FEANTSA Toolkit. Free Movement of EU citizens! and access to social assistance! Guidance for Homeless Service Providers

Similar documents
EU GUIDE. Questions and answers about the rights of EU citizens

TABLE OF CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN DIRECTIVE 2004/38/EC AND CURRENT EC LEGISLATION ON FREE MOVEMENT AND RESIDENCE OF UNION CITIZENS WITHIN THE EU

This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents

THE 2007 LAW ON THE RIGHT OF UNION CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS TO MOVE AND RESIDE FREELY IN THE TERRITORY OF THE REPUBLIC

Citizenship of the European Union

Do you want to work in another EU Member State? Find out about your rights!

Judgment of the Court (Full Court) of 23 March Brian Francis Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Free movement of EU citizens within the EU and equal treatment for social benefits: solidarity or benefit tourism?

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 20 September 2001 *

Social benefits for migrating EU citizens

REPORT. on the Free Movement of Workers in Finland in Rapporteurs: July 2013

UK EMN Ad Hoc Query on settlement under the European Convention on Establishment Requested by UK EMN NCP on 14 th July 2014

The Free Movement of Persons

Name of legal analyst: Oran Doyle Date Table completed: October 2008 Contact details:

ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION TRANSPOSING DIRECTIVE 2004/38/EC ON FREE MOVEMENT OF UNION CITIZENS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 5 SUMMARY DATASHEET...

Information sheet for secondary advisers Permanent Residence

Free Movement of Workers and the European Citizenship

composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, A. Ó Caoimh, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), U. Lõhmus and P. Lindh, Judges,

Conformity Study Directive 2004/38/EC for Estonia /52. Milieu Ltd & Europa Institute

The Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006

EEA nationals & their family members

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL GEELHOED delivered on 19 February

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) 21 February 2013 (*)

Further proposals to restrict migrants access to benefits

Before : MRS JUSTICE LANG DBE Between : THE QUEEN on the application of. - and - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 7 September 2004 *

MEPs Petitions Committee European Parliament Rue Wiertz 60 B 1047 Bruxelles. Paris, 25 February Dear MEPs,

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 26 July and. The Norwegian Government, represented by the Immigration Appeals Board THE COURT,

Who is eligible for housing? By Amy Lush, 12 College Place

FOLLOW-UP OF THE CASE LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION TRANSPOSING DIRECTIVE 2004/38/EC ON FREE MOVEMENT OF UNION CITIZENS

Questionnaire. 02 Freedom of movement for workers

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS ON THE FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. Working Paper IE Law School WPLS

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 26 February 1992*

Prof. dr. Herwig Verschueren University of Antwerp Berlin - 20 June Non-discrimination and social rights under Reg. 492/2011 and Dir.

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL SIR GORDON SLYNN DELIVERED ON 20 JANUARY 1982

Social assistance and the right to reside at the European Court of Justice Dano v Jobcenter Leipzig

Comparative Study on the Employment of Foreign Nationals in France, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and Montenegro

EEA/EU Staff Immigration Advice Seminars. Presented by Mark Lilley-Tams, Paragon Law

EU nationals and Brexit: How to answer immediate and technical questions

REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA LAW ON THE LEGAL STATUS OF ALIENS CHAPTER ONE GENERAL PROVISIONS

Residence) Amendment Regulations 2013 No See pp1559 of the Welfare Benefits and Tax Credits Handbook

EMN Ad-Hoc Query on Required resources in the framework of family reunification Family Reunification

Migrant workers Social services duties to provide accommodation and other services

Permanent residence University of Reading

1 P a g e. to the GPOW: the Genuine Prospect of Work Test - (1) as a cause of homelessness for EEA migrants. (2) arguments against the test

REPORT on the Free Movement of Workers in the Czech Republic in Rapporteur: Mgr. Věra Honusková. November 2010

Key pressures on local authority NRPF service provision

Ad-Hoc Query on family reunification with prisoners who are nationals of a Member State. Requested by LT EMN NCP on 15 th October 2009

Ad-Hoc Query on parallel legal statuses of residence in other Member States. Requested by CZ EMN NCP on 10 th May 2010

Free Movement of Workers

Session 5 Applying European Citizenship rights

EMN Ad-Hoc Query on Implementation of Directive 2008/115/EC

The Rights of EEA National Victims of Trafficking in the UK

Ad-hoc query on admission of students to study at institutions of higher education. Requested by LT EMN NCP on 22 nd November 2010

Official Journal of the European Union L 94/375

STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL'S REASONS

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL Sharpston delivered on 12 December 2013 (1) Case C-456/12. Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel v O

GETTING AND PAYING FOR HOUSING

The AIRE Centre. Human Trafficking, EU Law and the European Convention on Human Rights. Topics We Will Cover. Objectives of This Session

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 25 July 2002 *

Ad-Hoc Query EU Laissez-Passer. Requested by SE EMN NCP on 24 August Compilation produced on 14 th October

JUDGMENT OF CASE 53/81

Act on the General Freedom of Movement for EU Citizens (Freedom of Movement Act/EU) of 30 July 2004 (Federal Law Gazette I, p.

EEA migrants rights, Roma rights and recent changes. Part 2. Practitioners training 16 th October 2014, Luton

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 20 January 2006 On 07 March Before MR P R LANE (SENIOR IMMIGRATION JUDGE) SIR JEFFREY JAMES. Between.

Families know no borders I Who is a family in Slovakia?

Reports of Cases OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL SHARPSTON 1. delivered on 12 December Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel v O. v S.

The facts 4. The facts, as found by the First-tier Tribunal, supplemented with information provided in this appeal, are as follows.

EEA Nationals not subject to immigration control Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006

Ad-Hoc Query on access to the labour market for asylum seekers. Requested by AT EMN NCP on 9 January Compilation produced on 9 April 2013

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL GEELHOED delivered on 28 September

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 18 March 2009 (OR. en) 17426/08 Interinstitutional File: 2007/0228 (CNS) MIGR 130 SOC 800

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular points (a) and (b) of Article 79(2) thereof,

RIGHT OF ENTERING AND LEAVING THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA

EMN Ad-Hoc Query on immediate family members applying for asylum at the same time

Read Barnard, 3 rd edition, Chs 8 and 9 Treaty of Maastricht 1993 created the status of Union Citizenship Arts TFEU Treaty

EMN Ad-Hoc Query on Short term visa for planned medical treatment Border

Factsheet on rights for nationals of European states and those with an enforceable Community right

The experiences of national equality bodies in combating nationality-based discrimination: the experience of the Greek Ombudsman

A2 workers and the right to reside in Ireland Genov and Gusa v Minister for Social Protection

EMN Ad-Hoc Query on COM AHQ on National residence permits of permanent or unlimited validity Residence

ETUC Position on the EC proposal for the revision of Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems

FURTHER EDUCATION RESIDENCY GUIDE. September 2013

LIMITE EN COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 12 February /13 Interinstitutional File: 2010/0210 (COD) LIMITE MIGR 15 SOC 96 CODEC 308

THE FOUNDATION DEGREE at the University of Glamorgan

The 'Right to Reside' and Social Security Entitlements

ACTRAV/ITC-ILO Course (A155169) Trade Union Actions for Achieving Decent Work for Migrants (Kisumu, Kenya, May 2012)

Committee on Petitions NOTICE TO MEMBERS. Petition 1098/2010 by Bernhard Bökeler (German), on discrimination of EU citizens by the Swedish authorities

EUROPEAN EXTERNAL ACTION SERVICE

OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL LÉGER delivered on 5 October

Background information:

Brexit Frequently Asked Questions. 1. For Permanent Residency - how do you calculate any absences when qualifying for the five years?

RESTRICTED THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY S GOVERNMENT CABINET MINISTERIAL WORKING GROUP ON ASYLUM AND MIGRATION

ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 11 July 2002 *

L 375/12 Official Journal of the European Union

Information session on Brexit for EU/EEA Staff

What is the current status of negotiations between the UK and the EU on the rights of EU nationals residing in the UK?

ACT ON AMENDMENDS TO THE ASYLUM ACT. Title I GENERAL PROVISIONS. Article 1

Transcription:

FEANTSA Toolkit Free Movement of EU citizens! and access to social assistance! Guidance for Homeless Service Providers

The right to free movement between European Union (EU) Member States is one of the fundamental rights EU citizens have. Many people make use of this right every day and many people have permanently established a new life abroad, thus contributing to the wealth and growth of the host society. However, free movement rules might sometimes appear difficult to interpret and they can be very imprecisely implemented, particularly regarding what happens when EU citizens become destitute in a Member State other than the one they are a nationals of. Therefore, the main objective of this document is to provide answers to questions that homeless service providers are often asked when they provide services to an EU citizen who, whilst exercising the right to free movement, becomes destitute. The aim is to regularly update this document with new legislation and case-law that relate to free movement. However, this document intends to provide initial and general guidance - if you think your country is not implementing free movement rules appropriately, you are advised to contact a lawyer in the Member State where you reside or to contact Mauro Striano mauro.striano@feantsa.org - FEANTSA Migration Policy Officer - who will help you find more information. 1. What are the rights guaranteed by citizenship of the European Union? 2. What do EU citizens and their family members need if they want to reside in another Member State? 3. Who retains the status of worker or self-employed person if they lose their job? 4. What is the definition of worker in European Union law? 5. Does it need to be full-time work? 6. Is the level of remuneration important? 7. What does equal treatment mean? 8. Can EU citizens move to another Member State to look for a job? 9. Can job-seekers access the labour market? 10.Can job-seekers access benefits? 11.For how long can EU citizens be jobseekers in another Member State? 12.Can EU citizens be expelled because they have recourse to the social assistance system of the host Member State? 13.How does a Member State assess whether someone with the right to reside there is a burden on the social assistance system? 14.For which reasons can EU citizens be expelled?

1.! What are the rights guaranteed by citizenship of the European Union?! freedom of movement and residence throughout the Union the right to vote and stand as a candidate in municipal elections and in elections to the European Parliament in the state where he/she resides p r o t e c t i o n b y t h e diplomatic and consular authorities of any Member State where the State of which the person is a national is not represented in a non-member country the right to petition the European Parliament and apply to the Ombudsman 2.! What do EU citizens and their family members need if they want to reside in another Member State?! For up to three months:! A valid identity card or passport Concept of EU Citizenship EU citizenship as a distinct concept was first introduced by the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. Prior to the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, the European Communities treaties provided guarantees for the free movement of economically active persons, but not, generally, for others. The interpretation of Treaty provisions on free movement has been very important since they considered free movement not as having a narrow economic purpose, but rather a wider social and economic purpose. In the Levin ruling, the Court found that the freedom to take up employment was important, not just as a means towards the creation of a single market for the benefit of the Member State economies, but as a right for the worker to raise her or his standard of living. (see Case 53/81 Levin v Staatssecretaris van Justitie) For more than three months:! They have to be workers or self-employed, or They must have sufficient resources not to become a burden on the social assistance system and must have comprehensive sickness insurance cover, or They have to be students, have sufficient resources not to become a burden on the social assistance system and have Who is considered a 'family member'? The Union citizen s spouse; the partner with whom the Union citizen has contracted a registered partnership, on the basis of the legislation of an EU Member State the direct descendants of the Union citizen who are under the age of 21 or are dependants and those of the spouse or partner the dependent direct relatives in the ascending line and those of the spouse or partner

comprehensive sickness insurance cover. 3.! Who retains the status of worker or self-employed person if they lose their job?! Those who are temporarily unable to work because of an illness or an accident Those who are involuntarily unemployed after having been employed for more than 12 months and have registered as job-seekers Those who are involuntarily unemployed after completing a fixedterm employment contract of less than a year or after having become involuntarily unemployed during the first twelve months and having registered as job-seekers In this case, worker status is retained for no less than six months! Those who embark on vocational training the training must be related to the individual s previous employment, unless the person concerned is involuntarily unemployed. 4.! What is the definition of worker in European Union law?! The essential feature of an employment relationship is that for a certain period of time a person performs services for and under the direction of another person in return for remuneration. Someone in this kind of relationship is defined as a worker. 5.! Does it need to be fulltime work?! No, it does not: the right to free movement applies to both part-time and full-time work, as long as the work is effective and genuine and not purely marginal and ancillary. 6.! Is the level of remuneration important?! Case 53/81 Levin v Staatssecretaris van Justitie [1982] 1035: Ms. Levin was a British national, married to a South African national, who moved to the Netherlands. Ms. Levin had undertaken a small amount of part-time work and she and her husband supplemented their earned income with investment income. The earned income was far below what could be regarded as a necessary income according to Dutch Law. The question was whether she could be regarded as a worker for the purposes of EU law. The European Court of Justice stated that it does not matter if the income is lower than the minimum required for subsistence. What is important is that the work activity be effective and genuine, not marginal and ancillary. No, it is not: remuneration is a necessary precondition for an activity to constitute work yet the amount is not important. The right to free

movement applies whether or not the worker requires additional financial assistance from the Member State into which s/he moves. Remuneration may be indirect quid pro quo (e.g. board and lodging) rather than strictly monetary remuneration for work. 7.! What does equal treatment mean?! Any discrimination based on nationality is prohibited in connection with employment, remuneration and other working conditions, social and tax advantages and social welfare. This includes not only direct discrimination based on nationality, but also indirect discrimination: even if certain criteria are applicable irrespective of nationality, they must be regarded as indirectly discriminatory if there is a risk of migrant workers being placed at a particular disadvantage. Common examples of indirect discrimination are situations where a particular allowance is conditional on a residence condition or language requirements for certain posts that may by definition be more easily satisfied by nationals than by non-nationals. 8.! Can EU citizens move to another Member State to look for a job?! Yes, they can: they have the right to reside in another Member State for the purposes of job-seeking during 6 months and even more than 6 months if they can provide evidence that they are continuing to seek employment and that they have a genuine chance of being employed. EU citizens can go to another EU country to look for work and continue to receive unemployment benefits from the country where they became unemployed for at least 3 months 9.! Can job-seekers access the labour market?! Yes, they can: they are entitled to treatment equal to that received by nationals as regards access to employment 10.! Can job-seekers access benefits?! Yes, they can. Indeed, they should also qualify for equal treatment with regard to access to benefits of a financial nature intended to facilitate access to employment on the labour market of the host Member State (i.e. jobseeker allowances).

However, a Member State could require that there be a genuine link between the jobseeker and the geographic employment market in question, such as the person needing to have, for a reasonable period, genuinely sought work in the Member State in question. National legislators remain competent for determining the nature of the link with their employment market but they should respect the principle of proportionality. Criteria should not go beyond what is necessary to conclude that the person concerned is genuinely seeking work on the employment market of the host Member State. Financial benefits to facilitate access to the labour market cannot be regarded as constituting social assistance, thus having recourse to these benefits can never lead to the expulsion of the jobseeker receiving them. Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Mr Collins was an Irish national who moved to the UK, claimed job-seekers allowance and had his claim rejected. The European Court of Justice found that the rights of job-seekers should be interpreted in the light of the more general right to equal treatment of citizens. The ECJ decided that citizens of the Union could rely on the Treaty to have access to Benefits of a financial nature intended to facilitate access to employment in the labour market of a Member State. Therefore, the Court ruled that although it was a legitimate and perfectly legal act for a Member State to require that a job-seeker has genuine link to the employment market in the Member State in which he claims job-seeking allowance, it was not permissible under Union law for a r e s i d e n c e c o n d i t i o n t o a p p l y i n a disproportionate and discriminatory way. Hence the UK had to justify on objective grounds the refusal to grant Mr Collins job-seekers allowance and show that the grounds were proportionate and legitimate and not merely on the grounds of national discrimination. 11.! For how long can EU citizens be jobseekers in another Member State?! Jobseekers have the right to reside in a host Member State for a reasonable period of time in order to look for a job. In the absence of a definition of reasonable period, most EU countries are now operating a 6-month period, though some EU countries are still operating a 3-month period. After that period expires, as long as jobseekers provide evidence that they are continuing to seek employment and have a genuine chance of being employed, they cannot be asked to leave the country. For example, if they still have interviews or tests to attend.

12.! Can EU citizens be expelled because they have recourse to the social assistance system of the host Member State?! No, they cannot. Indeed, an expulsion measure should not be the automatic consequence of recourse to the social assistance system. Those with the right to reside in a host Member State should not be expelled as long as they do not become an unreasonable burden on the social assistance s y s t e m o f t h a t h o s t Member State. 13.! How does a Member State assess whether someone with the right to reside there is a burden on the social assistance system?! The host Member State should examine on a caseby-case basis whether or Rudy Grzelczyk v. Centre public d'aide sociale d Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve [2001] Mr Grzelczyk, a French national, undertook a course of study in physical education at the Catholic University of Louvain-la- Neuve (Belgium). In the fourth year of his studies, Mr Grzelczyk applied to the Public Social Assistance Centre (CPAS) for a minimum subsistence allowance, or minimex. He was initially granted the allowance but when the CPAS applied to the Belgian state authorities to have the payments reimbursed, the application was refused on the ground that Grzelczyk was not a Belgian national. The question which arose was whether, following Grzelczyk s minimex application, the host Member State could not only to refuse him entitlement to the benefit in question but also to revoke his right of residence. The Court of Justice held that the minimex was indeed a social benefit and that a Belgian student in the same position as Mr Grzelczyk would have satisfied the conditions for obtaining it. The Court thus found that Mr Grzelczyk had suffered discrimination solely on the grounds of his nationality, which, within the sphere of application of the EC Treaty, was prohibited. not it is a case of temporary difficulties and take into account the duration of residence, the personal circumstances and the amount of aid granted in order to consider whether the beneficiary has become an unreasonable burden on its social assistance system and to proceed to his/her expulsion. 14.! For which reasons can EU citizens be expelled?! For reasons of public policy or public security. However, before making an expulsion decision Member States should take account of considerations such as how long the individual concerned has resided on its territory, his/her age, state of health, family and economic situation, social and cultural integration into the host Member State and the extent of his/her links with the country of origin. Moreover, the personal conduct of the individual concerned must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental

interests of society. Justifications that are isolated from the particulars of the case or that rely on considerations of general prevention shall not be accepted.