No. 07-00-614/2019-02 date: 18. 2. 2020.
The opinion was issued in the procedure regarding the complaint of A. A. from V. against B. B, the principal of the elementary school in V. The complainant states that the principal transferred him from the main school to the separate department in D, and that while deciding on his transfer, she did not consider that he has a son with autism, from whom he will be alienated by this transfer. In the principal’s statement, it is stressed that, due to insufficient enrolment of students in the first grade, there was a reduction of classes in the main school; that the only and basic criterion in the assignment of A. A. to another place of work were the interest of good organization and functioning of the school and the best interest of students in rural areas, who also deserve quality education; that the Law on the Fundamentals of the Education System does not provide criteria for transfer from one place of work to another, but that the principal, in compliance with Article 126, paragraph 1, ensures successful performance of the work of the institution, as well as that, on November 13, 2019, she reached a joint agreement with A. A. that in the 2019/2020 school year he will work in the separate department of the school in D, and in the next school year (2020/2021), he will be transferred back to the headquarters of the main school in V. During the procedure, it was determined that A. A. lives in V. with his wife, who works as a teacher outside V., that their son has developmental difficulties and that the transfer of A. A. to another place of work puts him in a less favourable position in relation to other employees, due to the health condition of a member of his family. It was further established that B. B, the principal of the elementary school in V, did not submit evidence indicating that the transfer of A. A. to another place of work was proportionate and necessary, i.e. that the goal (relocation of an unassigned primary school teacher and well-organized teaching in D.) could not be achieved in another way. Due to all of the above, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality gave the opinion that, by transferring A. A. to another place of work, B. B., the principal of the elementary school in V, violated the provisions of Article 7 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination, Article 18 of the Labor Law and Article 110 of the Law on the Fundamentals of the Education System. Considering that, during the procedure, it was determined that the principal and A. A. reached an agreement that he would be assigned to the headquarters of the main school in V in the next school year, the Commissioner gave a recommendation to B. B, the school principal, to take all measures and activities within her competence in order to conclude an annex to the employment contract, by which the employee A. A. would be transferred from the separate department of the school in D back to the headquarters of the main school in V, in the school year 2020/2021 at the latest, as well as not to violate anti-discrimination regulations in the future in the performance of tasks within her competence.
COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY