settlement

Besides intitiating public and judicial procedings, the Bureau often participates in settlements, if the victim of the discrimination receives adquate redress. In our cases where settlement was believed bette, it was always the discriminating party who offered the possibility of settlement outside of court. According to our experience, settlement is a much cheaper, faster and las but not least a more human solution than judicial procedures. Since the establishment of the Bureau we have only had 2 settlement cases one of which was the case of R. Ibolya that we have already introduced.

We have turned to the court with a petition because the fixed period labour relation was illegal, and because of discrimination. In our petition we asked the court to change the labour contract with the association into an indefinite contract and oblige the employer to pay 1.350.000.Huf in arrears of salary and severance pay. We hae furthermore requested that the resondent be obliged to pay 300.000 Huf non-pecuniary because of discrimination.

Two weeks before the hearing the legal representative of the respondent turned to our office and offered a settlement: if we drop charges, they pay the palintiff 1.000.000 Huf.[1]

As R. Ibolya was open to the settlement, the Bureau decided to start negotiations with the respondent and its representative. During negotiations we insisted that next to paying the „bargained” compensation, the employer has to apologise to R. Ibolya for the humiliation she has suffered during their labour relation and the termination of it. As a result of our talks, the employer was willing to pay 1.100.000.Huf, which R. Ibolya accepted. Besides settling the bill, the employer also apologised to R. Ibolya.

In our experience, there is a difference between settlements in frontt of court and settlements outside court. In an entertainment and a labour discrimination case the discriminating party came to the Burea and made an offer of settlement. The perpetrator apologised to the plaintiff in both cases and paid the Roma plainiffs compensation above the average of judicial pratice. As a condition of settlement they stipulated that we undertake an obligation of official secrecy, so that neither the case itself, nor the content of the settlement ever becomes public. Taking into consideration the wish and interest of our clients we hae decided that in the given case it is more important for our clients to receive settlement than to set an example by drawing attenton the the discrimination. Despite this it is one of our most important tasks to call the society’s attention to the numerous types of prejudice and discrimination, and to „inform” the people through conctrete cases of the legal consequences of discrimination.