Cyprus

Support in the labour market

Age discrimination in employment

The Cypriot Constitution contains a general anti-discrimination provision in Article 28, but does not specifically protect against age discrimination. In 2004, following Cyprus’ accession to the EU, directive 2000/78/EC was incorporated into Cypriot law as the Equal Treatment in Employment and Occupation Act. This law acts as a bulwark against discrimination in the workplace on a number of grounds, including age, and regulates equal treatment in the labour market. This law applies in the public and private sector for all matters relating to “access to employment, self-employment and work, selection criteria and recruitment conditions, in all sectors of activity and at all levels of the professional hierarchy, including professional training, access to all types and levels of orientation, training, continuing education and professional reorientation, including the acquisition of practical experience and professional, working conditions and conditions of employment, including dismissal conditions and emoluments, as well as membership and participation in organizations of employees or employers ”.

Complaints about age discrimination can be made to the Office of the Commissioner for Administration, the Cyprus Ombudsman. The Ombudsman has the power of appointment and formally decides on complaints (e.g. decision or recommendation to the parties). These decisions are legally binding.

Direct age discrimination in the age criterion in a job advertisement of the Nicosia Municipality

“Case: In May 2015, the Equality Body of Cyprus received a complaint. In April 2015, the Nicosia Municipality advertised  11 vacancies. The advertisement stated that applicants would be assessed on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience in related duties. Applicants scoring equally on these criteria would be further assessed on the basis of their date of birth (priority was to be given to younger applicants). In response to the Equality Body’s investigation, the Mayor of Nicosia argued that the age criterion would be applied only where the applicants had scored equally on the first two criteria, adding that the same system applied to promotions in the public sector. The mayor argued that in the end, the Municipality did not have to resort to the age criterion because applicants did not score equally on the first two criteria.

Decision of the Equality Body: the Equality Body found that differential treatment based on age can only be justified if the conditions set in the law with regard to proportionality and legitimacy of the aim are met. (…) The report found that the aim behind the age criterion in this case was not legitimate, as it merely sought to address the dilemma of candidates scoring equally on the first two criteria set. The aim was not directly or indirectly connected to employment policy, nor could it otherwise be justified within the remit of the directive. By introducing the age criterion, the Municipality expressed its preference for younger candidates without justifying this preference on any of the exceptions foreseen in the directive. If the age criterion had been applied, it would lead to less favourable treatment of candidates scoring equally on all other criteria, so essentially the Municipality was on the one hand trying to address the dilemma of candidates scoring equally but at the same time secure that younger rather than older employees would be joining its workforce. As a rule, employers tend to justify the age criterion in favour of younger employees through the inaccurate and stereotyped perception that older persons do not have the same will, readiness and capacity to respond to job requirements and cannot adapt to developments and new needs. In law however, the age criterion can only be justified if it meets the requirements of the principle of proportionality. The report concluded that the Municipality’s age criterion amounted to unlawful direct discrimination and recommended that in the future the possibility of a candidate scoring equally.”

Direct age discrimination in the age criterion in a job advertisement of the Nicosia Municipality

“Case: In May 2015, the Equality Body of Cyprus received a complaint. In April 2015, the Nicosia Municipality advertised  11 vacancies. The advertisement stated that applicants would be assessed on the basis of their academic qualifications and experience in related duties. Applicants scoring equally on these criteria would be further assessed on the basis of their date of birth (priority was to be given to younger applicants). In response to the Equality Body’s investigation, the Mayor of Nicosia argued that the age criterion would be applied only where the applicants had scored equally on the first two criteria, adding that the same system applied to promotions in the public sector. The mayor argued that in the end, the Municipality did not have to resort to the age criterion because applicants did not score equally on the first two criteria.

Decision of the Equality Body: the Equality Body found that differential treatment based on age can only be justified if the conditions set in the law with regard to proportionality and legitimacy of the aim are met. (…) The report found that the aim behind the age criterion in this case was not legitimate, as it merely sought to address the dilemma of candidates scoring equally on the first two criteria set. The aim was not directly or indirectly connected to employment policy, nor could it otherwise be justified within the remit of the directive. By introducing the age criterion, the Municipality expressed its preference for younger candidates without justifying this preference on any of the exceptions foreseen in the directive. If the age criterion had been applied, it would lead to less favourable treatment of candidates scoring equally on all other criteria, so essentially the Municipality was on the one hand trying to address the dilemma of candidates scoring equally but at the same time secure that younger rather than older employees would be joining its workforce. As a rule, employers tend to justify the age criterion in favour of younger employees through the inaccurate and stereotyped perception that older persons do not have the same will, readiness and capacity to respond to job requirements and cannot adapt to developments and new needs. In law, however, the age criterion can only be justified if it meets the requirements of the principle of proportionality. The report concluded that the Municipality’s age criterion amounted to unlawful direct discrimination and recommended that in the future the possibility of a candidate scoring equally.”

Workplaces for all ages

Cyprus has adopted its new Health and Safety Strategy for the period 2021- 2027. This plan is based partly on the main results of the previous strategy 2013-2020 but also on the EU Strategic Framework on Health and Safety at Work 2021-2027. Among the results of the previous strategy, it is interesting to note that the institution providing occupational safety and health services to the self-employed, many of whom are over 50 years old, has been expanded and better established. 

In this new Strategy, the Department of Labour Inspection promotes “a Workplace Safety and Health Policy for all Ages”, aiming to address the problems arising from the ageing workforce, and thus improve the quality of life of older workers, in view of the announcement by the United Nations General Assembly of the Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021 – 2030). In this context, a specific Action Plan is planned to be formulated, with a focus on the “development of a working environment that will promote sustainable working life.”