OPINION

The opinion was adopted in the proceedings regarding the complaint filed by A. A. from Vršac against bank B. B. due to age discrimination. The complainant stated that almost none of the men employed at the Bank do not stay until retirement, but are declared redundant a few years before retirement, and that three years before becoming eligible for old-age pension, he was terminated from his employment contract. In the statement of bank B. B., it was specified that the complainant’s employment at the Bank was terminated in the process of resolving the redundancy of employees, because due to technological, organizational and economic changes at the Employer, the need to perform his duties ceased, and that these duties were abolished and deleted from the Rulebook on Systematization. In the course of the procedure, it was determined that on September 11, 2018, the employer made the Decision on the introduction of organizational changes no. 10-329/2018, on the basis of which the Rulebook on Amendments and Supplements to the Rulebook on the Systematization of Jobs No. 10-330/2018 of September 11, 2018, was adopted, which abolished the jobs of: Associate and Expert Associate for support in the work of business units, collection of receivables and administrative tasks in the Regional Centers Novi Sad and East-West. After the amendments to the Rulebook entered into force, the Employer issued Decision on resolving the redundancy of employees no. 10-340/2018 of September 25, 2018, which, among other things, established that the jobs abolished by the amendments to the Rulebook are performed by four employees, whose work consequently ceases to be necessary, while the employer has no possibility of resolving their labor-legal status by maintaining the continuity of their employment. In accordance with the above, it was established that, in addition to the complainant, three more employees, of different genders and ages, were determined as redundant based on the same criteria: the cessation of the need to perform the tasks to which they were assigned due to technological, economic and organizational changes at the Employer. Also, by analyzing the submitted evidence, that is, by analyzing the tabular presentation and comparing the data on the general age structure of employees in 2018 and the data on the age structure of employees whose employment was terminated in 2018, it can be concluded that the employment was terminated for persons of all age structures, as well as that the age structure of persons whose employment in the Bank was terminated in 2018 corresponds to the general age structure of the Bank’s employees. Namely, among the employees whose employment was terminated in 2018, the largest share are employees aged between 30 and 39 (40%), while this category of employees makes up 43% of the total number of employees in the Bank. Therefore, considering the established facts and relevant legal regulations, the Commissioner for Protection of Equality is of the opinion that bank B. B. provided sufficient evidence that the termination of A.A.’s employment, that is, determining him as redundant with the employer, was not related to his personal characteristic – age. Bearing in mind the above, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality issued the opinion that by determining A. A. as a redundant employee in bank B. B., and by passing the Decision on termination of employment contract no. 7/17-21 of September 26, 2018, the Bank did not violate the provisions of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination.

COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY

Brankica Janković