EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 13.07.2010 
SEC(2010) 888 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
 
 
accompanying the 
Proposal for a 
 
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 
 
on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of 
seasonal employment 
{COM(2010) 379 final} 
{SEC(2010) 887} 
 
 
EN 2   EN 1. P ROBLEM DEFINITION  
EU economies face a structural need for s easonal workers. It is expected to be 
increasingly difficult to fill these gaps with  EU national workers, mostly owing to the 
unattractiveness of seasonal work for EU na tional workers. The impact of the global 
economic crisis remains difficult to predict.  However, according to the International 
Organisation for Migration (IOM), it is expect ed that in certain labour market sectors in 
destination countries, there is likely to be a continued stable  need for migrant workers, 
particularly in healthcare, household/domestic employment and care work (as well as in 
agriculture in some countries) where th e demand for such workers is structural’1.  
There is significant evidence that certain third-country seasonal workers face sub-
standard working conditions and exploitation, such as absence of  work contracts, salaries 
below the legal minimum, absence of social security coverage, no access to basic sanitary 
services, flimsy accommodation and no access to healthcare.  
Sectors of the economy that feature a str ong presence of seasonal workers — notably 
agriculture, horticulture and t ourism — are repeatedly identified as the sectors most 
prone to work undertaken by illegally  staying third-country nationals. 
From the sending countries’ pers pective, potential migrants are faced with diverse rules 
set by the different EU Member States, on which information is not always readily 
available. This is particularly relevant for the seasonal work sector, and improving 
conditions and creating a common legal framework in this sector would be of interest to 
countries with high unemployment and strong migration pressure, notably in North and 
sub-Saharan Africa and, to a lesser extent, Ea stern Europe. This would help increase the 
contribution of the EU's legal migration polic ies to the development of third countries.  
1. 1. Size and sectors of seasonal work 
Size and sectors of seasonal work vary acro ss the European Union. For example, only in 
2008 Spain admitted 24 838 non-EU seasonal workers2. For the 2008 calendar year, only 
by 7 February 2008, Italy received 11 273 applications3 (for 2008, 2009 and 2010, the 
quota set by the Italian Minist ry of Interior for seasonal work by non-EU nationals has 
been 80 000)4. In 2009, Germany admitted 4  248 non-EU seasonal workers, France 2 215 
(the corresponding number for 2008 was 3 860) whereas Sweden 7 2525. 
Non-EU seasonal workers have been also working in the new Member States. For 
example, Hungary admitted 919 and 892 th ird-country nationals in 2008 and 2009 
respectively. The data avai lable for Poland concerns te mporary work undertaken by 
third-country nationals and, as a result, the numbers are considerably higher - 181 030 for 
2009. However, the main sector of employment  is agriculture. In Slovenia over 10 000 
non-EU nationals have been admitte d as seasonal workers in 2008 and 2009. 
                                                 
1 IOM Policy brief: The impact of the global economic crisis on migrants and migration, March 
2009, pp. 5-6. 
2 Ad-Hoc Query on Seasonal Wo rkers and Intra-Corporate Transf erees Requested by Commission 
to EMN NCP on 17 March 2010. 
3
 http://www.interno.it/mininte rno/export/sites/default/it/sezioni/sala_stampa/notizie/immi
grazione/0848_APP_domande_pervenute_STAGIONALI.html 
4 Above, at 2.  
5 Ibid. 
 
EN 3   EN Although trends are short and not comparable gi ven the gaps in data, general increases of 
foreign seasonal labour were registered in recen t years in Member States such as France, 
United Kingdom and Slovenia.  
The scarcity of very recent data does not a llow a proper assessment of the impact of the 
current economic crisis on the demand for non-EU seasonal workers. Nonetheless, the comparison of the data for 2008 and 2009 does not  show any falling off in respect of the 
demand. Whereas there are Member States where the numbers of the admitted third-country nationals for 2009 are lower (Austria, Slovenia, Hungary) or even considerably 
lower in 2009 (France), there are also Member  States in which an increase has been 
observed (Germany and Sweden)
6.  
Further, it should be emphasised that season al work sectors are very prone to work 
undertaken by illegally staying workers or ot herwise unregistered wo rkers, so that the 
total numbers of seasonal workers can be assumed to be much higher (well above 
100  000 per year). 
For certain regions in  certain Member States season al labour recruited from third 
countries is crucial. Thus, rega rding agriculture in Andalusia, in particular in the province 
of Huelva, 35  000 third-country nationals were recruited from non- EU countries in 2008. 
An estimated 12  000 agricultural seasonal workers from  third countries are employed in 
southern Italy, especially in  Apulia, and an estimated 5  000 Moroccan seasonal workers 
in the French department of Bouches-du-R hône. Those third-country workers are thought 
to represent about 80-90% of total seasonal workers. In tourism,  certain regions of 
Austria, most notably Tyrol and Salzburg, st rongly rely on seasonal workers from third 
countries to cover seasonal pe aks: the quota was set at 8  000 for the 2008/09 winter 
season. 
In many Member States seasonal workers from third countries take up low-skilled jobs in 
specific sectors such as agricu lture (e.g. 60% of total season al labour force in Italy, 20% 
of total labour force in agriculture in Greece) and tourism (e.g. in Spain work permits for work in the hotels and catering sector reached  13% of the total work permits issued in 
2003), which generally require low-skilled or manual workers and where there are 
significant shortages of manpower. 
1.2. Principle of subsidiarity 
Any measure proposed will resp ect the competence of Member States to determine the 
numbers of economic migrants seeking access to the EU, including by means of national 
quotas. Thus, it remains up to the respective Member State to assess whether it has an economic need for the admission of third-country seasonal workers. 
Although third-country workers enter a specifi c Member State within the EU, a Member 
State’s decision on the rights of third-country nationals could affect other Member States. 
The difference in treatment granted to third-country nationals in the different Member States consequently has a supr anational dimension that lies outside the scope of national 
legislation. 
The Schengen area without internal borde rs requires a common di scipline, that is, 
common minimum rules to reduce the risk of overstaying and illegal entries that may be caused by lax and diverse rules on admission of seasonal workers.  
                                                
 
6 Above, at 2.  
 
EN 4   EN Exploitation and sub-standard working condi tions of third-count ry national seasonal 
workers need to be overcome, by granting ce rtain socio-economic rights in a binding, and 
thus enforceable, EU-level instrument, in  line with the call by the 1999 Tampere Council 
for third-country nationals to be granted fair treatment and a secure legal status, as well 
as the EU's general commitments to human rights and fundamental freedoms. 
An EU instrument on seasonal workers is important to improve effective cooperation 
with third countries, both in allowing the EU to facilitate  low/non-skilled legal migration 
and in strengthening third countries’ comm itment to fighting illegal immigration. 
1. 3. EU added value 
Member States and employers of seasonal workers would benefit from a flexible 
admission system to cope with seasonal labour shortages.  
Third-country seasonal workers would be nefit from a common, transparent and 
accessible European framework, allowing them to move legally towards Member States 
in need of labour. Such legal migrati on opportunities may also diminish illegal 
immigration and illegal employment. 
EU action would send a cooperation-oriented me ssage to third countries concerning the 
management of labour migration. A commitment  on behalf of the EU as a whole in the 
field of economic migration in the non-skilled an d low-skilled sector is likely to facilitate 
cooperation with third countries, including in  fighting illegal migration and fostering 
mutually beneficial circular migration (acco rding to which migrant workers could come 
to a Member State to work temporarily, go back  to their countries and come again in the 
EU etc.). 
2. O BJECTIVES  
2.1. The global objectives:  
1. To respond to seasonal fluctuations in th e economy and offset labour shortages faced 
in specific industries/ec onomic sectors and regions; 
2. To contribute to preventing exploitation and poor working conditions for third-country 
seasonal workers and illegal immigration; 
3. To contribute to the development of third countries. 
2.2. The specific objectives:  
1. To provide for flexible rules to facilitate the temporary legal migration of seasonal 
workers and to promote thei r circular migration;  
2. To provide for equal conditions for empl oyers of third-country seasonal workers 
legally entering the EU labour market; 
3. To ensure a secure legal status and prot ection against exploita tion of third-country 
seasonal workers; 
4. To enhance cooperation with third countries in the management of seasonal migration. 
 
EN 5   EN 3. P OLICY OPTIONS  
Under all of the options examined, the Memb er States would remain free to determine 
the overall numbers of seasonal workers they admitted, in accordance with Article 79(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 
3.1. Option 1: Status quo 
Current developments in Member States and at EU and international level would 
continue within the existing legal fr amework. Employers will be under certain 
obligations under the Directive on employer sanctions, namely as regards notifications to 
authorities and penalties in cas e of illegal employment. The effect of this option would be 
limited. 
3.2. Option 2: Directive on entry and resid ence conditions of seasonal workers 
and rights 
Common rules would be established, including the definition of seasonal work, 
admission criteria, maximum duration of stay  as a seasonal worker and provisions on 
equal treatment with EU national seasonal workers with respect to certain socio-
economic rights, to a differing extent (sub- option 2A: clear determination of working 
conditions; sub-option 2B: clear determination of working conditions and equal treatment 
with EU nationals with respect  to certain socio-economic righ ts such as such as freedom 
of association, right to social  security, etc.). This option would help establish equal 
conditions for EU employers and prevent expl oitation. However, seasonal workers would 
still be faced with diverging a nd complex procedures for entry.  
3.3. Option 3: Directive laying do wn common admission procedures  
In addition to option 2, a single permit would be introduced for work and residence of 
third-country seasonal workers, to be issued  in a single procedure. Provisions would be 
made for facilitating re-entry of a seasonal worker in subsequent seasons (sub-option 3A: 
introduction of a multi-seasonal permit; sub-option 3B: introduction of a facilitated procedure for re-entry). Hiring procedures  would be more efficient, and a more 
predictable workforce would be available fo r EU employers. However, the playing field 
for EU employers would not be levelled and seasonal workers would continue to face a 
risk of exploitation.  
3.4. Option 4: Directive on measu res to ensure effective return  
Measures would include limitation of the lengt h of stay, and an explicit obligation to 
return at the end of the period. An explicit oblig ation to report to the consular authorities 
after return is also considered. Overstayi ng of seasonal workers would be prevented to 
some extent. Effects on the functioning of the EU  internal market would be marginal. 
Seasonal workers would still be faced with  diverging and complex entry procedures. 
3.5. Option 5: Communication, coordina tion and cooperation among Member 
States  
No new legislation is introduced but co mplementary and supporting activities are 
provided for with a view to approximating Me mber States’ practices. Effects would be 
limited, as the measures would not be bi nding; potential seasonal workers would 
continue to face an ar ray of different rules for admission and different rights during their 
residence. 
 
EN 6   EN 4. C OMPARING THE OPTIONS  
Table 1: Impacts 
PO 2 PO 3 Assessment 
criteria  PO 1: Status 
quo 
PO 2A PO 2B PO 3A PO 3B PO 4 PO 5 
 
Relevance  
• Global 
objective 1  0 √ √√ √√√ √√ 0 √ 0/ √ 
• Global 
objective 2  0 √√ √√ √√√ √√(√) √√ 0/ √ 
• Global 
objective 3  0 √ √√ √√√√  √√√ √ 0 
 
Feasibility 
Difficulty/risks for 
transposition N/A - √ - √√ - √√√√  - √√√ - √√√ 0 
Simplification of 
administrative 
burden N/A - √ - √√ - √ 0 - √√√ -√√√ 
Financial and 
administrative 
costs N/A - √√ - √√√ - √ - √ - √√√√  -√√√ 
 
EN 7   EN PO 2 PO 3 Assessment 
criteria  PO 1: Status 
quo 
PO 2A PO 2B PO 3A PO 3B PO 4 PO 5 
 
Expected impacts 
Economic impacts 
at EU level 0 √√ √√√ √√√√  √√√ √ 0 
Impacts on SMEs 
 0 - √√ - √√√ √√√√  √√√ √ 0 
Social impacts at 
EU level 0 √√ √√√ √√√√  √√√ √√ 0/ √ 
Impacts on third 
countries 
 0 √ √√ √√√√  √√ √√ 0/ √ 
Impacts on third-
country seasonal workers 0 √√ √√√ √√ √√ - √√√ 0/ √ 
Impacts on EU 
national seasonal 
workers 0 √ √√ √ √ √ 0 
 
 
EN 8   EN Table 2: The preferred option 
The preferred option is a combination of differe nt aspects of policy options 2B, 3A/B and 4. 
Main areas of 
EU action Provisions of the preferred policy options Policy options and sub-options 
considered 
Admission 
conditions • Common definition of seasonal workers ; 
• Common admission criteria , such as the need to perform a labour market 
test, the need for a work contract or a binding job offer; 
• Definition of the maximu m duration of the permit ; 
• Single permit for work and residence  on the territory of the Member State; 
• Admission allowed on the basis of a visa  bearing the words ‘seasonal 
worker’ for short periods of stay (up to 3 months);  
Definition of a maximum time for pro cessing applications for the single 
permit . Policy option 2B 
 
Re-entry in 
subsequent years • Multi-seasonal permit , with a maximum duration defined (e.g. up to three 
years), or facilitated procedure for re-en try (optional for Member States) ; 
• Previous compliance  of the third-country seasonal workers with all rules as a 
condition for re-entry. Sub-option 3 A/B 
Rights and 
benefits granted 
to TCN SWs • Comprehensive set of rights in the field of  working conditions ; 
• Equal treatment with EU nationals with respect to social security rights , 
such as occupational diseases, accidents at work, sickness benefits, invalidity 
benefits, family benefits, death grants;   
• Right to change employer (e.g. in the event of situation of exploitation/poor 
working conditions, in the case of cons ecutive short harvests) and within the 
duration of authorised stay.  Sub-option 2 B 
Provisions 
ensuring return 
of TCN SWs  • Explicit obligation to return  after the end of each season; 
• Maximum duration  of the authorisation to stay per season; 
• Possibilities for facilitated re-entry  in subsequent years that are accessible 
only to TCN SWs who have complied  with all conditions during their 
previous stay as a seasonal worker. Options 4, 3 A/B 
4.1. Main benefits  
The preferred option would achieve  better results than any of th e policy options alone, or any 
other combination of options. Common admission st andards with simplified entry procedures 
would provide Member States with a flexible  instrument for the admission of the seasonal 
labour force they need. The pref erred option requires Member Stat es to either introduce multi-
seasonal permits or set up a facilitated procedur e. This would have positive impacts on labour 
market needs, as the supply of seasonal work ers should be more easily  guaranteed, and would 
offer prospects to third-country seasonal workers for legal, circular migration.  
Equal treatment in a broader range of areas would reduce ri sks of exploitative working 
conditions and increase remittances. Several provis ions should help ensure the return of the 
third-country seasonal workers and thus reduce the risk of overstayi ng and illegal work.  
Safeguards are introduced to addr ess the problem of lax enforcem ent. Thus, authorities will 
have to carry out check s before the entry of a seasonal worker (e.g. existence of a work 
contract with a salary equi valent to national seasonal wo rkers). Under the Directive on 
employer sanctions labour inspections in certai n risk sectors for illegal employment will be 
undertaken that are expected to have positive sp ill-over effects for sectors of seasonal work. 
4.2. Administrative costs 
The number of third country national seasonal  workers to be admitted to the EU to meet 
future labour needs is estimated at 230  000 per year. At least half of these, thus 115  000, are 
estimated to be eligible for a multi-seasonal pe rmit/facilitated re-entry. The hourly tariffs of 
Member States’ personnel are estimated to be €  23. The examination of an application is 
calculated to require 6 h; information on mu lti-seasonal permits 0.5 h and annual reporting 
10 h. 
The preferred option would lead to the following additional ad ministrative costs (per annum) 
for Member State's authorities: transmission of information by regional/local foreigners’ 
 
EN 9   EN offices to the Member State's authority handling the database of multi-seasonal 
permits/facilitated re-entry procedures (€  57 500) and obligation to submit annual statistics to 
the Commission and other Member States on numbers  of residence permits or visas issued to 
third-country seasonal workers (€  5 980), thus in total €  63 480. Initial costs could be expected 
to reduce as the Member State administrations become familiar with the scheme.  
4.3. Proportionality and EU added value  
Proposing binding rules on the admission and resi dence conditions of third-country national 
seasonal workers is proportionate to the problem to be tackled. The proposed Directive puts in 
place a common EU wide proce dure while respecting the Memb er States' competence over 
immigration. Furthermore it is the only way to ensure a clear legal framework for migrant 
workers who, unfortunately, are a group open to e xploitation. The choice of  a Directive as the 
legal instrument used leaves flexibility to the Member States whilst ensuring a common end result. The Commission has underlined si nce 2001 that binding common standards are 
required. Their implementation and application can  be effectively monitored, especially as 
regards approximation of the rights that lega lly staying migrants enjoy compared to EU 
nationals, in line with the call made by the 1999 Tampere European Council for action 
‘granting legally resident third- country nationals rights and ob ligations compar able to those 
of EU citizens ’.  
The Directive leaves a great deal of flexib ility for Member States in implementation. The 
preferred option would constitute a relatively minor change from the status quo  in terms of 
both the weight of the legislation and the burden on legitimate employers. Some Member 
States may have increased burdens  resulting from the need to set up (more) specific rules, but 
these are justified in relation to the objectives a nd in view of their expected future need for 
this category of th ird-country workers.
 It will remain for Member States to determine the 
volumes of third-country seasonal workers admitted. 
This combination of policy options has the po tential to generate the following EU added 
value: 
– simplified admission procedures and reside nce conditions for th ird-country national 
seasonal workers contribute to offsetting labour shortages faced in specific industries/economic sectors a nd regions where shortages exist and are expected to 
increase; 
– better protection against exploitation for third-country seasonal workers; 
– reduced risk of overstaying and illegal employment owing to a common discipline for 
admission and stay of seasonal workers; and 
– impetus to the further development of third coun tries and of the external aspects of the EU 
migration policy. 
Third-country national seasonal workers would not be treated in a more preferential way 
compared to EU nationals to whom transition periods for free movement of workers apply. In 
particular, equal treatment in certain socio-economic areas would only be granted once the 
third-country national seasonal worker was admitted to a Member State to work.  
 
EN 10   EN 5. M ONITORING AND EVALUATION  
In accordance with the Commission Communi cation ‘A Europe of results – Applying 
Community law’7, the Commission suggests setting up an expert group of representatives of 
the Member States and the Commission (the ‘Contact Committee’), which would meet to 
discuss issues concerning the tr ansposition of the proposed dir ective, along the lines of the 
Contact Committees that meet regularly to co nsider the implementation of, for example, 
Directives 2009/50/EC and 2009/52/EC. The pr oposed expert group would ensure improved 
information flow between EU and national auth orities on how the directive is implemented 
and would help anticipate and resolve problems more effectively.  
Member States would be required to communica te to the Commission and the other Member 
States statistics on the volumes of third-coun try national seasonal worker s in respect of whom 
a seasonal work permit has been  granted, renewed or withdraw n during the prev ious calendar 
year, indicating their nationality, age and sex, length of validity of the permit and economic 
sector.  
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements will be al so carried out in the form of a Commission 
evaluation report three years after the transposi tion deadline of the Directive, on basis of 
Member States’ reporting. 
                                                 
7 COM(2007) 502.