ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

European rules on facilitated admission of third-country....

Immigration to European countries, don't post UK or Ireland related topics!

Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator

Locked
runie80
Member of Standing
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:17 pm

European rules on facilitated admission of third-country....

Post by runie80 » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:01 pm

European rules on facilitated admission of third-country scientific researchers

The Directive

The purpose of Council Directive 2005/71/EC is to contribute to the objectives of the Lisbon Agenda to make Europe the most competitive and knowledge-based economy of the world, by fostering the admission and mobility of third country researchers in order to enhance the Community’s attractiveness for researchers from around the world and boost its position as an international centre for research.

How does the procedure work?

The Directive provides for a fast track procedure for the admission of researchers. Accredited research organisations play a major role in this process, as they will have to certify the status of the researchers in a hosting agreement which will acknowledge the existence of a valid research project, as well as the possession by the researcher of the necessary scientific skills, sufficient resources and sickness insurance. Delivery of a residence permit to a researcher will automatically imply the right to work without an “economic needs testâ€
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

runie80
Member of Standing
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:17 pm

Post by runie80 » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:17 pm

Some More Data here

It is a controversial poster with a very simple political message: three white Swiss sheep, kicking out their black neighbour.

The Swiss People's Party has been accused of blatant beloved, yet it believes its recent poster was legitimate - and that some immigrants should be sent packing.

The politics of migration are often emotive - but should Europe's citizens also be asking whether states do enough to integrate those eventually allowed in?

That is the issue at the heart of a detailed study into how 25 European Union nations, plus three others, treat more than 20 million foreign-born minorities across the continent.

The Migration Integration Policy Index (Mipex) may come with a technocratic-sounding Brussels acronym, but the pages of data reveal hidden stories and subtleties about the history of migration to and within the continent.

It provides a snapshot of how migration has been handled by the biggest economies on the block - but also of the domestic political challenges that migration poses to societies.

So how was this study compiled and what did it conclude? Researchers looked at laws and policies in each country and drew up a list of what they saw as an ideal climate for integrating migrants into a society.

The key factors were rights in the labour force, opportunities to settle and naturalise, political freedoms and humanitarian issues such as permits for families to follow.

The researchers did not interview migrants; instead they scored each nation on 140 indicators to provide a snapshot of the legal position.

Menu of nations

So if you were an immigrant weighing up job opportunities in 28 different nations, which should you go for?

Click here for a map of how the countries fare

According to the results, you should head for Sweden which in true Eurovision style won near full marks from the international jury of researchers.

Its foreign workers are able to move freely from job to job after just one year - and those who lose work get help learning Swedish and vocational training. It is easy to bring your family in after you - and once settled everyone can vote.

In contrast, Latvia came close to nul points with severe restrictions on work, settlement rights, political participation, topped off with what researchers concluded were weak anti-discrimination laws.

Tricky issues

The reality is of course a little more complex. The study is neither a migrant's equivalent of a good restaurant guide or an attempt to condemn nations for being too illiberal by the standards of Brussels-based thinkers. Statistics can, after all, mask experience.

Take the UK's entry, for example. Britain scores well for its anti-discrimination laws - some of the first enacted anywhere in the world. But the study suggests they remain weakly enforced.

The UK also loses marks for not having any official measure for consulting migrants' groups. Mipex suggests such consultative bodies are a good idea - but in reality there is no consensus on their merit.

Some minorities believe these bodies give power to self-appointed "community leaders" who pursue their own agendas.

Another issue is compulsion. Should migrants be "forced" to integrate - such as through obligatory language classes. This is a live issue in countries worried about cultural fall-out.

But language classes are very often over subscribed, suggesting there are no shortage of migrant workers who want to learn.

Social conflict

In fact, what the study does most is highlight how migration policies are a reflection of domestic political mores and history.

African immigrants are intercepted by Italian coastguards
Domestic anxieties over new arrivals affects policies

Remember low-scoring Latvia? Most of its "migrants" are Russian-born people who were denied citizenship after the break-up of the USSR. Their restricted rights, compared with migrants elsewhere in the study, are a manifestation of Latvia's fears of Moscow as much as anything else.

France has some of the most developed anti-discrimination laws in Europe - but many migrant groups will readily tell you, in the wake of President Nicolas Sarkozy's tightening of immigration law, that the lot of a dark-skinned French citizen is not that rosy.

In contrast Sweden has long considered itself a beacon of moderate policy-making and so scores highly on what its laws say. It offers Swedish language classes and a whole suite of rights to migrants after just one year in the country.

In reality, the experience on the street is sometimes different: a 2006 study found a youth from an immigrant background had to put in three times more applications to land a job than others in society.

Export to import

And then there are countries which were once exporters of people. Ireland, the Celtic Tiger economy, has found itself attractive after two centuries of seeing people flee poverty.

This has led to an often fractious domestic debate over the rights of migrants in Irish society and the Mipex findings reflect this tension.

So while the report criticises Dublin on some key workers' rights, it also notes the courts last year gave residency rights to foreigners whose children are born in Ireland.

At the other end of the EU there is Poland which has seen so many of its own people head west. But while Polish workers enjoy unlimited access to some EU labour markets, those getting off trains in Warsaw from further east do not experience the same conditions, says the report.

In a globalised age where people are increasingly free and willing to move, governments face a delicate political balancing act between a nation's economic needs and its population's fear of change.

Populations want reassurance that governments are only letting in the right sort of people. Indeed, some people born to immigrants themselves have joined a chorus of concern over whether current levels of migration are sustainable.

The Mipex report asks these populations to pause for a moment and consider what the migrants themselves think - and what kind of role they are being offered in the future of European societies.


Image
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

runie80
Member of Standing
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:17 pm

Post by runie80 » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:23 pm

A score of 100 would represent the most welcoming possible legal framework for the integration of immigrants


1 SE Sweden 92
2 PT Portugal 84
3 IT Italy 79
4 CA Canada 76
5 SI Slovenia 71
6= LT Lithuania 68
FI Finland 68
8= ES Spain 66
PL Poland 66
NO Norway 66
MT Malta 66
12= UK United Kingdom 61
DE Germany 61
EE Estonia 61
BE Belgium 61
16 NL Netherlands 59
EU-15 59
All 28 58
17 CZ Czech Republic 58
EU-25 57
EU-10 55
18= LU Luxembourg 50
IE Ireland 50
HU Hungary 50
21 FR France 45
22 CH Switzerland 43
23 LV Latvia 42
24 GR Greece 41
25 SK Slovakia 38
26 DK Denmark 36
27 AT Austria 34
28 CY Cyprus 32
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

runie80
Member of Standing
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:17 pm

Post by runie80 » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:27 pm

Going by the newest league table, potential migrants to Europe should head for Sweden and avoid Latvia like the plague.

Britain, favoured European destination for Indians because of the linguistic and legal comfort zone, scores enough to come half-way up the index, but only just, say researchers on this European continent-wide evaluation of how well different countries promote 21st-century integration.



more at the following link
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Worl ... 461336.cms

feel free to comment
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

geoffsinclair
Newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:08 pm

Post by geoffsinclair » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:22 pm

Countries like, India, China, Arab and African nations should issue travel advisories to their own people based on these findings. Beware of blatant beloved in Switzerland, apathy in Lithuania and the BNP in the UK.

There is nothing legitimate or defensible about three white sheep kicking a black sheep "out". Its so dearly beloved, it defies logic, but they will say that its not meant to be dearly beloved, and that its just a poster of black and white sheep. Switzerland is not alone in this regard and there is a lot of growing up to do in Europe on the race issue. This poster has raised opposition in Switzerland but not enough as it is still seems to be up and in everyone's face.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6980766.stm

Try as much as you might, you cannot legislate against poor taste.

There is a lot of denial going on.

microlab
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:43 pm

Post by microlab » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:29 am

geoffsinclair wrote:Countries like, India, China, Arab and African nations should issue travel advisories to their own people based on these findings..
Yeah.Some parts of the world you just mentioned are beacons of freedom. Religious and facial tolerance they provide should be envy of us Europeans.

geoffsinclair
Newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:08 pm

Post by geoffsinclair » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:37 am

That is exactly the point I am making.

Although these countries/regions mentioned above are "known" equalities violators, the EU wants to "whitewash" the issue instead of owning up to the fact that as you pointed out, no one is above criticism and there is always room for improvement.

Saykocan
Newly Registered
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:42 am

Post by Saykocan » Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:44 pm

I've never been in Switzerland, but I've made the mistake of visiting Lithuania. They're not only dearly beloved, they treat you like a piece of dirt even if you are white, once they figure you are a foreigner. Especially the way Lithuanian guys treat foreign men (again, including white foreigners) is unacceptable. It's a very unsafe country too, and a true third world nation in all aspects. I don't see why anyone in his right mind would want to go to Lithuania. If Switzerland is even worse than that, I just don't want to go near it for any reason. But then, at least it's a rich country with proper wages.

By the way, I've also been in Latvia, and I didn't experience the least bit of hostility. Not with the border guards, not with the people. Their immigration regulations are really strict though. I'd say if you want to live in the Baltics, it's still worth challenging the Latvian immigration regulations. At least it's a beautiful country with nice people, unlike its underdeveloped snobbish neighbour to the south. Riga is just great, and Vilnius is like a crappy suburb of Athens or Ankara, to say the least.

runie80
Member of Standing
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 10:17 pm

Post by runie80 » Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:30 am

Good Information Saykocan


I would like to recommend u visiting Switzerland.I have visited the place and my own opinion is that the whole place works like a clock work.

very very organized. I didnt found any rudeness or beloved there.

that my opinion and may not reflect the correct pictures.
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

User avatar
Administrator
Diamond Member
Posts: 1179
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 2:01 am
Mood:
Contact:
United Kingdom

Post by Administrator » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:43 am

.

Saykocan - after living in Latvia for over four years and having visited Lithuania on several occasions (once for two months), I'd have to say that your commentary is exactly reversed for the two countries.

If I had to do it all over again and choose between the two, I'd have settled in Lithuania.

I agree that Lithuania is still one of the most corrupt countries of the EU, but that only puts it in the same league as Poland and Latvia. It does not distinguish it from its neighbors.

The beloved in Latvia turns the bile in my stomach like I've never experienced before in my life. I used to live in the South of the United States (over 12 years) and I experienced covert & overt beloved there that made me sick.

But what I have seen in Latvia was unimaginable to me until I saw it.

There is an endemic mentality of the genetic superiority of the white race that would give the most xenophobic areas of modern Russia a run for its money. I've heard commentaries here that would do Hitler proud.

This much I'll grant - after 50 plus years of Soviet occupation (and, it really hasn't ended yet), the people of this country sure know how to smile to your face while sliding the knife home in your back.

That goes for both the Latvians and the Russians living here.

As far as outright xenophobia for all foreigners, I'd have to nominate Estonia as edging out Latvia and Lithuania by a comfortable and bitter margin.

All three of the Baltic nations were horribly raped by the Soviets, and those scars will be there for several generations. The fact that ultra-nationalistic Russians still 'occupy' portions of those countries is just prolonging the process. By that measure, Latvia may never truly recover.

There is deep and bitter hatred here, and you have to live in the middle of it for a couple of years before you really understand and see it. But, it is there. Every day.


As far as the men being jealous, they have a lot to be jealous and protective over. For the past 15 years foreigners have been using Latvia and Lithuania as convenient and cheap whore houses.

Some of the most beautiful women I've ever seen live here, and I've seen them prostituting themselves out of desperation in both Riga and Vilnius. There is incredible economic disparity in these countries, driven by the corruption being kept alive by the ex-Soviet players throughout the government and businesses.

Either you are a criminal or you are poor here. There are wonderful and good people throughout the country, and I've met quite a number of them. We westerners also describe their situation as 'poverty' or 'abject poverty.'

Westerners show up with a hundred pounds in their pocket and it is unimaginable wealth for many. Nowadays, compared to 2003, for example, maybe it takes 200 or 300 pounds. But the principle is the same.

My (bitter) two-bits on it.

the Admin

Locked