Public petition n°4304

Petitioner: Andrey Lebedev

This petition is available in other languages:

Introduce legislation requiring employers in Luxembourg to provide clear, specific and objective justifications for every mandatory language requirement included in a job advertisement. The legislation should establish the following obligations: Job-related justification: Each mandatory language requirement must be justified by specific professional duties, such as communication with clients, colleagues, public authorities or other stakeholders. Proportional proficiency levels: Employers must justify not only the language required but also the requested proficiency level, using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Distinction between essential and desirable skills: Languages that are useful but not essential for performing the job must be identified as desirable rather than mandatory. Transparent job advertisements: Justifications must be included directly in job descriptions, allowing applicants to understand why the specified language skills are necessary. Prevention of arbitrary requirements: Language requirements must be proportionate to the actual responsibilities of the position and must not create unjustified barriers to employment. Oversight and enforcement: Competent authorities must be empowered to examine potentially unjustified language requirements and impose proportionate sanctions for non-compliance.

Luxembourg's multilingual labour market frequently presents jobseekers with vacancies requiring advanced proficiency in two, three or even more languages, including positions where the professional necessity of such requirements is not immediately apparent. For example, a software engineering position may require advanced French and English proficiency, even when its primary responsibilities concern software development, technical architecture or system maintenance. While multilingual skills can be essential for certain positions, requiring advanced proficiency without identifying the actual professional necessity may unnecessarily exclude otherwise highly qualified candidates. Excessive or unjustified language requirements may also create opportunities for indirect discrimination, arbitrary candidate exclusion and the use of language proficiency as a pretext for rejecting applicants for unrelated reasons. Such practices can restrict access to employment, reduce the available pool of qualified professionals and contribute to difficulties faced by unemployed jobseekers. Requiring employers to explain the professional necessity of each mandatory language and proficiency level would promote transparency, encourage proportionate recruitment criteria and reduce unnecessary barriers to employment. The objective is not to restrict employers' ability to require genuinely necessary language skills, but to ensure that such requirements are justified by the actual duties and responsibilities of the position.