The Amsterdam police have said it has erred in its formulation of the text of a job advertisement and has since changed the language, after critics pointed out that the advertisement was discriminatory and at variance with EU law. In the advertisement, the police rejected native born Dutchmen out of hand, saying that:

to make sure that the composition of the team’s chiefs is actually diversified, a candidate will be selected from a different cultural background.”

The advertisement, which was published on the police’s intranet, was responsible for a stream of angry reactions. According to the chairman of the Police Union (NPB):

policemen with an immigration background complained, because they are negatively affected by this discriminatory policy, that gives other policemen the impression that they are favoured and not selected on the basis of their qualities.

According to two professors of Labour law, the sentence is at odds with European laws. Professor Mr. Jaap van Slooten, University of Amsterdam, says:

this formulation does not meet the requirements of the law. The law says that a group can only be favoured when they are equal in all other aspects.

According to professor Ferdinand Grapperhaus, Maastricht University, the text of the advertisement:

suggests that the selection is based not purely on qualities. It also discriminates against people without another cultural background.

MP Ockje Tellegen (VVD) has asked the Minister of Safety and Justice for clarification:

I support the strive for cultural diversity within the police force, but I cannot support the way in which the police has tried to realise this until now. Quality should be the only consideration. Everybody should get an equal opportunity with the police.

This is not the first time the police’s policy of diversity has been criticised. A pilot to allow more policemen with a migrant background to enter the police training met resistance some months ago. Aspiring policemen who failed the admission test were offered an extra training program. According to Tellegen, this is “a double standard.”