Spain is allowed to deny further numbers of migrant workers

Voodoo_rasher

from moving there to work! The EU Commisioner is giving permission for this in order to protect their domestic labour market;

unemployment rate already at 20%! Is it not high time for this to be implemented here?? Spain will be given exception from eu rules

about free movements within the union until end of 2012. The decision is motivated by the "really special occupation situation in Spain".

(translated from link to story, foreign media on my behalf)

http://svt.se/svttext/web/pages/140.html

Mena

It's nice to see the situation can be made flexible when a crisis hits.

Edit: After translating the link, why is this directed at Romanians only? Surely it should be EU wide if they want the exemption?

keithclancy

Netherlands did the same with Slovakia and Poland when they joined.

Nothing new really.

meditraitor

Voodoo_rasher wrote: »

from moving there to work! The EU Commisioner is giving permission for this in order to protect their domestic labour market;

unemployment rate already at 20%! Is it not high time for this to be implemented here?? Spain will be given exception from eu rules

about free movements within the union until end of 2012. The decision is motivated by the "really special occupation situation in Spain".

(translated from link to story, foreign media on my behalf)

http://svt.se/svttext/web/pages/140.html

Posted this article on another thread no more than 5 minutes ago,

Spain has been given the right by the European Union to bar entry to any new Romanian workers as it struggles with the highest unemployment rate in the 27-nation block.

Romanians will now be required to have an approved work contract before settling in Spain, reversing a two-and-a-half year moratorium that previously gave them unrestricted access as fellow members of the EU.

The EU Commission recognised the measure was needed "due to serious disturbances on the labour market in crisis-hit Spain", said a statement released by Brussels yesterday.

The approval, running to the end of next year, is the first time the "safeguard clause" to restrict freedom of movement by EU-member citizens has been invoked.

Spain suffers the EU's highest jobless rate, running at more than 20pc since May last year and as high as 40pc among under-25s.

The number of Romanians in the country has quadrupled in the past five years to more than 800,000, making them Spain's biggest foreign community.

Thirty per cent of Romanians in the country are unemployed.

Initially attracted by opportunities in Spain's booming construction industry and seasonal agricultural work, many are now returning home as the few jobs available are claimed by Spanish workers. Romania has an unemployment rate of 7pc.

The free movement of citizens can only be restricted under certain conditions and Spain was asked by the EU to provide data to justify the implementation of the curb.

Dramatic

Announcing the decision, Laszlo Andor, the European Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, said: "The commission understands why, at this particular juncture, because of the dramatic employment situation and the very complex financial environment, the Spanish authorities wish to step back from full, free movement."

"The temporary measure will not affect Romanians who are already part of the labour force," said Jose Blanco, a spokesman for the socialist government.

He added: "It will not affect the free circulation of citizens within the EU, a principle that Spain has always defended."

Romania has two weeks to request an annulment of the EU's decision. (© Daily Telegraph, London)

Immigration control is on the way,

El Soarab

If there is no more free movement of people then there isn't much reason to stay in the EU is there. If founding principles can be brushed aside for short term economic gain and Xenophobia

meditraitor

El Soarab wrote: »

If there is no more free movement of people then there isn't much reason to stay in the EU is there. If founding principles can be brushed aside for short term economic gain and Xenophobia

LOL, did you read the article,

Spain has the highest unemployment in Europe,40% of under 25s......... Romania has 7% and yet 800,000 of them arrived on spains door.

Close the quick

This is not xenophobic, this is common sense

El Soarab

meditraitor wrote: »

LOL, did you read the article,

Spain has the highest unemployment in Europe,40% of under 25s......... Romania has 7% and yet 800,000 of them arrived on spains door.

Close the quick

This is not xenophobic, this is common sense

40% of under 25's vs 7% over all. Hardly fair comparison

If England closed it's doors to Irish workers there'd be war

meditraitor

El Soarab wrote: »

40% of under 25's vs 7% over all. Hardly fair comparison

If England closed it's doors to Irish workers there'd be war

Sorry, I didnt think anyone would not be aware that overall Spains unemployment is above 20%, to be more precise 21%.

3 times that of romania, and yet 800,000 romanians feel that spain is the place to go as an economic immigrant?

Also that volume of immigration can only contribute to further unemployment and social hardship, the costs to an economy of an influx of non native speaking immigrants is enormous.

Romania is nowhere near Spain, and I very much doubt that spannish is a commonly thought language in Romania, (english or italian!)

and as for your "If England closed its doors to Ireland" analogy! I can only say O M G.

southsiderosie

New accession states have a seven-year 'ease in' period where countries can put limitations on work permits. The Spaniards were confronted with this in the early days of the EC, the Poles in 2004 (when only the UK, Ireland and Sweden opened their labor markets to them), and now the Romanians and Bulgarians.

From what I have seem, Spain is a good 'fit' for Romanians, in part because Romanian is actually a romance language, so they pick up Spanish quite quickly. Therefore, they can transition out of entry-level hotel-type jobs up the food chain relatively quickly. There are lots of service jobs for the women, and there used to be a lot of construction jobs for the men, but that clearly isn't the case anymore.

I think part of the reason why the Spaniards are closing the door on Romanians is because their return program for Latin American immigrants has been a total failure: people are not going home at nearly the rates that the government expected them to, although that may pick up as unemployment benefits start to run out.

At the end of the day, Spain has every right to try to limit immigration given their economic situation, and they are not violating EU law in the Romanian case. They were extraordinarily generous with amnesties, residence permits and granting a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants over the last 8-10 years, and I think the government is acting in good faith here.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

meditraitor

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Simply unacceptable, I would guess this will have a very dramatic effect down the line as social and behavioural problems as these disinfranchised get older and more bitter.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

PS in Ireland?

southsiderosie

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I don't disagree with you on the labor market rigidity issue, but there are also broader structural and familial issues at play.

First, in Spain, extended families are still the main economic unit. Inter-generational child care, elder care, and resource pooling happens within a much broader familiar unit than in Northern Europe. But at the core of this structure is one, usually male, older worker who has a permanent contract. This allows everyone else in the family to slip in and out of employment when necessary, while still maintaining many of the social functions that in other countries have been farmed out to the state. This is starting to change somewhat; female migrant workers from Latin America now have a critical role in the labor market as child carers and home health care workers. But until there are either better safeguards for families, or norms of family networks change significantly, people are very reluctant to give up this familial security blanket - which covers young people as well.

Second, when the government attempted to reform the labor laws a few years ago through the use of temporary contracts (or 'garbage contracts', as they are known), at the time both unions and large enterprises were all on board with this as a step towards loosening labor market rigidity. But in practice what this has meant is that companies have built it into their economic model that you hire and fire your staff on 2-3 year cycles - this way you never get stuck with higher-wage workers. However, the effect of this has been 1) frustration among young workers who stagger from contract to contract, 2) under-investment in workforce training, and subsequently 3) very low worker productivity.

More recently, the way around a lot of this has been immigration, in particular, illegal immigration. Everyone was willing to turn a blind eye, because the immigrants weer taking jobs that locals did not want, and employers did not need to put them on contract. This all worked reasonably well from an economic (if not a social) perspective until the government began regularizing their status. So, now that there is a downturn, instead of heading home, people are staying because, due to their legal status, they have access to unemployment benefits. These are due to run out soon for a lot of people, but since going home would mean, in many cases, giving up Spanish residency, Ecuadorans, Bolivians and Colombians are not willing to take that risk...which is why pushing Romanians to go home/not come at all may be easier from the perspective of the Spanish government.

Ultimately I would not be surprised if the next government radically changed many of the labor laws. But there are very serious social dynamics underneath all of this rigidity, and THAT is what scares people more than anything else. And this fear is compounded by the fact that, due to Spain's draconian mortgage and bankruptcy laws, if you lose your job and can't make payments on your house, you will still owe the bank for it - for life.

I guess this is a long way of saying that there may be a lot of other branches that have to break before this tree comes down.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sollar

They are absolutely right. And other countries should follow suit if they are struggling. The EU should suit a countries interests. If it doesn't wjats the point being part of it.

800,000 Romanians (many of them unemployed) in a country struggling with massive unemployment is hardly positive.

View

sollar wrote: »

They are absolutely right. And other countries should follow suit if they are struggling. The EU should suit a countries interests. If it doesn't wjats the point being part of it.

So, if the UK, France & Germany all decide its not in their interest to allow products or services produced or sold from Ireland to be sold in their domestic markets, the Commission should just "Okay" it and ignore the EU Treaties. Right?

View

southsiderosie wrote: »

At the end of the day, Spain has every right to try to limit immigration given their economic situation, and they are not violating EU law in the Romanian case.

That is questionable - after all, only the ECJ can ultimately make that decision.

You are perfectly correct that the issue is covered by (the special case of) Romania's accession treaty.

However, the justification used by Spain and okayed by the Commission is the high unemployment rate amongst Romanians in Spain. The accession treaty doesn't refer to such a scenario at all though - rather it allows such an action in the event of the labour market of the relevant member state being seriously disrupted.

Unless they have facts and figures to show their labour market is being disrupted - by which I mean that existing residents of Spain are being displaced out of possible employment by newly-arrived Romanians - I'd say Spain could find it really tough to defend this decision at the ECJ.

sollar

View wrote: »

So, if the UK, France & Germany all decide its not in their interest to allow products or services produced or sold from Ireland to be sold in their domestic markets, the Commission should just "Okay" it and ignore the EU Treaties. Right?

No, thats a bit extreme. I'm referring to workers and immigrants. A country should reserve the right to limit immigration if they are struggling with unemployment. Goods and services are a different matter completely.

AlekSmart

keithclancy wrote: »

Netherlands did the same with Slovakia and Poland when they joined.

Nothing new really.

I'd say it a very big suitcase of something NEW,as it in reality challenges the entire rationale of the EU's last great expansion.

View:Unless they have facts and figures to show their labour market is being disrupted - by which I mean that existing residents of Spain are being displaced out of possible employment by newly-arrived Romanians - I'd say Spain could find it really tough to defend this decision at the ECJ.

View's view in elation to Spain having a tough job convincing the ECJ may well have been already well turned over in advance of the Spanish announcement.

The free movement of citizens can only be restricted under certain conditions and Spain was asked by the EU to provide data to justify the implementation of the curb.

One would have to accept that the EU Commission is not exactly over enthusiastic about suspending a core-principle of EU enlargement,therefore I would surmise that Spain had a shed-full of pretty damning statistics particular to the Romanian issue.

The immediate "Out" as far as the ECJ goes is the "Temporary" status of the measure allied to the fact that it does not effect Romanians already in Spain,an element which may temper the ECJ's enthusiasm to become embroiled in the issue.

WalterMitty

I see a lot of non EU workers in Dublin in customer facing roles, indians, chinese etc. Dont know how they can get visas here with current unemployment rate. I know theres a student visa but i have seen people in shops there every day morning and evening and they must be exceeding part time working hours allowed under such visas

mikemac

Some of the English language schools are just addresses, they only exist on paper.
A back door way to get a visa for Ireland and then the twenty hour rule for working is not complied with

View

sollar wrote: »

No, thats a bit extreme. I'm referring to workers and immigrants. A country should reserve the right to limit immigration if they are struggling with unemployment. Goods and services are a different matter completely.

Is it? I understand that one of the arguments for protectionism is that "a country should reserve the right to limit imports if they are struggling with unemployment" as it would results in domestically produced products instead.

After all, there is unemployment in the UK, France & Germany - why shouldn't they act against goods & services which are imported from Ireland?

View

AlekSmart wrote: »

View's view in elation to Spain having a tough job convincing the ECJ may well have been already well turned over in advance of the Spanish announcement.

Well, the ECJ hasn't been consulted on the matter. A Commission decision is as open to legal challenge as any other.

AlekSmart wrote: »

One would have to accept that the EU Commission is not exactly over enthusiastic about suspending a core-principle of EU enlargement,therefore I would surmise that Spain had a shed-full of pretty damning statistics particular to the Romanian issue.

That may well be the case but as the reports cite unemployment amongst the Romanian's in Spain as being the ground for the restriction rather than unemployment amongst residents of Spain resulting from them being displaced by the newly arriving Romanians, I would have my doubts.

AlekSmart wrote: »

The immediate "Out" as far as the ECJ goes is the "Temporary" status of the measure allied to the fact that it does not effect Romanians already in Spain,an element which may temper the ECJ's enthusiasm to become embroiled in the issue.

That may be the case since the restriction applies only until the end of 2012. However, should it be taken to court, which I would imagine Romania might do, if only for domestic political reasons, then the ECJ would have reasonable grounds to ask for clarification on the grounds and pass judgment accordingly. It would also have the perfect opportunity to oblige the member states to spell out what are the exact conditions that should apply prior to the application of such an extreme restriction, if only to ensure that the extreme case doesn't become the norm over time.

AlekSmart

mikemac wrote: »

Some of the English language schools are just addresses, they only exist on paper.
A back door way to get a visa for Ireland and then the twenty hour rule for working is not complied with

This entire area appears to be fraught with "Regulatory Dificulties" :rolleyes:.

Back in 2007 it appeared that some concerted action was at last being contemplated....

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/director-of-private-college-arrested-in-visa-factory-schools-probe-44225.html

However,little follow-on appeared to take place and one would wonder what the current real-time position is on the ground ?

AlekSmart

View wrote: »

Well, the ECJ hasn't been consulted on the matter. A Commission decision is as open to legal challenge as any other.....

......It would also have the perfect opportunity to oblige the member states to spell out what are the exact conditions that should apply prior to the application of such an extreme restriction, if only to ensure that the extreme case doesn't become the norm over time.

Agreed on the ECJ role,however I would see the Spanish situation as probably the first actual acknowledgement that all is not well in the State(s) of Europe.

However,with the current crisis threatening so many "Core" E.U. principles I would be confident that any ECJ action on this particular element will,like Peace,be a long time a-coming.

m4r10

According to the agencies that were contracting the romanians, the jobs that were denied to romanians have to be filled anyway, so the agencies are sourcing the workers needed in Bulgaria or even China. The unemployment figures shown by previous posters mean nothing if the spanish workers are unwilling to take certain types of jobs (in construction industry and seasonal agricultural work). I'd say they only needed a scapegoat to cover other, more important and deeper deficiencies in their system.

keithclancy

AlekSmart wrote: »

I'd say it a very big suitcase of something NEW,as it in reality challenges the entire rationale of the EU's last great expansion.

Nope,

Up until 1st of May 2007 the Immigratie- en Naturalisatiedienst (Imigration and Naturalisation Service) were denying work permits to Polish and Slovakian workers if there was a surplus of a skill already in the Dutch Market.

Its the exact same now for Romanian and Bulgarian workers, they will need to apply for a Work Permit up till at least December 2013 and if you have a skill already in the market your application will be denied.

The only thing thats new with Spain is the backtracking:
http://ec.europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/work/jobseeker/work-permits/index_en.htm

It says on the page you do not need a work permit at all, which they've now gone back on.