No.07-00-208\/2015-02\u00a0 Date: 31 July 2015<\/p>\n
OPINION<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The opinion was issued in the procedure regarding the complaint lodged by D.B. of B. against the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d of I. in connection with the Rulebook on Professional Development and Specialist Training of Employees of the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d of I. In the course of the procedure it was established that the Rulebook laid down the criteria for sending to specialist training, namely: length of studies, average mark in the course of studies, length of service, candidate\u2019s age, appraisal done by the head of the department where the candidate had most work experience – performance appraisal, contribution to the development of the institution and specific contribution to professional, scientific or practical work. It was also established that, in the meanwhile and following the submission of declaration regarding the complaint, the Rulebook on Professional Development and Specialist Training of Employees was amended so the criteria for specialist training now were length of studies, average mark, length of service, appraisal done by the head of the department where the candidate had most work experience, contribution to the development of the institution and specific contribution to professional, scientific or practical work; in other words, the amended Rulebook on Professional Development and Specialist Training of Employees of the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d no longer contained candidate\u2019s age as a criterion for sending to specialist training. The analysis of the prescribed criteria which were the subject matter of the complaint showed that candidate\u2019s age under the previous Rulebook was the only criterion that was not related to a candidate\u2019s professional capabilities and achievements. In the course of the procedure it was established that, given the scoring system, persons older than 32 were obviously put in an unequal position compared to younger candidates. The Commissioner for the Protection of Equality issued the opinion that by laying down the age criterion for specialist training in the Rulebook on Professional Development and Specialist Training of Employees of the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d no. 01-554\/4 of 27 February 2014, the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d violated the provisions of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination. For this reason the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d was recommended to ensure that it does not violate the provisions of the Law on the Prevention of Discrimination in the future when defining the criteria for professional development and when performing other activities within its competence.<\/em><\/p>\n PROTECTION OF EQUALITY<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n No.07-00-208\/2015-02\u00a0 Date: 31 July 2015 OPINION The opinion was issued in the procedure regarding the complaint lodged by D.B. of B. against the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d of I. in connection with the Rulebook on Professional Development and Specialist Training of Employees of the Primary Health Care Centre \u201cM. \u2013 M.P.\u201d…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[182],"tags":[188],"class_list":["post-31439","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-age","tag-education-training"],"yoast_head":"\n\n\n
\n <\/td>\n COMMISSIONER FOR THE<\/strong><\/p>\n \n Brankica Jankovi\u0107<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n ","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"