This memorandum is an abstract of the empirical part of the report. The sample for the study consisted of 473 shop stewards, of which 232 responded. Through their profession as shop stewards, they represent approximately 90 000 employees.

Ethnic Minorities

The research findings show that at every third workplace there were or had been employees from ethnic minorities. In the public sector the number of minority representatives was 42 per cent of the workplaces, in private services sector 38 per cent and in industry 26 per cent. The municipal sector increases the percentage in the public sector: 48 per cent of the workplaces were reported of having or having had employees from ethnic minorities. Correspondingly, the business sector increases the percentage in the private services sector: 43 per cent of workplaces either had or had had employees from ethnic minority groups.

Occasionally, shop stewards had difficulties in recognising ethnic minorities. Therefore the presence of employees with an ethnic background was uncertain in 3 per cent of the workplaces. Even greater uncertainty prevailed in the private services sector, 5 per cent of the workplaces were unaware whether they had employees from ethnic minorities or not.

Racial Discrimination at the Workplace

Racial discrimination had occurred in 12 per cent of the workplaces which reported having or having had employees from an ethnic minority group. Both employers ( 6 per cent of multiethnic workplaces) and colleagues (11 per cent of multiethnic workplaces) had discriminated against ethnic minorities. Both employers and colleagues were reported to have discriminated against ethnic minorities in 5 per cent of multiethnic workplaces. In addition, it is quite evident that ethnic minorities are at a disadvantage in access to employment, but this question was beyond the scope of this study.

Discrimination seems to be most flagrant in the public sector (16 per cent of multiethnic workplaces). The figures are lowest in industry (7 per cent of multiethnic workplaces). The figure in the public sector is probably increased by often temporary subsidized work arranged for immigrants by the labour administration. The permanent employees may find these kinds of measures as external and they may easily begin to resent and discriminate against the subsidezed employees.

Manifestations of Racial Discrimination

If shop stewards reported of discrimination, they were asked to further define in detail what kind of discrimination had taken place and how it had been addressed. Unfortunately, many respondents had skipped this question. They undoubtedly found it difficult to define the nature of discrimination. Defining the required measures to address these problems seemed to be an even more laborious a task for them.

Table 1: Manifestations of discrimination, measures, examples

The fact that no means are employed to redress either indirect or direct discrimination is alarming. For example, some interviewees believed that victims of discrimination do not even want anyone to pay attention to the problem.

Effective Measures to Combat Racism at the Workplace

The fact that discrimination is not redressed is, however, regarded as a problem. This becomes clear from a substantial number of shop stewards' suggestions to settle the grievances caused by racism and xenophobia at the workplace. Nearly every other respondent came up with some suggestions to fight discrimination.

The majority of the suggestions emphasised the importance of increasing interaction. In other words, one should sit down and get to know each other; one should learn to respect differences and different cultures. Also employers should take part in these kinds of activities. A shop steward setting an example would be a good start.

Table 2: Effective measures

• personnel in advance
• making one familiar with work, the workplace rules
• training to change demeanour and attitudes, cultural competence

Conclusion

Discrimination taking place at the workplaces is not very extensive in nature. Discrimination was reported to have occurred in 4 per cent of all workplaces, and approximately in 12 per cent of such workplaces where there either is or had been employees from ethnic minority groups. One must bear in mind, however that figures are entirely based on observations made by shop stewards. If unintentional discrimination could have been included in the figures, the percentage would have undoubtedly been higher. There is not even a rough estimation available concerning the discrimination in access to employment in Finland.

Discrimination seems to be based on differences and negative attitudes rising from these differences. This mainly result in watching ethnic employees and treating them with silent hostility. It is likely that there are understandable reasons for this kind of behaviour: language problems and fear of people from other countries, i.e., xenophobia. Presumably xenophobia is the reason for the lack of tradition to redress wrongs caused by discrimination, something which is also demanded in the Florence declaration. In general, no measures are employed to prevent discrimination. Even if discrimination had been addressed, it was not perceived as a serious infringement requiring effective and visible measures. Rather, these issues have been evaded and an attitude 'time cures all things - both wounds and manners' prevails.

The absence of redress mechanism is however, regarded as a problem. The problem cannot be solved which without increased interaction between Finns and ethnic minorities. Active or passive attempts of shop stewards and management to root out direct or indirect discrimination will influence the attitudes of the personnel. Addressing discrimination functions as a positive experience which encourages a mutual commitment to the principles of equal treatment policies.