Vol. 463 No. 3
28 Mr. E. Byrne asked the Minister for Equality and Law Reform if he has satisfied himself that recruitment forms used by State and semi-State agencies do not discriminate between the sexes; the plans, if any, he has to eliminate any vestiges of such discrimination: and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6408/96]
Persons who consider that the format or wording of recruitment forms used by State or semi-State or any other employer or agency in the private sector are discriminatory between the sexes may pursue a claim to that effect under the Employment Equality Act, 1977. In pursuing any such claim a person may apply to the Employment Equality Agency under the aegis of my Department for advice or assistance.
While matters relating to the format and wording of recruitment forms used by State and semi-State agencies are, in the first instance, for the organisations concerned and their parent Departments, I have an interest in ensuring that access to redress is available to persons who consider that recruitment forms in respect of employment may be discriminatory.
The forthcoming employment equality legislation which I will bring forward shortly will seek to reinforce protection in respect of such discriminatory practices.
I thank the Minister for his reply. I tabled this question because of the insights gained into the recruitment policy of the Department of the Marine at a recent Committee of Public Accounts meeting. Will the Minister comment on, for example, the suggestion that applicants must be free from any defect which would render them unsuitable for recruitment. What constitutes a defect? The recruitment policy states that a person must be of good character. That is a very subjective argument. Does it mean a daily communicant or person who attends Mass every Sunday has a good character? Are those who do not attend Mass every Sunday deemed to have doubtful characters? We all know that a teacher lost her job because of her character, presumably because she was cohabiting.
Will the Minister examine the form of recruitment in the various Departments? Is he familiar with the outrageous questions asked on the vocational education committees' VO2 form which female applicants must complete before recruitment? The medical examiner must ask them if they are free from stammer and other serious speech defects, how many of their teeth are decayed or missing, if they have any evidence of adenoids, enlargement of tonsils or scars and if they suffer from varicose veins or piles. They are also asked if their monthly periods are regular and normal in all respects. That should not be relevant to a female's employment prospects. Why is there a VO2 form for females and a VO1 form for males? The answers to the questions on those forms may determine an applicant's success. Have those who are unsuccessful on medical grounds access to the medical records which resulted in their not being recruited?
Questioning has been over long. As I am anxious to facilitate as many Members as possible, I ask for brevity.
I am not familiar with the application forms to which Deputy Byrne referred. He can table questions to the Ministers responsible for the particular agencies. If the format or wording of a recruitment form is discriminatory, those aggrieved or affected by it can pursue a claim under the Employment Equality Act, 1977. The Employment Equality Agency will advise such people on how to pursue a claim to the tribunal based on the terms of the 1977 Act. I encourage people to do this.
Does the Minister agree his Department should adopt a proactive role in this area? Given that the vocational education committees were established in the 1930s, the documentation which accompanies the medical examiner's report is obviously out of date. The documentation which must be completed for recruitment to the Department of the Marine was formulated in the 1920s. As the role of women in State and semi-State agencies has changed substantially since the 1920s and the 1930s, the Minister's Department should request those agencies to update their recruitment forms. The term "defects" could be termed racist. A 3 per cent recruitment quota for the disabled now applies in such agencies. As attitudes and legislation have changed dramatically since those forms were formulated, it is a cause of concern that many State and semi-State bodies continue to use recruitment documentation that is long out of date.
As State and semi-State bodies are responsible to particular Ministers, the Deputy should table questions to the relevant Ministers. There must be a large number of such forms in circulation. If the Deputy sends me a copy of the form about which he is concerned, I will examine its content. Primary responsibility for this issue rests with the Minister in control of the agency. If Deputy Byrne sends me the form to which he referred I will look at it and communicate, as may be appropriate, with the relevant Minister.
The matter raised by Deputy Byrne is interesting and I am sure the Minister is amazed at the wording used in the VO2 form. Will the Minister take up Deputy Byrne's suggestion and initiate a revision of these forms within Departments? He could do this either through the interdepartmental committee to which he referred or by asking his colleagues in Government if they would agree to such a revision so that the forms could be updated to reflect the gender equity we are entitled to expect in this day and age.
It is not only the Minister for Equality and Law Reform who has responsibility to ensure that forms etc. are prepared in a proper manner, are gender neutral and inoffensive. This is the responsibility of many organisations and all Departments. It is appropriate, therefore, for a Deputy who has a complaint regarding a form alleged to have been prepared under the ambit of a Department or semi-State organisation to raise the matter in the first instance with the organisation or Minister concerned. It is not within the ambit of my Department to do a trawl through the hundreds or more of these forms which must exist at all levels in the Civil Service and public service. I have invited Deputy Byrne to send me the forms to which he referred so that I can see what action may be appropriate.
I will send the Minister the relevant documentation. Given that one of his Cabinet colleagues who is renowned for his stammer was given a democratic mandate to represent his constituency in this Parliament and was appointed Minister for Social Welfare, does the Minister agree it is wrong for a Department or semi-State body to discriminate against potential employees on the grounds that they have a stammer?
That is a reasonably acceptable statement to make.
