Search

This report gives an overview of the Con3Post project1 research that analyses a new and understudied phenomenon of posting third country nationals (TCNs) in the European construction sector, with a special focus on the posting flow involving workers from Ukraine being posted to Finland and Estonia through Poland. The research highlights severe regulatory challenges related to the phenomenon. These include posted TCNs being exposed to multiple vulnerabilities that are even more extreme than intra-European Union (EU) posted workers are usually exposed to. These are: lack of occupational safety and health training and having no accident insurance coverage, not receiving wages and other employment conditions the workers should be entitled to, not asking for help from authorities/unions and falling through the cracks of social security systems. We argue that, although posting of TCNs happens for a variety of reasons (including labour market disparities between the sending and receiving countries, established migration routes and ever increasing migration industry), there is also clear evidence that some companies are trying to gain competitive advantage by avoiding inspections and by opting out of more expensive and difficult ways of hiring migrants. As with conventional posting, this can stem from the availability of undemanding TCN workers, and the possibility to hire them via complex corporate constructions which shield employers from liability for violations and inspections. TCN posted workers are even more vulnerable to exploitation and abuse than intra-EU posted workers, because of the increased difficulties in monitoring TCN posting, the lower expectations of TCN workers, and their often unclear immigration status. To improve the situation for posted TCNs, and ensure fair functioning of the free movement of labour (and labour as services), we provide multiple recommendations (see Chapter six) at the workplace, sector, country and regional level including extensive cooperation between regulatory actors, more resources for inspections, better regulations throughout the whole posting chain and lowering the barriers for TCNs to know their rights and ask for help in case of problems. nonPeerReviewed

Media discourses have conveyed the message that European identity has been severely undermined by the Euro-crisis. We test this contention with Eurobarometer data. Conceptually we distinguish two dimensions of collective identity: ‘image’ and ’belonging’. We surmise that economic downturns can alter the superficial layer of identity (image-like assessments), but not its underlying substance (belonging-like assessments) which depends on deeply ingrained socio-psychological mechanisms. These two dimensions are expected to be affected by the crisis in different ways: the image being a more volatile reflection of historical circumstances, and the sense of belonging being more stable over time. Keywords: Eurocrisis; EU image; European identity; European citizens; European public opinion

To what extent and how do European citizens experience other European societies? Do their ordinary lives incorporate a transnational dimension? Or do they prevailingly perform local and national activities? This article examines a wide palette of individual actions that span over national borders through physical and virtual mobility, aiming to measure their diffusion and single out typical configurations of mobility practices. Empirical data come from a sixcountry comparative study, the Eucross project, that carried out a CATI survey of 6,000 citizens in Italy, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Great Britain and Romania and a follow-up set of 60 in-depth interviews to survey respondents. Through a Latent Class Analysis (LCA) six neatly distinguished types emerged. At the two extremes, there are locals (little if any international contact and mobility) and transnationals (very active on all fronts of transnational behaviours). Inbetween, we identified four more types: tourists (who travel substantially but with little interest for long-term stays and expressive contacts), explorers (who are also quite mobile and focus on interpersonal contacts across borders), repatriates (who experienced long-term mobility but have decreased their mobility thereafter) and virtual transnationals (who are not physically mobile but have strong virtual connections abroad). These types are neither evenly spread across countries nor across social categories, mirroring inequalities and possibly national and cultural differences in managing mobilities.

To what extent and how do European citizens experience other European societies? Do their ordinary lives incorporate a transnational dimension? Or do they prevailingly perform local and national activities? This article examines a wide palette of individual actions that span over national borders through physical and virtual mobility, aiming to measure their diffusion and single out typical configurations of mobility practices. Empirical data come from a sixcountry comparative study, the Eucross project, that carried out a CATI survey of 6,000 citizens in Italy, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Great Britain and Romania and a follow-up set of 60 in-depth interviews to survey respondents. Through a Latent Class Analysis (LCA) six neatly distinguished types emerged. At the two extremes, there are locals (little if any international contact and mobility) and transnationals (very active on all fronts of transnational behaviours). Inbetween, we identified four more types: tourists (who travel substantially but with little interest for long-term stays and expressive contacts), explorers (who are also quite mobile and focus on interpersonal contacts across borders), repatriates (who experienced long-term mobility but have decreased their mobility thereafter) and virtual transnationals (who are not physically mobile but have strong virtual connections abroad). These types are neither evenly spread across countries nor across social categories, mirroring inequalities and possibly national and cultural differences in managing mobilities.

This study analyses the socioeconomic background of migrants and refugees who have fled to Italy. It compiles information about their education level, work experience, skills, professional aspirations and future employment prospects. The aim of this research is to help policy-makers in Italy and across Europe get a current, in-depth profile of migrants, understand what drives them to leave home, what influences their decisions during their journey and how they can better integrate in Italy. The International Organization for Migration (IOM), with support from the UK Department for International Development (DfID), commissioned the Migration Policy Centre (MPC) at the European University Institute (EUI) to carry out this research.

More than half a century ago, a future winner of the Nobel prize in economics assessed the case for multinational monetary integration, concluding that ‘an essential ingredient of a common currency, or a single currency area, is a high degree of [production] factor mobility’ (Mundell 1961: 661). The EU free movement regime and the Eurocrisis provide the ideal conditions for a real-life test of Mundell’s theory: Have workers from the countries most affected by the Eurocrisis in the late 2000s relocated to the most thriving labour markets of the continent? Have open intra-EU borders worked as safety valves for displaced labour? This paper focuses on intra-EU movements in order to determine whether they have indeed changed in size and composition during the recent global crisis. We first draw an overall picture of migrant stocks and flows in Europe before and during the recession based on the Eurostat databases. We find that with the exception of Ireland, other Western economies hit by the crisis were not abandoned en masse as the popular press suggested. In the second step on the basis of cross-sectional Eurobarometer data we examine propensity to migrate to search for work within the EU in 2006, 2009 and 2011. We use multilevel modelling in order to examine the impact of individual resources, and also institutional and economic country effects on migration intentions.

More than half a century ago, a future winner of the Nobel prize in economics assessed the case for multinational monetary integration, concluding that ‘an essential ingredient of a common currency, or a single currency area, is a high degree of [production] factor mobility’ (Mundell 1961: 661). The EU free movement regime and the Eurocrisis provide the ideal conditions for a real-life test of Mundell’s theory: Have workers from the countries most affected by the Eurocrisis in the late 2000s relocated to the most thriving labour markets of the continent? Have open intra-EU borders worked as safety valves for displaced labour? This paper focuses on intra-EU movements in order to determine whether they have indeed changed in size and composition during the recent global crisis. We first draw an overall picture of migrant stocks and flows in Europe before and during the recession based on the Eurostat databases. We find that with the exception of Ireland, other Western economies hit by the crisis were not abandoned en masse as the popular press suggested. In the second step on the basis of cross-sectional Eurobarometer data we examine propensity to migrate to search for work within the EU in 2006, 2009 and 2011. We use multilevel modelling in order to examine the impact of individual resources, and also institutional and economic country effects on migration intentions. Reference Mundell, R. (1961) ‘A theory of optimum currency areas’, American Economic Review, 51, 509-17.

INTERACT - Researching Third Country Nationals? Integration as a Three-way Process - Immigrants, Countries of Emigration and Countries of Immigration as Actors of Integration The fulltext pdfs are available upon request to migration@EUI.eu during the embargo period (until 6 October 2019) Recent developments in migration studies have shown how important it is to consider multiple actors, both at origin and destination, in studying migrants’ integration processes. In light of these developments, the INTERACT survey provides a new tool to research migrant integration. Its novelty lies in offering a cross-national approach to civil society organisations at both destination and origin. These organisations are taken as actors relevant for migrant integration in EU destination countries. Upon completion the survey gathered over 900 responses from organisations working predominantly (but not only) in employment, education, language and social relations. These organisations had different levels of reach, but their voices give us a better understanding of how they support migrants in their efforts to integrate in the EU. Although the exploratory character of the survey does not allow for generalisations about all civil society organisations, it sheds light on how these actors’ activities affect migrant integration between origin and destination, and how organisations perceive states of origin and their policies in the context of the day-to-day reality of migrant incorporation in the receiving society. In this methodological paper, we will present the survey’s rationale and structure, before moving onto a description of fieldwork and the challenges faced there. This paper will thus contribute to the multisite cross-national survey literature and map out migrant civil society organisations. INTERACT is co-financed by the European University Institute and the European Unionhe MPC is co-financed by the European University Institute and the European Union

Study for the LIBE Committee. The paradox between the need for international labour migration to counter the impending demographic crisis in Europe and the lack of commensurate policy instruments to attract and integrate labour migration from third countries into the EU is one of the key strategic issues for Europe. Upon request by the LIBE committee, this research paper reviews the social and economic context of EU international labour migration policy, the status of relevant EU legislation and the available policy options from a comprehensive labour market perspective, as well as their feasibility. These options for opening up legal labour migration channels to the EU should be considered in the framework of the ongoing discussion over the European Agenda on Migration.

Social stratification research on leisure tends to focus on class differences in cultural consumption patterns.In this literature, seldom is travelling taken into account as a dependent variable, even if international journeys are exponentially rising worldwide. But how is the experience of travelling sorted across social strata? Do they increase linearly as we move up the social hierarchy, as a reflex of higher income and cultural capital? Or are they more than proportionally an elite prerogative, while the bulk of the population keeps nation-wide travel horizons? And are there societal differences in the association between social class and travelling?In addition, this paper investigates differences in meanings of travels. We thus expand the cultural-sociological debate on the social stratification of cultural tastes to mobility behaviours. Is international travelling a form of ‘omnivorous’ consumption, to use the famous concept of Peterson, for the better off and most educated? Is it meant to incorporate holidays, business and sociability experiences among the upper class, while being more focused and limited in scope among lower classes? Do these differences help characterize class-specific cultural capitals, thus fostering class reproduction?We address both sets of questions – the social stratification of the quantity and quality of mobility experiences – by analysing the distribution of national and international travels across social strata with data from the EUCROSS survey, covering six EU countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Romania, Spain and the UK.Preliminary analyses of EUCROSS data suggest that SES is an important predictor ofmobility experiences; however, there are differences in motives of travels. Higher SES is associated with more travel for both holidays and professional trips. Furthermore, travelling patterns vary significantly depending on the countries from which they originate.

Social stratification research on leisure tends to focus on class differences in cultural consumption patterns.In this literature, seldom is travelling taken into account as a dependent variable, even if international journeys are exponentially rising worldwide. But how is the experience of travelling sorted across social strata? Do they increase linearly as we move up the social hierarchy, as a reflex of higher income and cultural capital? Or are they more than proportionally an elite prerogative, while the bulk of the population keeps nation-wide travel horizons? And are there societal differences in the association between social class and travelling? In addition, this paper investigates differences in meanings of travels. We thus expand the cultural-sociological debate on the social stratification of cultural tastes to mobility behaviours. Is international travelling a form of ‘omnivorous’ consumption, to use the famous concept of Peterson, for the better off and most educated? Is it meant to incorporate holidays, business and sociability experiences among the upper class, while being more focused and limited in scope among lower classes? Do these differences help characterize class-specific cultural capitals, thus fostering class reproduction? We address both sets of questions – the social stratification of the quantity and quality of mobility experiences – by analysing the distribution of national and international travels across social strata with data from the EUCROSS survey, covering six EU countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Romania, Spain and the UK. Preliminary analyses of EUCROSS data suggest that SES is an important predictor of mobility experiences; however, there are differences in motives of travels. Higher SES is associated with more travel for both holidays and professional trips. Furthermore, travelling patterns vary significantly depending on the countries from which they originate.

In its different forms, mobility is a central concept to understand contemporary social life (Urry 2000 and 2007). In this paper we focus on the European context and argue that indeed social life in Europe is enacted through diverse kinds of mobilities – in both physical and virtual space. On the basis of survey data, we map out the patterns of these mobilities, including intra-European migrations, international travels, but also individual networks across borders and online transactions, and explore how they are structured depending on both individual socioeconomic characteristics and places from which they originate. Going beyond the mobilities paradigm, the analysis sheds light on how free movement within the EU, one of the basic rights of the EU citizens, is translated into a set of mobility practices. Therefore mapping out mobilities is a way of mapping EU citizenship practices in a day-to-day reality. Preliminary analyses show that there are national specificities in mobility patterns, countering the idea that mobilities ‘level the field’ and have integrative effects. We address these issues using the EUCROSS survey which was carried out in six European countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Romania, Spain and UK) in 2012. EUCROSS included various measures of physical and virtual mobilities, which are used as dependent variables in logistic regression models. Based on statistical analyses we draw a detailed account of EU citizenship practices across national borders.

In its different forms, mobility is a central concept to understand contemporary social life (Urry 2000 and 2007). In this paper we focus on the European context and argue that indeed social life in Europe is enacted through diverse kinds of mobilities – in both physical and virtual space. On the basis of survey data, we map out the patterns of these mobilities, including intra-European migrations, international travels, but also individual networks across borders and online transactions, and explore how they are structured depending on both individual socioeconomic characteristics and places from which they originate. Going beyond the mobilities paradigm, the analysis sheds light on how free movement within the EU, one of the basic rights of the EU citizens, is translated into a set of mobility practices. Therefore mapping out mobilities is a way of mapping EU citizenship practices in a day-to-day reality. Preliminary analyses show that there are national specificities in mobility patterns, countering the idea that mobilities ‘level the field’ and have integrative effects.We address these issues using the EUCROSS survey which was carried out in six European countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Romania, Spain and UK) in 2012. EUCROSS included various measures of physical and virtual mobilities, which are used as dependent variables in logistic regression models. Based on statistical analyses we draw a detailed account of EU citizenship practices across national borders.