European Employment framework and its effects for the European Roma.

Could Romania be a solution ?

Valeriu Nicolae Secretary General of European Roma Grassroots Organisations (ERGO)

“Focus should be on employment and employability as the best means to alleviate poverty and achieve social cohesion. Again, this requires education, basic skills, and active labour market policies to draw disadvantaged groups into work.”

European Commission[1] (2^nd of February 2005)

Introduction

The main priorities of the European Union are reflected in the Lisbon Strategy. The most important aspect of what drives the European Union at this moment is growth and jobs.

It is my opinion that the European Union offers an excellent framework when it comes to employment in general but up to this point with quite abysmal results when it comes to the soon to be 8 million European Roma that will compose the European Union in 2007.

I am arguing in this paper that there are an excellent strategy, monitoring and evaluation tools and considerable financial power within the European Union. The almost complete lack of expertise and (up to recently) interest in Roma-related issues lead  to the fact that the growth, employment and employability framework in the European Union managed practically to ignore the Roma and failed to use the huge potential of the youngest European ethnic group.

In general, it is very hard to collect ethnic segregated data  due to different reasons in Europe . Despite obvious problems with collecting data in Romania , there is in fact enough data to be the base of ethnic segregated indicators and effective evaluation of needs and progress in Romania . Romania is the country with the largest Roma population in Europe and most probably together with Bulgaria the litmus test for the integration of Roma for the European Union. This paper has an in depth look at the situation in Romania when it comes to the employment framework of the European Union.

It is unfortunately often enough that a supposed lack of data is used to justify the indifference or failures when it comes to Roma.

Very good existing employment framework and spectacular failures when it comes to Roma

Introduced in 1997 the European Employment Strategy is probably the most important document produced by the European Union and the very base of the Lisbon strategy.

In its first Joint Employment Report[2] of 1997 we can find priorities[3] which are almost entirely reflected in the new Employment Guidelines (2005-8). Those priorities are: attract and retain more people in employment, increase labour supply and modernise social protection systems; improve adaptability of workers and enterprises; increase investment in human capital through better education and skills[4].

Moreover the European Employment Taskforce responsible for the European Employment Strategy and the revision in 2005 of the Lisbon Strategy came up with four priorities which reflect in a large measure priorities established since 1997 namely:

• increasing adaptability of workers and enterprises;

• attracting more people to the labour market and making work a real option for all;

• investing more and more effectively in human capital;

• ensuring effective implementation of reforms through better governance.

Arguably, contrary to all the above, the evaluation of the Phare programs of the DG Enlargement found out that: “Given the scale of unemployment in Roma communities, it is surprising that only 9% of Phare assistance for Roma minorities was spent on tackling unemployment. Not enough emphasis or investment has gone to tackling unemployment and labour market reintegration for unemployed Roma….Direct support to long term employment is a critical missing link in Roma integration policies. Overall, the activities [Projects focused on Employment] have been piecemeal and have relied on long-established practices such as vocational education and training, supported short-term employment, and public work projects with little attempt to ensure that the methodologies meet the needs of the target group.”[5]

In November 2001 the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted a Recommendation focused on the problems faced by Roma in accessing the labour markets: “[L]arge groups of Roma/Gypsies and Travellers in Europe suffer from the effects of long-term unemployment and poverty, which could present a threat to the social cohesion of member states… Persistent problems of poverty and unemployment are the result of discrimination against and social exclusion of Roma/Gypsies and Travelers, and are closely interlinked to problems in areas such as accommodation, education, vocational training and health… the labour market will not open up many job opportunities for Roma/Gypsies and Travellers in the near future without pro-active measures… the economic problems of Roma/Gypsies and Travelers cannot be overcome unless member states consider equal opportunities as a policy priority for access to the labour market and income-generating activities.”[6]

Within the “old” European Union member states the situation is far from being any better.

Spain – an old member of the European Union - has the largest number of Roma from all the “old” 15 European states. According to the European Monitoring Body the EUMC, ”there is not a single study in Spain on employment discrimination related, for example, to the Roma population”[7] despite the fact that “[in Spain ] existence of discrimination against Roma in job related matters is universally known”[8].

It is not a big surprise that in its Report on Germany, the Council of Europe European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) writes: “Members of Roma and Sinti communities continue to face serious social disadvantage and to be confronted with prejudice and discrimination, including in some cases blatant direct discrimination, in such fields as employment, housing and education.”[9]

However the letter dated 3^rd February 2005 sent by Antje Hofert, Coordinator of EQUAL 1, to Odile Quintin, Director General of Employment and Social Policy, about Germany is. She writes: “whereas the German guidelines for EQUAL place a special emphasis on projects that assist the integration of Roma people, in particular Roma refugees, no projects dedicated to the labour market integration of Roma and Sinti has so far been selected”. The letter concludes “It is not acceptable that Germany as a leading economic power withdraws from its duties towards Roma and Sinti”.

On the website of the European Commission one can find the following text : “Combined with a better use of EU financial resources, most notably the European Social Fund (ESF), the revised guidelines adopted in July 2005 and the reinforced mutual learning progra mme can give a new dynamic to the European Employment Strategy, a strategy fully involving national Parliaments, the social partners, other stakeholders and promoting reform partnerships”.

Germany spent over 628,000 Euros (partially funded from European Social Funds) in one single project on Training for Former Drug Addicts- Café de Ville[10] and over 2,000,000 Euros (over 1.5 million from ESF) in a project focused on employment in the tourism industry. None of those included any Roma or Sinti.

With an unemployment estimated at around 70% in Europe , Roma are the European ethnic group for which the European Employment Strategy failed the worst. Following the existing indicators for the Lisbon Strategy, Roma score the worst in 10 of the 14 main indicators.

A major importance for the Lisbon strategy is also the focus on small and medium enterprises. The European Commission Communication from February 2005: “Working together for growth and jobs - A new start for the Lisbon Strategy” [11] writes when talking about the environment for business that: ”Action here [business environment] is of particular importance for Europe’s small and medium sized businesses (SMEs) which constitute 99% of all enterprises and two third of employment. There are just too many obstacles to becoming an entrepreneur or starting a business, and, therefore, Europe is missing opportunities. Encouraging more entrepreneurial initiative implies promoting more entrepreneurial attitudes. The balance between risk and reward associated with entrepreneurship should be reviewed.”

This should have been also of higher importance during Phare funding targeting Roma considering that the only clear positive numbers in Romania can be found in this area (see the next chapter for data on Romania) as the number of Roma having their own business is very close to the national average (1.18% compared with 1.9%).

According to the evaluation from December 2004 of Phare projects, the European Union and governments from the Czech Republic , Hungary , Slovakia , Bulgaria and Romania spent a total amount of 191,000 Euros [12] during 2 years between 2001 and 2003 for business development focused on Roma. That means 10,000 Euros per country per year, which means in the case of Romania something under 1 Euro per year per Roma enterprise.

Investment in Income Generating Activities at the level of communities is rare despite a proven potential in increased activation and participation of the communities. The main approach of the funding targeting Roma unfortunately continues to be service oriented stimulating dependency rather than active participation of the Roma communities. The very rare income generating activities are often lead by people who never had any experience in management and have accordingly a very high rate of failures.

Could Romania be a turning point ?

The minimum estimate of Roma population in Romania is 730,174 according to the Romanian Government in 2005[13] which means a ratio of 3.3%. Credible sociological estimates put the Roma population at around 1.5 million[14] or 6.8% of the population.

Up to this moment the lack of ethnic segregated data was always considered a very serious impediment in an efficient approach and in measuring and evaluation of progress.

What follows tries to prove that ethnic segregated data is in fact available and there are certain areas where progress can be measured in Romania .

The European Commission adopted in 2005 a document called :”Indicators to monitor the Employment Guidelines (2005-2008) – endorsed by EMCO, October 2005”[15]. Most of those indicators are available in an ethnic segregated form in documents of the Romania Government.

This is an analysis reflecting both the European and Romanian documents and some of the 8 guidelines (from 17 to 24) from the above mentioned document of the European Commission.

Guideline No.19 reads : Ensure inclusive labour market, enhance work attractiveness, and make work pay for job-seekers, including disadvantaged people, and the inactive.

Some indicators under this guideline are extremely relevant:

Under the heading: “Support the inclusion of those furthest away from the labour market” we have the indicator : “Unemployment rate gaps for people at a disadvantage.”

The chart below comes from an official document of the Romanian government from 2005.

The Communication of the European Commission on the European Year of Equal Opportunities for All (2007) Towards a Just Society emphasizes the fact that Roma are the “most disadvantaged ethnic minority group in Europe” and writes about the “significant barriers in employment and education” they face : “disadvantages experienced by some communities e.g. the Roma are so wide-scale and embedded in the structure of society that positive action may be necessary to remedy the nature of their exclusion.”

According to the National Program for the Development of Human Resources[16] of the Romanian government, the unemployment rate in Romania in 2004 was around 9% for men and 6.8% for women. The same document discovers a general unemployment rate of 28.5 % within the Romani population with women at a rate of unemployment three times higher than for Romani men. That means the gap between unemployment in general is three times worst for Roma and in case of Romani women almost 10 times worst.

Labour market gaps for disadvantaged groups.

According to the same document of the Romanian Government, the active Roma population is 22.9 % compared to the national average of 44%. Out of those employed, an extremely worrying 41.7 % work on daily basis. Almost half of the active Roma population has no qualification and do work which requires none.

Poverty (low wage) trap.

The figure above shows the poverty risks segregated on ethnic communities. The first one (upper) is Roma ethnic group, second one other ethnic groups, third one Romanians and the last one ethnic Hungarians. The Roma are at a risk of poverty 3 to 4 times higher that that of any other ethnic group in Romania .

ACTIVATION OF LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYED

Over 50 % of Roma have been unemployed for more than 2 years states the document of the Romanian Government. This is over 10 times more than the national average which is 4.7%. With 16% of the population living exclusively on welfare, the Roma are in by far the worst position compared to all other ethnic groups in Romania .

A comprehensive report on the working situation in Bucharest[17] in 2004 found out that an extremely high 54.3% of Roma were living off the state allocations for their children compared with 36.2 % living out of salaries.

Remarkable is the fact that the number of Roma who receive a pension from the state is almost 6 times lower than the majority population (7.42% compared with 40.03%). The fact that Roma have a significantly lower lifespan than the majority population could be one of the factors justifying this discrepancy.

Number of working poor is also an indicator of the European Commission which can be easily determined from the numbers above for the Roma in Romania .

Use of computers is another indicator; considering the levels of poverty within the Roma population, it is realistic to estimate a number at least 20 times less than the national average of 22%.

Guideline 23 is called: ”Expand and improve investment in human resources”.

The indicators related to this guideline can also be collected from Romanian government documents in an ethnic segregated form.

The next  three indicators are the most relevant.

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF 22 YEAR OLDS.

EARLY SCHOOL LEAVERS

PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING

In 1998 research of the Romanian Institute for Research of the Life Quality[18] (IRLQ) found out that 17.3 % of Romani children never went to school and 11.6% abandoned compulsory education. The Romani children were 4 times less likely to attend preschool than Romanian children.

A research study from 2002[19] found out that in school with a high percentage of Roma children, the quality of education was much lower and the rate of failure was 3 times higher than the national average.

Despite the fact that Roma population under 15 years old is estimated to be at around 33% and just 20% in the case of Romanians, the number of Romani students is much lower at 22.08% compared with 30.2% in case of the Romanians[20].

Another research from the IRLQ in 2002[21] found out that the lack of education is in fact on the rise among the new generation.

Participation in Education by age groups

Research from 2004 by the Romanian Academy [22] found out that Roma children are at a risk of poverty over 3 times higher than the majority population (80% compared to 27%) and over 10 times higher when it comes to abject poverty as 43.3% of the Romani children live in abject poverty.

Considering that over 90% of the children outside the educational system in Romania are coming from poor families, it is clear that Roma children continue to be by far the most vulnerable when it comes to access to education.

Worrying is also the fact that the rate at which Romani girls do not enrol in the educational system is almost twice that of Romani boys (23.5% compared to 14%). On a positive side, the number of girls attending school is on the rise in an opposing trend with the situation for the Romani boys[23].

The illiteracy rate continues to be the highest among the Roma population. According to Sorin Cace and Marin Preda, among the old generation around 60% of people are illiterate while among the adult generation is twice less. Both of the interviewed considered also that there is an increase in illiteracy compared with the adult generation among the young generation.

There is another series of indicators: PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING and PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUOUS VOCATIONAL TRAINING which are also very relevant and could make a difference in the way the situation of Roma is addressed. This especially considering the declaration of the European Commission regarding the accession countries: “There are specific problems in education, where the Roma confront discrimination and even exclusion from mainstream educational institutions.”[24]

According to the European Development Bank and to the EUMC, there was no private initiative known up to 2005 in Europe trying to invest in Roma human resources.

According to the County Agencies for Employment quoted by Agentia Impreuna, only 5% of the Roma have participated in training and reinsertion to employment initiatives.

More on employment

Research done in 2002[25] discovered after interviews with 1,511 Roma that in 67% of the households there were no people employed, and in 19% of the households there was just one individual working. Worrying was the fact that over 42% of the unemployed didn’t look for a job.

Peculiar enough The World Bank report in 2004 points out: “Popular stereotypes characterize Roma as lazy. However, survey data indicate that Roma actively seek employment. In Romania , 35 percent of unemployed Roma sought employment during the previous week, in comparison with 15 percent of the overall population.“[26]

Another research study conducted in 2002[27] on 7,990 Roma people with 4,866 active found out that only 16.5% had a relevant qualification, almost 50% were without any qualification and just 0.6% were specialized in traditional crafts.

It seemed that lately (2005) the situation of Romani women improved as Romani women were just 2 times more likely to be unemployed that the majority population (4 times in 2002). The dependency on others was extremely high (36.5%) within the Roma population as well as within the grade of idleness.

Around 73% of Roma didn’t have a qualification or a minimal one, a rate which is 2.5 times higher than the national average. Extremely low was the number of Roma (3.5% compared with 29%) with high and medium level qualifications. This can be seen as a confirmation of the theory that strong social stigma related to anti-Gypsyism links to a massive denial of Roma identity within the well-educated and integrated Roma.

Without doubt there are some positive improvements. Since 2001 the number of Roma employed through the County Agencies for Employment has risen constantly.

In 2001 – 5,188 people, 2002 – 5,535, 2003 – 8,791 out of which 2,396 were Romani women, 2004 – 9,079 and in 2005 – 10,366 out of which 2,503 were Romani women.

In 2002 research conducted by Marin Preda found out that 3.1% of the Roma population do not have any identity papers which practically makes impossible any kind of legal employment for this segment.

What has been done and conclusions

There is indeed a significant amount of money spent in Romania targeting different problems affecting the Roma population. Between 1993 and 2004 in Romania for instance, the European Commission and the Romanian Government spent 41,884,736 Euros. Over 85% of the money, 36,230,000 Euros respectively, was spent from 2001 to 2004. Generally this period is seen as the best, as most of the visible improvements were witnessed in the last years (with the remarkable exception of electoral participation).

Still the amount is just a fraction of what needed.

In comparison an 18 month long project TRACE[28], which focused on employment for young people in difficulty in France (under 25 years old), had a budget over 22 times bigger with just over 3,600 jobs created.

A single project focused on employment and training towards employment in Spain (Acceder) spent over 50,000,000 Euros for a per iod of 5 years for a target population less than half than the estimated number of Roma in Romania .

An important donor in Romania has been the Open Society Foundation which contributed with 3,284,784 USD (1997 to 2005), mainly to the development of the Romani Civil Society.

The European Commission in Brussels spends practically the same 1,000,000 per year for the running costs of 4 NGOs dealing with antidiscrimination employing a total number of around 20 people.

Arguably the best examples in Romania are in education and health.

Most of the employed Roma paid from the budget are working in education. There are 490 teachers or teaching assistants, 183 scholar mediators and 26 Romani inspectors in their majority of Romani origins. In total there are 699 people employed within the Romanian educational system dealing with Roma. There are also a number of 220 special places for Roma in Universities and the National Agency for Roma estimates that at least 100 Roma students finish university each year as a result of affirmative action.

The health mediator scheme was very successful in the employment for Romani women as it created 250 budget paid jobs in their overwhelming majority occupied by Romani women.

According to documents of international and european organisations, the participation of Roma in local and national administrations as well as in political life is a major factor towards the inclusion.

In February 2003 the Report of the National Democratic Institute[29] discovered that out of 39, 718 jobs as councillors nationwide, some 160 were occupied by Roma which means a per centage of 0.4%. That meant an under-representation of Roma at least 10 times less than average. According to the Romanian Agency for Roma, at this moment there are around 470[30] or a three-fold increase since 2003. Still the Roma continue to be under-represented by at least 3 times compared with the majority population. Also to be taken into consideration is the fact that over 350 Roma ex per ts were employed at local level, most of them of Romani origins.

Out of 485 people in the bicameral Romanian parliament in 2003, there were 2 Roma MPs (0.41%), over 10 times less than average. One of those MPs had been elected on the electoral lists of the party which won the election, the PSDR, the other being elected as part of the “minorities group”, a constitutional form of representation in Romania .

Since 2004 there has been just one Roma MP in the Romanian parliament who is part of the minorities group.

The number of civil servants in the central administration (government) is 6,404 according to SNFP[31]. Out of those, there is just one known to be of Roma origins. For a population estimated at 22,329,977, it means that one in 3,500 people are employed by the government. The ratio is between 200 to 400 times less for the Roma as at this moment there are just two Roma[32] employed as public servants.

There are 24 ministers (none of them Roma) and around 180 secretaries of state. One of those is of Roma origin which means 7 times less that it should be according to the population per centage.

In 2003 according to a monitoring report of EUMAP,[33] there were five Roma employed within the government structures.[34] 

The number of Roma employed within the central administration (government) saw also an increase since the National Agency for Roma was established. At this moment there are 13 Roma working in the premises of the Agency in Bucharest and 28 in the territory.

At the political level of the government, there are some positive developments. At this moment there is one Roma employed as a councillor for the Ministry of Labour, another one as the advisor to the Prime Minister and one Roma man as the advisor for the Deputy Prime Minister. Compared to 2003 there is an increase as at that time there was just one councillor for the Ministry of Culture[35].

It is interesting to note that over 70 % of the Roma working within the central administration are women while practically they are completely excluded from leading positions in Roma organisations which participate(d) in elections.

Considering the fact that there are 15 Ministries and 13 of them do not employ a single Roma at the central administration level, the situation is far from normal. Since 1990 there were no Roma among Romania ’s ministers and the under-representation of Roma in national and local administration continues to be at least 10 times less than normal.

The fact that these numbers are in fact available could easily lead to ethnic segregated indicators capable of measuring active participation of Roma in designing and implementation of policy affecting them, but also regarding employment within budget paid jobs in Romania . The numbers prove that there are clear improvements but at the same time emphasize the limited participation of Roma when it comes to local and national administration, as well as political life.

Conclusions.

Out of 14 major indicators of the Lisbon strategy, 10 are of much importance to Roma in Europe . The lack of data and focused reporting which is considered endemic and repeatedly underlined (EUMC, ECRI and European Commission Report “Roma in an Enlarged Europe”), is sometimes used to justify the inaction of European and international institutions. I proved in this pa per that at least in Romania (and most probably in many other countries) some of the needed data is in fact available, even in documents of the national governments.

The main priority of the European Commission according to President Barrosso’s Communication Paper[36] is focus: “First, Europe ’s actions need more focus. We must concentrate all our efforts on delivering on the ground policies that will have greatest impact.”

Up to this point most of the progra mme s, including those of the European Commission, did quite the opposite in regard to Roma. There can not be focus where there is lack of ex per tise and at least in Brussels everybody seems to agree on the fact that Roma ex per tise within the EU Commission is lacking.

The acknowledgement of the discrimination and harsh living conditions of European Roma is indeed a major achievement of the European Commission, Council of Europe, international organisations and of the work of the European Parliament.

The switch from acknowledgement to concrete actions is still missing. Often the Roma are held responsible for their situation and the Draft Jo int Employment Report 2004/2005 also recognizes it: “The burden is often placed on individuals to adapt rather than addressing wider issues of discrimination in society at large. The Roma or migrants often seem to be portrayed largely as responsible for their labour market exclusion”.

The Lisbon Strategy could very well be the best opportunity that the Roma had for being included in European Society, and the European Employment Strategy together with Structural Funds an excellent tool for tackling social exclusion and unemployment, the main factors in reducing the gap between the majorities and the Roma minority.

It could provide the opportunity for Roma to better and more actively contribute to the European economy and become equal citizens.

The only thing needed is that Europe lives up to its often excellent documents and starts applying them also for the Roma.

And Romania could be a very good place to start.

Annex of co mme nted relevant excerpts from European Commission documents related to employment

I argue that the Commission’s documents already have everything they need for a dramatic improvement in the situation of Roma. In the fortunate case mainstreaming would work and the extreme anti-Gypsyism at some national levels wouldn’t make invisible the fact that Roma are in fact not only the most disadvantaged group but also one of the best assets Europe has. For the sake of making the document easier to read I emphasised my co mme nts in blue.

“Working together for growth and jobs A new start for the Lisbon Strategy “[37] February 2005