Presentation on theme: "Labor migration, employment, and demography in Europe: facts and fears Marina Bourgain European University Institute."— Presentation transcript:
Labor migration, employment, and demography in Europe: facts and fears Marina Bourgain European University Institute
Main points (1) Tensions between MS and Brussels about direction and prerogatives on both employment and migration issues. (2) Distinction between three different types of migration, regulated by different rules: community workers, commuters, 3rd country workers. (3) Demographic component.
In the US about 6.7 million people each year move across state borders in the 1990s (just above 2.5% of the total population). In Europe, Community migrants + Commuters account for less than 1% of the EU workforce. [Commuters: 83% from FR, DE, BE,IT, 71% commute to SWITZ, DE, LX) Important role of the ECJ to promote the “free movement of workers” and further integration => spill-over effect <= (Casagrande case C9/74, …). see the two illustrative cases in the handouts: compare Rutili v. Ministre de l’intérieur (1975); Edwards v. California (1941). 0.5 m community migrants 0.5 m crossborder commuters 1.7 m third countries workers
Unemployment and foreign workers Countries with lowest unemployment (<5%) (June 2005) Foreign workers as part of the active population CEC-workers as part of the active population Ireland8%2% Austria11%1.8% United Kingdom6%0.8% Denmark4%0.4%
Unemployment and foreign workers -Countries with Average unemployment EU-25: 8.9 % (June 2005) Foreign workers as part of the active population CEC-workers as part of the active population Germany10%1% Belgium9%0.4% France5%0.2% Sweden5%0.4% Netherlands4%0.2%
Unemployment and foreign workers -Countries with highest unemployment (June 2005) Unemployment rateForeign workers as part of the active population CEC-workers as part of the active population Greece (10%) 6%0.8% Spain (10%) (down from 23% in 1980s) 9%0.4% Slovakia (16 %) Poland (18%) na
Tensions between MS and Brussels A single country may have many incentives to protect the employment of its nationals and to regulate its external migration flows… BUT from a Union point of view, it does not matter whether unemployment or guest workers are located in Poland or in Germany, respectively 18% and 7% unemployment. Compare with 1941-case « Edwards vs California », in your handouts
Tensions between MS and EU Brussels is going one direction towards: More internal mobility [Integration] (EU-workers and citizens) Accelerated waves of enlargement (1973, 1981, 1986, 1993, 2004 - 2007) [Expansion] Active immigration programs and push for EU-prerogatives on immigration and asylum policies [Integration] Employment Commissioner (Vladimir Špidla ) and Justice, Freedom and Security Commissioner (Franco Frattini), push countries to open their borders to all three types of migrants: « Legal migration and integration are inseparable and should mutually reinforce each other.»
MS want to stay in control. = 14 million unemployed = 12 MS restricted the access from 8 CEEC after accession in 2004. Schengenland (abolition of controls at internal border) made the entrance of “Outside” workers harder. Worries about employment issues, security issues, identity issues, housing scarcity, illegal immigration and trafficking, terrorism after 9/11… In other words: MS care about being re-elected ! Difficulty to integrate important demographic changes
Change 1: Most EU-Countries now have a positive Net migration
Change 2: Europe faces population decline Europe in 2005 = 4.8 million live births and 4.5 million deaths => Natural population change is + 0.3 million people (decrease) [Compared with the entrance of 1.7 million foreigners] Migration compensated population decline in: Italy: Albanians, Maroccans and Ukrainians Spain: Maroccans and West Africans Germany: Turks, ex-Youg., Italians, Greeks and Poles. => Still, according to current « natural growth » and current levels of migration, the active population in Europe (15-64) will start declining in 2010. By 2030 the loss will reach 20 millions.
EXPANSION AND MIGRATION ? To assess the role of migration for work in Europe, we need to understand the implications of expansion. Migrants from “outside the community” may become members of the Community, therefore entitled to assert Community rights. Distribution of foreigners in Germany according to nationality Total 7.4 million foreigners in Germany (31 Dec. 1997) Country of the nationality Number registered Country of the nationality Number registered Turkey2 107 000Poland283 000 Ex- Yougoslavia 721 000 Portugal Spain 132 000 Italy608 000 Iran 114 000 Greece363 000Netherlands United Kingdom USA France 113 000 112 000 110 000 104 000
Distribution of foreigners in Germany according to nationality Total 7.4 million foreigners in Germany (31 Dec. 1997) Country of the nationality Number registered Turkey2 107 000 EU-Nationals1 750 000 Ex-Yougoslavia721 000 Iran USA 114 000 110 000
EXPANSION AND MIGRATION ? [ CEEC - COMMUNITY WORKERS] 1st of May 2006 is an important date as Brussels asked 12 MS to lift their restrictions on workers coming from eight Central European countries. Following last enlargement in May 2004, these 12 MS have taken advantage of the right to restrict migrations (of up to 2+5 years) – same restrictions applied to Greece in 1981. That move caused surprise and anger in the new MS, denied one of the Union four fundamental liberties: free movement of people, goods, services and capital. Only Britain, Ireland and Sweden fully opened their doors to the new MS workers. According to the European Commission the experience has been broadly positive. BUT…
Irish public opinion 160,000 European Eastern workers Unemployment -unchanged at 4.3%- A poll suggested that 78% of the voters now favor the reintroduction of a permit system for these new EU-workers. In recent weeks, Irish parties have taken a tough stance on immigration. Ireland had originally stated that these workers would not be entitled to full workers’ benefits for 2 years. However, the EU-attorney-general advised the government earlier this month, that it would be illegal under EU-law to discriminate between Irish and EU workers. 2005-Irish ferries dispute: the ferry company wanted to replace its Irish crews with cheaper non-Irish labor. 2006: Unions-employers talk on a new pay agreement: there is a concern that foreigners have put down pressure on unskilled wage rates, reducing the unions’ negotiating clout.
Abolition of internal border controls (Schengen) = stronger external controls. == > No customs or passport checks within the Schengen-land The bumpy road to abolish internal border control (1985 – 1995): 1985-five countries negotiated (DE, FR, NL, BE, LX) In December 1989, Germany signed off the signing ceremonies (study the rights of East Germans … 1990 Schengen-II: common asylum policy : - “first handling principle” that country remains responsible. It then failed to enter into force as Scheduled in 1993. Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, joined. SIS – database, located in Strasbourg and maintained by the countries, contains information on aliens, individuals wanted for extradition, people considered a threat to public order or national security, missing persons a,d objects wanted for evidence in criminal procedures. The Amsterdam Treaty (1997-1999) incorporated the Schengen acquis to take effect in 2004, granting the UK and Ireland to opt-out. Historical preferences for specific 3rd countries nationals had to be removed (France-North Africa) or (Romania-Moldova, requirement before accession)
Immigration policies: still national paths Italy: launched immigration quotas in 1998, reinforced Bossi-Fini law of 2002. Quota-system is based on nationality, with preferences when bilateral agreement to fight illegal immigration are, by region of destination, by types of work (entrepreneurs, employees, domestic workers). In 2003, amnesty to 600,000 illegal immigrants who received residence permits. In 2005, 160, 000 admissions while 14,000 illegal immigrants brought back to their country. In 2006, 170, 000 admissions are forecasted 1/3 for seasonal work in agriculture. Spain (unemployment at 10%, lower than in the 1980s 23%) Immigrants now account 8% of the 44 million population, a higher percentage than in France. 2005 amnesty to 700,000 illegal workers who could present a 6 month-contract in construction or industry, 3 month-contract in agriculture, or 30h/week in domestic work. In Oct. 2005, hundreds of desperate west Africans stormed their way into Ceuta and Mellila (Spanish enclaves in Morocco). A dozen people were killed and hundreds injured during violent clashes with police. M. Zapatero asked Brussels 40 million euros to help Morocco control its border and fight human trafficking. He said Europe would continue to have a security problem on its borders until it changed its attitude towards Africa. M. Zapatero’s lenient immigration policy has been criticized at home and within the EU, Germany said it encouraged more illegal immigrants to enter Spain.
Immigration policies: still national paths (2) UK: New laws on visa based on point-system, on asylum and nationality in discussion. Germany: 7 millions foreigners, 7% unemployment, restrictive policy towards immigration. Year 2000- mitigated results of the Green card system for 20 000 computer scientists. 2005- the new immigration law limits the entrance to highly qualified workers: computer scientists, researchers, doctors who have a job offer receive an unlimited residence permit … It will be more difficult for foreign seasonal workers to enter, as the government announced the preference would go to local unemployed. France: Nicolas Sarkozy announced to develop “chosen immigration” and block less qualified or family reunification. 2005 = 20,000 illegal immigrants brought back to their country.
Conclusion (1) Currently, the European Community has no mechanism to cut- off, regulate or efficiently coordinate “outside migration”, or “naturalization” policies. There are important tensions between MS and Brussels regarding direction and prerogatives. Progress to coordinate immigration issues and employment issues have been largely disappointing. (2) Keep in mind the distinction between the three types of migrant workers, they have different rights. (3) Any comparison with the USA is difficult due to the EU- demographic component.
Questions and Answers (1) Q- Following the riots in France last November, what can you say about the « marginalization »? A- Marginalization is an dire issue in many EU-countries. NOTE that most the rioters were second/third generation-migrants, i.e. 14-17 year old French. They spent their life in France and they cannot accept the kind of job/life their parents had, the marginalization their parents accepted as migrants. France used to be very proud of its integration model through schooling and the little open expression of migrant diversity/religion in public offices, schools etc…. The riots gave a blow to that minimalist approach, when unemployment is particularly high among young people (20%) and at least double in city-outskirts. These are the conclusions of an inquiry of the French Intelligence Service (Renseignements Généraux). Germany was particularly worried of such an outburst of violence given their important second or third generation Turks. According to Hans Weiler, the German integration model may have been more successful (still the respect of migrants traditions has kept women excluded) and it is possible to become German after living 8 years in Germany.
Questions and Answers (2) Q- Do we know haw many illegal migrants live in Europe? A- This is an important question as the establishment of Schengen, made external borders more difficult to pass but also more attractive. When your (tourist/work) visa expires, the incentive to stay illegally is stronger because of the difficulty to come in. So far, Member states have refused to disclose (to the public or member states) sensitive information about illegal aliens. A special clauses for Eurostat does not allow reports on the number of illegal aliens. Recently, some Eu-countries have launched “amnesty programs” in order to “legalize and assess” the illegal working population: –- in 2003, Italy gave a temporary residence permit to 630,000 illegal aliens who brought a valid work contract - in 2005, Spain gave a temporary residence permit to 700,000 illegal aliens who brought a valid work contract (for 6-months in construction, agriculture or services or 30h/week for domestic services). M. Zapatero’s lenient immigration policy has been criticized at home and within the EU, Germany said it encouraged more illegal immigrants to enter Spain. On the contrary, Nicolas Sarkozy, the French Interior Minister said that: - in 2005 20,000 forced expulsions of illegal aliens occurred - in 2006, the plan is 25,000 forced expulsions of illegal aliens.
Questions and Answers (3) Q- Did the 10 new MS have to transpose minimal European Social regulations, if there are any? A- First, the 10 new MS had to comply and transpose the “Acquis communautaire” before they could be accepted into the Community = the Accession process was based on Accession treaties. Second, it is possible that some of these countries inherited many stricter regulations from their communist past. A “most favorable” clause in all EU-social rules makes it possible to keep stricter laws if they wish. Third, we know that there is a gap between the “transposition of laws” and their actual implementation or control, the gap is already important in Spain and Greece, in part due to the lack of an efficient administration (see Linos Working paper n° 107 http://www.ces.fas.harvard.edu/publications/index.html). Also there is no EU-controllers task force and often too weak trade unions to control enforcement. http://www.ces.fas.harvard.edu/publications/index.html “Social regulations in Europe” include: - principles in the Treaty EU-: Equality between men and women, incl. equality of pay; freedom of association (etc…) in the Social Charta; - subsequent legislation (Directives/regulations) after the 1974-social action program: hundreds of safety rules; compulsory information (2002), Works councils (1994), redundancies rules (1975), transfers (1977), non-discrimination (2002), maximum working hours… Currently in the pipeline is a minimal wage-directive.