Work and Social Welfare for Asylum Seekers and Refugees: a study in 8 Selected EU Member States

The European Parliament Research Service has recently released a paper entitled ' Work and Social Welfare for Asylum-seekers and Refugees: Selected EU Member States' (EPRS, Dec. 2015) 

This publication provides an overview of the international and EU legal framework on the right to work and the access to social welfare for asylum-seekers and refugees. The legislation and practice in eight Member States is examined, while the economic impact and employment prospects of asylum-seekers and refugees in the EU are also assessed. It has been produced at the request of a member of the Committee of the Regions, in the framework of the Cooperation Agreement between the Parliament and the Committee.

The EPRS In-depth analysis ‘Work and social welfare for asylum-seekers and refugees: selected EU Member States‘ looks at the conditions for access to work and to social welfare for asylum-seekers and beneficiaries of international protection (refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection) in eight EU Member States: Bulgaria, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and Sweden. The selected Member States are either located at the external borders of the EU, or preferred destinations in asylum-seekers’ and refugees’ secondary intra-EU movements.

The main conclusions of this study concerning the right to work of refugees and asylum seekers are the following: 

The analysis illustrates that all Member States examined but France have granted the right to work to asylum seekers before the maximum waiting period of nine months set by article 15 of the Reception Conditions Directive if there is still no first-instance decision on their asylum application: six months after the registration of the asylum application in the Netherlands, Poland and Spain, three months in Bulgaria and Germany, two months in Italy, and immediately upon registration of the asylum application in Sweden.

Practical hurdles to the effectiveness of the right to work for asylum-seekers and refugees are common to all Member States, and include lack of knowledge among employers that both groups are allowed to work, insufficient language knowledge, lack of certificates and diplomas to acknowledge specialised skills, as well as asylum-seekers’ residence in reception centres that are often located in remote areas far from economic centres.

From an economic point of view, migration flows can contribute to domestic labour markets as they can fill gaps in low and high-skilled occupations; they can address labour market imbalances (some even claim demographic ones), and they can contribute more in taxes/social benefits than they receive. Yet the huge influx of asylum-seekers in 2015 challenges the standard economic paradigm, and above all raises concerns about the costs of migration. Processing and supporting large numbers of asylum-seekers will be costly in the short run, but at the same time offers an opportunity for the EU to revamp its migration policy. Many comparative studies and time-series data suggest that, in the long term, waves of refugees and migrants have had a neutral or slightly positive impact on public finances.

Hence, one of the crucial factors in integrating asylum-seekers is to make labour markets accessible, and to evaluate the ongoing trend of shortening periods for their admission. While reliable data on qualification levels remain scarce, e.g. in Germany, past experience suggests that much potential remains unused and over-qualification is thus an important challenge.

Migrant populations in the EU are more than twice as likely to be unemployed. Another factor in successful migrant integration is the employment rate. In France, the Netherlands, Sweden, and to a lesser degree in Germany, the difference between third-country nationals and domestic workers is more pronounced (up to 28 percentage points) than in Bulgaria, Italy and Poland. The employment rate for third-country nationals in Poland is 65%, and only slightly lower than the total population. As to the institutional framework for integrating migrants into domestic labour markets, those in Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain fare significantly better than those in France, Poland, and Bulgaria. A recent paper comparing Britain and Germany found that with regards to EU migration, the often-claimed difference between contributory and non-contributory welfare states is far less relevant. By contrast, improving administrative and state capacities promise to be more effective.

Finally, the quality of integration of successful asylum-seekers typically hinges upon early and intensive language training, to assess individual skills, to provide easy school access, to address health and social problems, and to engage in dialogue with employers.

Read the complete In-depth analysis on ‘Work and social welfare for asylum-seekers and refugees: selected EU Member States‘ in PDF.