Application of the quota requirement in the composition of a school board (TAS 442/2021, issued on 29 November, 2021)
The Ombudsman for Equality was requested to determine whether the selection of members for the school board of a primary school was in violation of the Equality Act. The board has seven members, and two men and five women were appointed as the members of the board.
According to section 4 of the Equality Act (Act on Equality between Women and Men 609/1986), authorities must in all their activities promote equality between women and men purposefully and systematically, and must create and consolidate administrative and operating practices that ensure the advancement of gender equality in the preparatory work undertaken on different matters and in decision-making. In particular, circumstances which prevent the attainment of gender equality must be changed.
According to section 4a of the Equality Act, the proportion of both women and men in government committees, advisory boards and other corresponding bodies, and in municipal bodies and bodies established for the purpose of inter-municipal cooperation, but excluding municipal councils, must be at least 40 per cent, unless there are special reasons to the contrary.
If a body, agency or institution exercising public authority, or a company in which the Government or a municipality is the major shareholder has an administrative board, board of directors or some other executive or administrative body consisting of elected representatives, this must comprise an equitable proportion of both women and men, unless there are special reasons to the contrary.
Authorities and all parties that are requested to nominate candidates for bodies referred to in this section must, wherever possible, propose both a woman and a man for every membership position. The authority preparing the appointment of a body is responsible for ensuring compliance with the quota requirement.
The quota requirement of the Equality Act applies separately to ordinary members and deputy members. An exception to the quota requirement can be made for a special reason, for example when a special field only has experts of one gender available. In the view of the Ombudsman for Equality, the concept of special reason should be given a narrow interpretation and a party referring to a special reason must justify their position. It should not be possible to retrospectively refer to special reasons if they were not taken into consideration when composing the body. The authority preparing the appointment of a body is responsible for ensuring compliance with the quota requirement.
The Ombudsman for Equality found that a school board is a body as referred to in the Local Government Act, and its composition must be in compliance with the quota requirement pursuant to the Equality Act. The board of the primary school has five members and deputy members appointed from the custodians of children. In addition, there is one member and deputy member appointed from both teachers and other staff. The board comprises of a total of seven members and deputy members. No male candidates were available for members and deputy members representing teachers and other staff. There were 7 female and 3 male custodian candidates available. For this reason, 5 women and 2 men were chosen as members of the board and 6 women and one man were chosen as deputy members.
According to clarification presented in the case, candidacy was voluntary and based on consent.
The Ombudsman for Equality found that the lack of male candidates for the two membership positions for teachers and other staff and the membership positions for custodians is deemed to be a special reason that allowed for an exception to be made to the quota requirement in this case. The Ombudsman for Equality concluded that it would be desirable for the school to appoint teacher members and members representing other staff in a manner resulting to compliance with the quota requirement in the final composition of the board.
22.12.2021
