the father of the child” is deemed to be direct discrimination, and the reference to “comparable situations” has been deleted from the definition of indirect discrimination. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the time limits for bringing an action have been extended. The Committee notes that amendments were also made in March 2010 to the Support for Unemployed Persons and Persons Seeking Employment Law, which now includes a provision prohibiting differential treatment on the grounds of gender, race and ethnic origin when implementing active employment measures and preventive measures for the reduction of unemployment (section 2). The Committee further notes from the Government’s report the following legislative developments relevant to the Convention: the adoption on 25 February 2010 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons – Performers of Economic Activity – pursuant to which differential treatment is prohibited in access to economic activity on the grounds of gender, race and ethnic origin; and the amendment of the Education Law (4 March 2010) providing for the right to acquire education regardless of financial and social status, race, nationality, ethnic origin, gender, religious and political convictions, state of health, occupation and place of residence. The Committee asks the Government to forward copies of the range of legislative texts to which it refers in its report, and to provide information on their application in practice with respect to equality and non-discrimination in education, training, employment and occupation, including with regard to the application of the various exceptions permitted. Please also provide information on the measures taken to address discrimination based on the grounds set forth in section 7 of the Labour Law, including sexual orientation in employment and occupation.

Equality of opportunity and treatment of women and men. The Committee notes the statistical data provided by the Government indicating the high level of women’s participation in employment promotion activities organized by the State Employment Agency (SEA), particularly in vocational training, retraining and raising of qualifications, on-the-job training, measures to start commercial activities or self-employment, and professional training of persons subject to unemployment risk. With regard to occupational segregation, the Committee refers to its comments on the application of the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), and also notes from the statistical information provided by the Government that women continue to be concentrated in education, health and social care, and trade, lodgement and food services. The Committee notes further from the Government’s report on Convention No. 100 that the Gender Equality Council was replaced in May 2010 by the Gender Equality Committee, and is mandated to promote the implementation, monitoring and improvement of the gender equality policy. The Gender Equality Committee is composed of representatives of the State, the social partners and non-governmental organizations. Regarding the Committee’s previous request with respect to the prohibition to inquire about a woman’s pregnancy status in the course of a job interview, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there have been no administrative or judicial decisions on this matter. The Committee again asks the Government to provide information on any judicial or administrative decisions concerning the prohibition to inquire into a women’s pregnancy status in the context of a job interview, and to consider taking measures to raise awareness of this prohibition and the relevant avenues for redress. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on the following:

(i)    any measures taken, and their impact, to address gender segregation in the labour market;

(ii)   details of the gender equality policy which the Gender Equality Committee is mandated to implement, and the specific initiatives of the Gender Equality Committee in this regard;

(iii)  the involvement of women in the various employment promotion activities of the SEA and to what extent such training and capacity building has resulted in women obtaining employment;

(iv)  statistics on the level of employment and the distribution of men and women in the different economic sectors, occupational categories and positions.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. The Committee notes the initiatives taken under the national programme “Gypsies (Roma) in Latvia” 2007–09. It particularly notes the training of Roma as teachers’ assistants to improve their employment level, and to ensure a better understanding of the issues relating to education and social inclusion of Roma children. Regarding minority groups other than the Roma, the Committee notes the activities implemented in the context of the “National Programme for the Promotion of Tolerance 2005–09”, the “Integration of New Members of the Society” project, and the establishment of the National Integration Centre, which provides training seminars and courses aimed at improving qualifications. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures undertaken to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in education, training, employment and occupation for minority groups, including the Roma. Please continue to provide information on any other programmes or measures taken or envisaged to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in employment and occupation in respect of minority groups.

Enforcement. The Committee notes that a new State Labour Inspectorate Law was adopted on 19 June 2008, which has the objective of expanding the areas of supervision and control of the State Labour Inspectorate (SLI). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the SLI continues to supervise and control the observance of the provisions included in sections 7 and 29 of the Labour Law. The Committee notes that a number of complaints of discrimination in employment were addressed by the Office of the Ombudsperson, and only a few cases were addressed by the SLI between 2008 and 2010; no training has been provided to labour inspectors on equality and non-discrimination in employment and occupation. The Committee asks the Government to take measures to improve the capacity of labour inspectors to detect and address discrimination in employment and occupation, and to provide information on the measures taken in this regard. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the number, nature and outcome of discrimination complaints addressed by the judicial and administrative bodies.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. For a number of years the Committee has expressed concern over certain provisions of the State Language Act, 1999, which might have a discriminatory effect on the employment or work of minority groups, including the large Russian-speaking minority in the country. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the two state agencies dealing with language were merged to form the new Latvian Language Agency (LLA) which has as its main objective to promote the strengthening of the status and sustainable development of the Latvian language. The Government indicates that the official language policy defined in the Guidelines for Official Language Policy for the Time Period 2005–14 and the Official Language Policy Programme for the Time Period 2006–10 are implemented by the LLA. The Committee notes the conclusions of the LLA study entitled “Impact of migration on the language environment in Latvia” (2009) indicating the difficulties faced by immigrants, in particular in integrating in the labour market. The Committee furthermore notes from the information provided by the Government concerning the application of the State Language Act that the provision regarding failure to use the official language to the extent required for the performance of duties is the most predominant issue related to that Law before the courts. While noting the participation of minority groups including Russian-speaking minority groups in language training courses conducted by the State Employment Agency, the Committee asks the Government to provide more detailed information on the situation of minority groups in the labour market, including statistical data on the proportion of those attending such courses that have subsequently obtained employment. The Committee also asks the Government to continue to provide information on activities undertaken by the LLA, and the results achieved to improve access to employment and occupation for all ethnic and linguistic minority groups. Please also continue to provide information on the percentage of men and women belonging to minority groups that have participated in the language training courses, as well as information on relevant administrative and judicial decisions concerning the application of the State Language Act.

Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. The Committee recalls its previous comments regarding the provisions of the State Civil Service Act, 2000, which sets out as mandatory requirements in order to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position that the person concerned “is not or has not been in a permanent staff position in the state security service, intelligence or counter-intelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or “who are not or have not been the members of organizations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Supreme Court has not dealt with these provisions, but that it has upheld similar provisions, in particular section 5(3) of the Law on Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau of 2002. The Committee, however, considers that such broad exclusions from being a candidate for any civil service position are not sufficiently well defined and delimited, and could result in discrimination in employment and occupation based on political opinion. The Committee asks the Government to revise section 7 of the State Civil Service Act to ensure that any requirements for positions in the public service are based on the inherent requirements of the particular job, as strictly defined. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide a list of the prohibited organizations under section 7(9) of the State Civil Service Act.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Article 1(1)(b). Legislative developments. The Committee notes with interest that section 7 of the Labour Law was amended on 21 September 2006 so as to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to address discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment and occupation.

Equality of opportunity and tretament between men and women. The Committee notes that the Labour Law, as amended in September 2006, prohibits any inquiries about women’s pregnant status in job interviews. The Committee also notes that awareness-raising campaigns on gender equality were carried out throughout 2006 and a research project on ‘The aspects of gender equality in the labour market’ was also realized. The Committee notes that according to the project’s conclusions there is a relationship between the gender of workers and the choice of certain professions and types of employment which eventually results in disparities between men and women as to their working conditions, including remuneration. The Committee notes from EUROSTAT that in 2007, women’s employment rate was approximately 62.4 per cent compared to 72.5 per cent of men. The Committee also notes from the Government’s report that women are mainly concentrated in education and healthcare, whereas men dominate in the construction, transport and agricultural sectors. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any judicial or administrative decisions concerning the breach of the prohibition of inquiries into women’s pregnant status in the context of job interviews. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken or envisaged to promote women’s employment, including information on any measures taken to provide women with a broader range of employment opportunities with a view to addressing the occupational sex segregation existing in the labour market, and the impact of such measures. The Committee further requests the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the levels of employment and the distribution of men and women in the different economic sectors, occupational categories and positions.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour, national extraction or social origin. The Committee notes from the concluding observations of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, that a National Programme on the Roma was adopted for the years 2007–09
(E/C.12/LVA/CO/1, 7 January 2008, paragraph 31). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken under the National Programme on Roma to promote the principle of the Convention and their impact. Please also provide information on any other programmes or measures taken to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in employment and occupation in respect of minority groups other than the Roma.

Employment services and vocational guidance. The Committee notes that pursuant to Order No. 436 of the Cabinet of Ministers (17 July 2007) the Professional Career Guidance Centre has been dismantled and its functions will be performed by the National Employment Service. The Committee also notes the Government’s general description of the mandate of this body regarding the promotion of employment. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any activities conducted by the National Employment Service relevant to the application of the Convention, including information on any initiatives specifically targeting women workers or persons belonging to minority groups with a view to promoting equality of opportunities with respect to vocational training, occupational guidance and access to employment.

Enforcement. The Committee notes that the functions of the former National Human Rights Office have been taken over by the Office of the Ombudsperson, established under the law on the Ombudsperson which entered into force on 1 January 2007. Further to its request for information on the practical application of sections 7 and 29 of the Labour Law, the Committee notes the decisions delivered by national courts in relation to cases of discrimination based on sex or race in employment. The Committee also notes that under section 22(6) of the Act on State Civil Service, labour inspectors are provided with training on equality issues and, in 2005, they participated in a series of seminars on gender equality that were organized by the Latvian School of Public Administration. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any complaints concerning discrimination in employment and occupation received by the ombudspersons and the outcome thereof. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to supply information on relevant judicial decisions and violations detected by the labour inspection services and the remedies provided or the sanction imposed. The Committee further encourages the Government to continue to supply labour inspectors with the necessary training on the issues covered by the Convention and to provide information on the measures taken in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. The Committee recalls its previous observation on the discriminatory effects that might follow from the application of the State Language Act of 1999 and its implementing regulations on the employment and occupation of minority groups, including the Russian-speaking minority. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the requirement for skills in the state official language responds to legitimate interests of the State and that training in the Latvian language is provided to persons whose mother tongue is not Latvian under Regulation No. 774/2004 of the Cabinet of Ministers establishing the National Agency for the Latvian Language Training (NALLT). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that section 3(4) of the Act on the unemployed and the persons seeking employment recognizes that the promotion of public knowledge of the state official language represents one of the means of reducing unemployment. The Committee requests the Government to provide full information on the activities of the NALLT, including information on the percentage of men and women belonging to minority groups that have participated in the language training courses. The Committee also requests the Government to supply information on the situation of minority groups in the labour market, and on any measures taken to assess the impact of the State Language Act and its implementing regulations on the employment opportunities of minority groups. Please also provide information on any relevant administrative and judicial decisions concerning the application of the State Language Act and the remedies provided or sanctions imposed.

Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. Further to its previous observation concerning the application of some provisions of the Police Act of 1999 and the State Civil Service Act of 2000 which may result in discrimination on the ground of political opinion in respect of access to employment, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that section 28 of the Police Act was repealed on 15 June 2006. As regards the restrictions on the access to public employment contained in the State Civil Service Act, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it is not in a position to supply information on the number of applicants who have been refused employment under the State Civil Service Act since, pursuant to section 9 of the Act on State Administration, the fulfilment of the criteria required in relation to a vacancy in the public service is evaluated autonomously by each public institution. Recalling the obligation of the Government to ensure the application of the principle of non-discrimination in respect of employment under the control of a national authority, the Committee requests the Government to monitor the application of the State Civil Service Act with a view to ensuring that applicants for jobs in the public service do not suffer from discrimination on the ground of political opinion, and it requests the Government to supply detailed information on the measures taken in this regard. The Committee also reiterates its request for information on any judicial or administrative decisions handed down in relation to the application of the Act, in particular as regards appeals against exclusion or dismissal from the public service on the ground of political opinion.

Regarding section 8(9) of the State Civil Service Act which makes access to employment in the public service conditional upon the requirement that the applicant is not or has not been a participant in organizations prohibited by law or judicial decisions, the Committee notes that the Government does not provide the information solicited. The Committee therefore again requests the Government to supply information on the application of this provision, the requirements for the prohibition of organizations, a list of all prohibited organizations, as well as indications as to the number of persons that have been excluded from being a candidate for a civil service position based on section 8(9) of the State Civil Service Act.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. Legislative developments. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Law was amended in 2004 to strengthen sections 7 and 29 concerning discrimination. It reiterates its request to the Government to provide information on the practical application and enforcement of these provisions, including through relevant administrative and judicial bodies. In this regard, please indicate whether any training is provided to labour inspectors concerning equality and non-discrimination.

2. Employment services and vocational guidance. The Committee recalls that under Article 3(e) of the Convention, Latvia undertook to ensure the promotion of equality of opportunity and treatment in the activities of vocational guidance and placement services. The Committee, therefore, once again requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken by the National Employment Service and the Professional Career Guidance Centre to ensure and promote equality of men and women, as well as members of ethnic minorities, with regard to vocational training, occupational guidance and placement services offered.

3. Gender equality. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report concerning a number of initiatives and projects aimed at promoting gender equality in society and the labour market. It asks the Government to continue to provide such information and to indicate the results achieved by such action, particularly in addressing gender-based occupational segregation (horizontal and vertical), by providing detailed statistical data on the position of men and women in the labour market (participation of men and women in employment in the different sectors, occupations and their distribution in management and decision-making jobs).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. Discrimination based on national extraction. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any information in reply to its previous comments concerning the application of the State Language Law and its implementing regulations with regard to access to employment and occupation, and the need to promote equal employment opportunities for all ethnic and linguistic minority groups. The Committee, therefore, urges the Government to provide in its next report information on the application of the State Language Law and its implementing regulations, including information on any measures taken to assess the impact of these measures on the employment opportunities of ethnic minority groups, and information on any relevant administrative and judicial decisions and sanctions imposed for violations of its provisions. It also reiterates its request to the Government to provide information on the efforts made to promote equal employment opportunities of these groups, including through language training.

2. Discrimination based on political opinion. The Committee notes that once again the Government has failed to provide any information requested by the Committee concerning certain provisions of the national legislation that amount to or may result in discrimination based on political opinion with regard to access to public service employment (section 7(8) of the State Civil Service Act, 2000, and section 28 of the Act on Police, 1999). The Committee, therefore, urges the Government to provide in its next report indications as to the number of persons who have been dismissed or excluded from being candidates for employment in the civil service and the police on the basis of these provisions, as well as any administrative or judicial decisions issued in cases where affected persons have appealed against their exclusion or dismissal.

3. In its previous comments the Committee noted that under section 8(9) of the State Civil Service Act, it is a mandatory requirement to qualify as a candidate for a civil service position that the person concerned is not or has not been a participant in organizations prohibited by law or judicial decision. The Committee urges the Government once again to provide information on the application of this provision, including the requirements for the prohibition of organizations, a list of all prohibited organizations, as well as indications as to the number of persons that have been excluded from being a candidate for a civil service position based on section 8(9) of the State Civil Service Act.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other matters.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

Further to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on the following points.

1. Article 1 of the Convention. Sexual harassment. The Committee notes that the Labour Code of 2002 prohibits harassment, including sexual harassment, as a form of discrimination. Under section 29(7) of the Labour Code it is prohibited to "subject a person to such actions which are unacceptable from the point of view of the persons, which are associated with his or her belonging to a specific gender, including actions of a sexual nature if the purpose of such actions is the infringement of the person’s dignity and the creation of an intimidating, hostile, humiliating, degrading, or offensive environment". The Government is requested to provide information on the implementation of this provision, including training and awareness raising undertaken on the issue of sexual harassment and any relevant judicial or administrative decisions.

2. Equal access to the public service. The Committee notes that one of the mandatory requirements in order to qualify as a candidate for a civil service position under the State Civil Service Act is that the person concerned is not or has not been a participant in organizations prohibited by law or judicial decision (section 8(9)). It requests the Government once again to provide detailed information on the application of this provision, including the requirements for the prohibition of organizations, a list of all prohibited organizations, as well as indications as to the number of persons that have been excluded from being a candidate for a civil service position based on section 8(9) of the State Civil Service Act.

3. Article 2. Equality of opportunity and treatment of men and women. The Committee notes that a Programme for the Implementation of Gender Equality (2005-06) was due to be adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers in June 2004. Please provide further information on the adoption of the Programme and its implementation with regard to gender equality in employment and occupation.  The Committee is particularly interested to receive information on any measures taken or envisaged to make the country’s policy and legislation regarding equality of men and women in employment and occupation better known to the general public.

4. Part III of the report form. The Committee notes that the National Human Rights Office has received 49 written and 197 oral complaints on the right to work, out of which seven written and 18 oral complaints related to discrimination. The Committee requests the Government to continue similar information in the future, as well as information on the nature and content of the complaints concerning discrimination received and the manner in which the cases were resolved. The Committee reiterates its request to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to protect against actual or perceived retaliation, which may be a reason for the currently low number of complaints.

5. The Committee recalls that it attaches great importance to the proper training of labour inspectors as regards questions related to equality of opportunity and treatment and requests the Government once again to indicate whether such training is being provided or planned. Further, the Government is requested once again to supply specific information on the measures taken by the National Employment Service and the Professional Career Guidance Centre to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of vocational training, occupational guidance and placement services offered.

6. Part IV of the report form. The Committee notes the information provided regarding Supreme Court Case No. 2002-21-01 of 20 May 2003, in which it was held that mandatory retirement at the age of 65 for faculty members in higher education institutions constituted discrimination on the basis of age. Please continue to provide information on any judicial and administrative decision giving effect to the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

1. Article 1 of the Convention. Prohibition of discrimination. The Committee notes with interest that under section 7 of the new Labour Code of 2002 everyone has an equal right to work; to fair, safe and healthy working conditions; as well as to fair remuneration, irrespective of race, skin colour, gender, age, disability, religious, political or other conviction, national or social origin, property or marital status or other circumstances. Section 27 of the Labour Code sets out a prohibition of discriminatory treatment on the same grounds in employment and occupation, providing definitions for direct and indirect discrimination and harassment, including sexual harassment. The Committee also notes with interest the provisions regarding non-discriminatory job advertisements and interviews (sections 32 and 33). In the Committee’s view these new provisions are in accordance with the Convention and should operate to improve its application. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to make these new equality provisions known to the broader public and to provide information on their practical application and enforcement, including through relevant administrative and judicial bodies.

2. Discrimination on the grounds of national extraction. The Committee regrets that the Government has not provided any information in reply to the Committee’s previous observation in which it had expressed concern over certain provisions of the State Language Act, 1999, which might have a discriminatory effect on the employment or work of the large Russian-speaking minority in the country. The Committee particularly recalls that section 2(2) of the Act provides that the use of language in private institutions, organizations and enterprises and the use of language with regard to self-employed persons shall be regulated in cases when their activities concern legitimate public interests. Legitimate public interest is broadly defined by the Act as including public safety, health, morals, health care, protection of consumer rights and labour rights, workplace safety and public administrative supervision. In this context the Committee notes the Regulations Regarding the Extent of Official Language Knowledge Required for the Performance of Professional and Official Duties, and Procedures for Testing Fluency of the Language of 19 June 2001. The Regulations assign levels of Latvian language proficiency to the various occupations and positions in the public sector (Annex I of the Regulations) and to some private sector occupations and positions which involve the exercise of certain public functions (Annex II of the Regulations). The Committee also notes that according to paragraph 5 of the Regulations the level of language proficiency for positions in the private sector other than those listed in Annex II shall be determined by the employers themselves. The Committee considers that these regulations provide guidance for the public sector in accordance with the Convention.

3. The Committee remains concerned, however, that the State Language Act and the implementing regulations may be interpreted and applied, particularly in the private sector, in a manner that would be indirectly discriminatory on the basis of national extraction. It also notes that the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination raised this issue with the Government in its concluding observations of 21 August 2003 (CERD A/58/18, paragraph 445). The Government is therefore once again requested to provide detailed information on the application of the State Language Act with regard to access to employment and occupation, including administrative and judicial decisions and sanctions imposed for violations of the Act. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken to assess the impact of the Act on Latvia’s ethnic and linguistic minority groups in respect of their employment and occupational opportunities; and on efforts made by the Government to provide Latvian language training to these groups.

4. Discrimination on the grounds of political opinion. The Committee also regrets that the Government’s report contains no information in reply to the Committee’s previous comments regarding one of the mandatory requirements established by the State Civil Service Act 2000 in order to qualify as a candidate for a position in the civil service which is that the person concerned "is not or has not been in a permanent staff position in the state security service, intelligence or counter-intelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian SSR or some foreign State" (section 7(8)). A similar provision is found in the Act on Police of 1999, stating that "the police shall not employ a person who is or has been a permanent or temporary staff employee of the security service (intelligence or counter-intelligence service) of the USSR, Latvian SSR or some foreign State; an agent, a resident or keeper of a safe house (under any form of cover organization)" (section 28, fourth sentence) on the basis of employment in security forces of the former political regime. The Committee considered these exclusions as not sufficiently well defined and delimited to ensure that they do not become discriminatory in employment and occupation based on political opinion. The Committee therefore once again hopes the Government will revise the provisions concerned. The Government is further requested to provide detailed information in its next report on the application of the provisions, including the number of persons and their levels who have been dismissed or excluded from being a candidate for a civil service position based on section 7(8) of the State Civil Service Act and from being employed by the police based on section 28 of the Act on Police. Please also provide information on whether persons affected have appealed against their exclusion or dismissal on the basis of these provisions to the National Human Rights Office or the courts, as well as administrative or judicial decisions in respect of such cases.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other points.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

1. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the new Labour Code will enter into force on 1 June 2002 and will include provision shifting the burden of proof in discrimination cases to the employer. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to supply a copy of the Code.

2. The Committee notes that the National Human Rights Office is established as an independent state institution, promoting the observance of the fundamental human rights and freedoms of individuals and citizens in Latvia in accordance with the Constitution and international human rights treaties, which are binding for Latvia. The Committee also notes the broad mandate of the Office, including responsibilities such as public information, the elaboration and coordination of promotional programmes, inquiries into individual complaints, investigating the human rights situation in the country and carrying out analysis regarding the compliance of national norms with international human rights treaties. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the specific activities undertaken by the Office with respect to the promotion and implementation of the Convention. The Government is requested to continue to supply the Committee with specific information on activities, projects and programmes undertaken to promote equal education, training and public awareness raising.

3. The Committee notes that the National Human Rights Office has received 38 written complaints concerning labour rights in 2000, out of which five could be resolved by conciliation. The Office also provided consultative services in 325 labour cases in the same year. The Government states that, in many instances, the Office is unable to provide assistance, because the persons concerned fear to lose their jobs. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to protect against actual or perceived retaliation and to continue to provide information on the number and nature of employment discrimination complaints brought before the National Human Rights Office or handled by the Prosecutor’s Office during the reporting period and the outcome of any such complaints. The Government is also requested to provide copies of any administrative or judicial decisions issued relevant to the application of the Convention.

4. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the State Labour Inspectorate has carried out more than 10,000 inspections in 2000, none of which appeared to reveal instances of discrimination. Noting that it attaches great importance to the proper training of labour inspectors as regards questions related to equality of opportunity and treatment, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on such training provided or planned.

5. The Committee notes that one of the mandatory requirements in order to qualify as a candidate for a civil service position under the State Civil Service Act is that the person concerned is not or has not been a participant in organizations prohibited by law or judicial decision (section 8(9)). The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the application of this provision, including the requirements for the prohibition of organizations, a list of all prohibited organizations, as well as indications as to the number of persons that have been excluded from being a candidate for a civil service position based on section 8(9) of the State Civil Service Act.

6. The Government indicated that the application of the Latvian policy of non-discrimination in employment is entrusted to, inter alia, the State Employment Service. The Government further indicates that the Professional Career Guidance Centre of the Ministry of Welfare is active in implementing the national policy. The Government is requested to supply specific information on the measures taken by the National Employment Service and the Professional Career Guidance Centre to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of vocational training, occupational guidance and placement services offered.

7. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which the social partners are involved in the prevention of discrimination and the promotion of equality in employment and occupation.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the report of the Government and the replies provided to several points raised by the Committee of Experts in its previous comments.

1. Discrimination on the ground of national extraction. In its previous comments the Committee had expressed concern that some of the provisions of the 1999 State Language Act might have a discriminatory effect on the employment or work of the large Russian-speaking minority in the country. It had asked the Government to take into account its comments in the drafting of a new Act. The Committee notes that the State Language Act entered into force on 1 September 2000. It notes that some of the provisions of concern to the Committee had been revised while others had not.

2. The Committee recalls that the establishment of Latvian as the official state language and the regulation of its use do not, per se, contravene the Convention. However, language restrictions that are intended to, or in fact operate to, deprive ethnic minority groups of equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of their employment and occupation without being related to the inherent requirements of a particular job would constitute discrimination on the ground of national extraction under the Convention. The Committee notes that article 114 of the Constitution provides that persons belonging to ethnic minorities have the right to preserve and develop their language and their ethnic and cultural identity, and under article 91 human rights shall be realized without discrimination of any kind. Moreover, section 1 of the Labour Code provides equal rights in legal employment relations regardless of sex, race, colour, age, religious, political or other persuasion, national or social origin, or material situation.

3. The Committee notes that section 2(2) of the State Language Act provides that the use of language in private institutions, organizations and enterprises (or companies) and the use of language with regard to self-employed persons shall be regulated in cases when their activities concern legitimate public interests. The Committee notes the additional element added to section 2(2) of the Act, providing that the use of language in private bodies shall be regulated to the extent that the restriction applied to ensure legitimate public interests is balanced with the rights and interests of private institutions, organizations, enterprises (or companies). Legitimate public interest is broadly defined as including public safety, health, morals, health care, protection of consumer rights and labour rights, workplace safety and public administrative supervision. Section 6(3) provides that employees of private institutions, organizations and enterprises (or companies), as well as self-employed persons who, as required by law or other normative acts, perform certain public functions must know and use the state language to the extent necessary for the performance of their functions. Section 8(2) provides that employees of private institutions, organizations, enterprises (or companies), as well as self-employed persons, shall use the state language in record-keeping and documents if their activities relate to legitimate public interests. Section 8(3) states that private institutions, organizations and enterprises (or companies), as well as self-employed persons who perform public functions as required by law or other normative acts shall use the state language in record-keeping and documents which are required for performing their functions.

4. The Committee notes that the new State Language Act retains a very broad definition of public interest. The Committee understands that the Government has enacted several regulations under the State Language Act and it requests the Government to supply in its next report the texts of the regulations, as well as detailed information on the Act’s practical application, including criteria used to determine legitimate public interest, administrative and judicial procedural protections and sanctions imposed for violations of the Act. The Committee is particularly interested in the impact of the Act on Latvia’s ethnic and linguistic minority groups in respect of their employment and occupational opportunities, including the number of persons who may have lost their jobs or income due to the implementation of the Act. The Committee also requests the Government to provide clarification as to the meaning of "the rights and interests of private institutions, organizations and enterprises (companies)" as set out in section 2(2) of the State Language Act.

5. Discrimination on the ground of political opinion. The Committee notes that one of the mandatory requirements established by the 2000 State Civil Service Act in order to qualify as a candidate for a position in the civil service is that the person concerned "is not or has not been in a permanent staff position in the state security service, intelligence or counter-intelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian SSR or some foreign State" (section 7(8)). A similar provision is found in the Act on Police of 1999, stating that "the police shall not employ a person who is or has been a permanent or temporary staff employee of the security service (intelligence or counter-intelligence service) of the USSR, Latvian SSR or some foreign State; an agent, a resident or keeper of safe house (under any form of cover organization)" (section 28, fourth sentence) on the basis of employment in security forces of the former political regime.

6. The Committee recalls that requirements of a political nature can be set for a particular job, but to ensure that they are not contrary to the Convention, they should be limited to the characteristics of a particular post and be in proportion to its labour requirements. The Committee notes that the above established exclusions by the provisions under examination apply broadly to the entire civil service and police rather than to specific jobs, functions or tasks. The Committee is concerned that these provisions appear to go beyond justifiable exclusions in respect of a particular job based on its inherent requirements as provided for under Article 1(2) of the Convention. The Committee recalls that for measures not to be deemed discriminatory under Article 4, they must be measures affecting an individual on account of activities he or she is justifiably suspected or proven to be engaged in which are prejudicial to the security of the State. Article 4 of the Convention does not exclude from the definition of discrimination measures taken by reason of membership of a particular group or community. The Committee also notes that in cases where persons are deemed to be justifiably suspected of or engaged in activities prejudicial to the security of the State, the individual concerned shall have the right to appeal to a competent body in accordance with national practice.

7. In the light of the above, the Committee considers the exclusions from being a candidate for any civil service position and from being employed by the police are not sufficiently well defined and delimited to ensure that they do not become discrimination in employment and occupation based on political opinion. The Committee hopes the Government will revise the provisions concerned, and, in doing so, will have recourse to the indications provided by the Committee in its General Survey on equality in employment and occupation of 1988, in particular paragraphs 126, and 135 to 137, and of paragraphs 192 to 202 of the Special Survey of 1996. The Government is further requested to provide detailed information in its next report on the application of the provisions, including the number of persons and their levels who have been dismissed or excluded from being a candidate for a civil service position based on section 7(8) of the State Civil Service Act and from being employed by the police based on section 28 of the Act on Police. Please also indicate the procedural protections of appellate review available to affected persons, the criteria used for determining the basis of exclusion or dismissal and any administrative or judicial decisions relevant to the application of these provisions. Please also supply information on whether the conformity of this Act with the Constitution or with the Convention has been challenged before the Constitutional Court.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other points.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

1. Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government's first report. The Committee notes with interest the Government's statement that, in order to promote the national policy of equal opportunity and treatment in employment and occupation, the Constitution of Latvia was amended on 15 October 1998 to add a chapter on "Fundamental human rights". The chapter contains a general prohibition against discrimination which states that "all human beings in Latvia shall be equal before the law and the courts" and that "human rights shall be realized without discrimination of any kind" (article 91). The Committee further notes with interest that section 1 of the Latvian Labour Code establishes that "physical persons in the Republic of Latvia are ensured of equal rights in legal employment relations regardless of race, colour, sex, age, religious, political or other persuasion, national or social origin, or material situation". Noting that section 1 of the Labour Code prohibits discrimination on the basis of "national or social origin", the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which protection from discrimination on the basis of national origin is currently provided in practice. The Committee notes that section 1 of the Latvian Labour Code prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of age and material situation, in addition to the seven grounds set forth in Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether it intends for the grounds of age and material situation to be covered under the Convention pursuant to Article 1(1)(b). Further, the Committee notes from the report that a new Labour Code will be enacted in the near future. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep it informed of developments and provide a copy as soon as it is adopted.

2. The Committee notes that, in July 1999, the Government adopted but did not promulgate a State Language Act requiring the use of the Latvian language in employment-related activities that would extend not only to the public service, but also to private enterprise and self-employment. The Act was to be considered for revision in December 1999. Noting that section 4 of the Latvian Constitution of 15 February 1922 establishes Latvian as the official state language, the Committee points out that such a provision does not, per se, contravene the Convention. However, language restrictions that are intended to or in fact operate to deprive ethnic minority groups of equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of their employment and occupation, including access to education and employment, occupational guidance and vocational training, would constitute discrimination on the ground of national extraction. A number of provisions contained in the draft State Language Act contain employment-related restrictions that could be found to place linguistic minorities in Latvia at a disadvantage with regard to their employment activities. These include sections 6(2) and (3) and 8(2) and (3), which require private institutions, organizations and companies, and their employees, and self-employed persons to use the state language, inter alia, where their activities relate to the public interest. The Committee notes that article 114 of the Latvian Constitution provides that "persons belonging to ethnic minorities have the right to preserve and develop their language and their ethnic and cultural identity". The Committee expresses the hope that the Government will reconsider the draft State Language Act in light of the analysis set forth above. The Government is asked to indicate the manner in which the relevant constitutional provisions, including articles 91 and 114, are applied to prevent and eliminate discriminatory practices with regard to Latvia's ethnic and linguistic minority groups. Further, the Government is requested to provide a copy of the final version of the State Language Act as soon as it is adopted.

3. With regard to access to employment, section 15 of the Labour Code provides that "no direct or indirect restrictions of rights or direct or indirect granting of preferential treatment due to race, colour, sex, age, religious, political or other persuasion, national or social origin, or material situation shall be permitted in hiring except those restrictions and preferences provided by law and other normative acts". The Committee notes the Government's statement that the exclusions referred to in section 15 are specified by law and apply only to special cases, including to protect the rights of other persons and to ensure the security of the State, public order and peace. It requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which this provision is applied in practice, and to indicate the precise nature of the restrictions and preferences permitted.

4. Article 2. The Government indicates that the application of the Latvian policy of non-discrimination in employment is entrusted to, inter alia, the State Employment Service. The Government further indicates that the Professional Career Guidance Centre of the Ministry of Welfare is active in implementing the national policy. The Government is requested to supply specific information on the measures taken by the National Employment Service and the Professional Career Guidance Centre to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of vocational training, occupational guidance and placement services offered. In addition, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the establishment, structure and activities of the National Human Rights Office, including any promotional, informational and advocacy functions carried out by that agency.

5. Article 3. The Committee notes with interest the Government's statement that cooperation between the social partners has developed rapidly in recent years, leading to ongoing social dialogue at the sectoral and national level. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the activities of the National Tripartite Cooperation Council as well as on trade unions that supervise the application of the Convention.

6. The Government's report indicates that public awareness in Latvia regarding discrimination in employment is low, and that this factor, coupled with the lack of court decisions with regard to discrimination are problems hindering the application of the Convention. Article 3(b) of the Convention requires ratifying States to promote educational programmes calculated to secure the acceptance and observance of the national equal opportunity and treatment policy. The Committee recalls the vital importance of action in the area of education and information in order to change historical attitudes and behaviour patterns and secure equality of opportunity and treatment in conformity with the Convention. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information in its next report on the measures taken in this regard.

7. Article 4. The Committee notes that the national legislation prohibits the employment of persons as state civil servants whose activities may threaten the security of the State. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide copies of the relevant provisions in its next report as well as information regarding the right of appeal available to persons affected by this restriction.

8. The Government's report states that those seeking redress for violations of their rights may apply to the National Human Rights Office. They may also bring an action before the courts or apply to the Prosecutor's Office. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number and type of employment discrimination complaints brought before the National Human Rights Office or handled by the Prosecutor's Office during the reporting period and the outcome of any such complaints. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to keep it informed and if it would provide copies of any administrative or judicial decisions issued relevant to the application of the Convention.

9. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information in its next report, including statistical data, on the activities of the State Labour Inspectorate, including the number of inspections carried out during the reporting period, the number of violations found relevant to the Convention, the action taken and the outcome.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

In examining the Government's report on the application of the Convention, the Committee has noted that a State Language Act was adopted in July 1999, but has not been promulgated. The Committee expresses concern that this Act, if it enters into force, might have a discriminatory effect on the employment or work of the large Russian-speaking minority in the country.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on this and other questions, and requests the Government to provide detailed information on this point.