Foreign Workers: Information on Selected Countries' Experiences
Published: 2006-09-08T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The opportunity for employment is an important magnet attracting immigrants, including unauthorized immigrants, to countries. The policies and practices used by other countries to manage foreign workers, including actions to limit illegal immigration and to reduce the employment of unauthorized foreign workers, have been shaped by country-specific economic, demographic, and political factors. Immigration reform is a matter of continuing debate in the United States. This report examines selected countries' (1) programs for admitting foreign workers; (2) efforts to limit the employment of unauthorized foreign workers; and (3) programs for providing unauthorized immigrants with an opportunity to obtain legal status, referred to as regularization. To address these objectives, we examined reports from foreign countries, intergovernmental organizations, and research organizations. We also interviewed government officials and experts from 8 countries--Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom--and surveyed 6 other countries. We selected these countries based on their net immigration rate, population size, membership in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development or World Bank classification as high income, range of immigration policies, and geographic location.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The countries GAO studied have programs for admitting foreign workers, most of which are focused on recruiting high-skilled or seasonal foreign workers. To recruit foreign workers, some countries use bilateral agreements with other countries. For example, Canada uses bilateral agreements with Mexico and several Caribbean nations to recruit seasonal agricultural workers. Some countries manage foreign worker admissions by various means, such as quotas or points-based systems. However, officials stated that it is difficult to implement a system that responds to changing labor market needs and does not create incentives for employers to hire unauthorized foreign workers. Some countries regulate foreign worker admissions by specifying requirements for participation in a foreign worker program, such as work permit fees. Moreover, foreign worker programs differ in their requirements for workers to return home. Some temporary programs require workers to return upon expiration of work permits, while others allow foreign workers to renew their permits and apply for permanent resident status. The countries GAO studied use a variety of efforts in enforcing laws designed to limit the employment of unauthorized foreign workers. In some of these countries, employers are required to report workers' information to government agencies or to verify workers' authorization status. Among these countries, the employment of unauthorized foreign workers is largely considered one of several illegal labor practices, including failure to pay taxes or social insurance contributions, and government agencies generally focus their enforcement efforts and investigate employers to detect all such practices. Government officials and experts have noted that conducting frequent employer investigations and publicizing those investigations helps deter employers' hiring of unauthorized foreign workers. Countries can penalize unscrupulous employers for employing unauthorized foreign workers, including imposing monetary fines on employers. However, countries have faced difficulties, such as the prevalence of document fraud, in penalizing employers. Some countries have implemented large-scale regularization programs that allow unauthorized immigrants to apply for legal status on either a temporary or a permanent basis. Countries have implemented regularization programs for different reasons, such as to help reduce the size of the underground economy or to facilitate immigrant integration, and governments believe they derive some benefits from implementing these programs, such as increased collection of tax and social insurance contributions. Under these programs, countries require illegal immigrants to meet specified eligibility requirements, such as residency and work requirements, before applying for or receiving legal status. Employers and unauthorized foreign workers have incentives to participate in regularization programs but may not want to because, for example, some employers can save money by employing unauthorized foreign workers from whom they do not pay taxes or social insurance contributions. However, countries have faced difficulties in implementing these programs, such as in ensuring timely review of applications. Moreover, some experts have reported that regularization programs may attract further illegal immigration,while others have concluded that programs' effect on illegal immigration is unclear.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: According to various studies, immigration affects nearly every country in  the world, as countries are points of origin for immigrants, places of  transit, final destinations, or can serve as all three. Migrants move between  countries for a variety of reasons, including family reunification, political  protection, and employment. However, the opportunity for employment is  one of the most important magnets attracting immigrants, including  unauthorized immigrants, to countries. Reports indicate that migrants,  especially labor migrants, help to keep viable segments of certain labor- intensive industries, expand foreign trade, provide valuable language and  cultural expertise to companies, and contribute to the economic  revitalization of some communities. Yet these reports also note that  immigration, particularly illegal immigration, may have adverse  consequences, such as helping to depress wages for low-skilled workers  and creating net fiscal costs for some levels of governments.
Countries use a variety of policies and practices related to foreign worker  programs, including actions to limit illegal immigration and to reduce  employment of unauthorized foreign workers. These policies and practices  have been shaped by country-specific economic, demographic, and  political factors, such as countries’ unemployment rates and population  characteristics. They may include visa categories to allow migrants to  enter and work in a country on a legal basis, mechanisms to regularize the  status of unauthorized migrants currently residing in a country, means to  verify workers’ employment authorization status, and efforts to enforce  laws that prohibit the employment of unauthorized workers.
As in other countries, immigrants can legally enter and reside in the United  States through different channels, such as work visa programs, but some  also illegally enter or overstay their visas and illegally remain in the United  States. Various reports have estimated that the U.S. unauthorized  immigrant population was about 11 million in 2005. Congress has passed  laws to provide legal channels for immigrants to live, work, and become  naturalized citizens and to prohibit unauthorized migrants from entering  and working in the United States. In 1986 Congress passed the  Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), making it illegal for  individuals or entities to knowingly employ unauthorized workers and  establishing an employment eligibility verification process and a sanctions  program for fining employers who do not comply with the act. The Illegal  Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996  revised some provisions of IRCA and established voluntary pilot programs  for employers to electronically verify employees’ work eligibility.
More recently, the House of Representatives and the Senate passed  different bills to further revise certain elements of U.S. immigration law.  Among other things, these proposals would revise current border and  interior enforcement measures and require employers’ mandatory  participation in an electronic employment eligibility verification system.  The Senate proposal would also establish a new temporary foreign worker  program and allow certain unauthorized immigrants currently residing in  the United States to apply to regularize their status.
You asked us to review other countries’ efforts to reduce the unauthorized  employment of foreign workers. This report addresses the following  questions: (1) What are selected countries’ programs for admitting foreign  workers, and what are the reported advantages and disadvantages of these  programs? (2) What are selected countries’ efforts to limit the employment  of unauthorized foreign workers, and what are the reported advantages  and disadvantages of these efforts? (3) What are selected countries’  programs for providing unauthorized immigrants with an opportunity to  obtain legal status, referred to as regularization, and what are the reported  advantages and disadvantages of these programs? In addition, this report  provides information on selected countries’ foreign worker programs,  worksite enforcement efforts, and regularization programs in appendixes  II through X.
To answer these questions, we obtained government agency reports and  other documents and interviewed officials during site visits to Belgium,  Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.  We also interviewed officials and obtained documents from, but did not  visit, Australia. In addition, we sent four questionnaires to government  agencies in 13 countries and received responses from Argentina, Austria,  the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, and Singapore. We selected the  countries for our review based on their net immigration rate, size of  population, membership in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation  and Development (OECD) or World Bank classification as high income,  range of immigration policies, and geographic location. In the 7 countries  we visited and Australia, we interviewed officials from the labor  ministries, interior ministries, finance ministries, treasury departments,  social security agencies, immigration agencies, law enforcement agencies,  and local government agencies. We analyzed information and documents,  such as agency annual reports, manuals, and briefing materials, from these  countries to determine the characteristics, functions, resources, and  outputs of the countries’ programs to admit foreign workers, enforce laws  that prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign workers, and  regularize unauthorized immigrants. Our questionnaires included general  questions about the characteristics, functions, outputs, and agency views  on the advantages and disadvantages of these programs in the surveyed  countries. We did not independently examine countries’ laws and  regulations, but rather based characterizations of countries’ programs on  information provided by countries in response to the questionnaires or in  interviews as of July 2006.
In addition, we interviewed officials and analyzed reports from the  International Labour Organization (ILO), the International Organization  for Migration (IOM), OECD, and the European Union (EU). We also  examined reports and studies from research organizations and  immigration experts, including reports from the Migration Policy Institute;  the Center on Migration, Policy and Society at Oxford University; and the  Center for Comparative Immigration Studies. In addition, we interviewed  officials from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees; the  United Nations High Commission for Human Rights; the  Intergovernmental Consultations on Asylum, Refugee, and Migration  Policies; 6 employer associations; 10 labor groups; and 1 advocacy group,  as well as 19 immigration experts in Belgium, Canada, France, Germany,  Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We  selected the experts based on the following criteria: type and depth of  experience; recognition in the professional community; relevance of  published work; employment history; and researchers’ recommendations.  We also interviewed officials from the Departments of Labor and  Homeland Security in the United States. We analyzed information from  these sources to determine their views on the advantages and  disadvantages of countries’ temporary foreign worker programs, efforts to  enforce laws that prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign  workers, and regularization efforts. For more detailed information on our  scope and methodology, see appendix I. We conducted our work from  September 2005 through August 2006 in accordance with generally  accepted government auditing standards.
subsections: section_title: Background
subsections: section_title: Political and Social Factors Related to Immigration
paragraphs: Individuals migrate between countries for different reasons, including for  family reunification, humanitarian, and work purposes. Many countries  provide channels through which immigrants can legally enter to live with  their immediate family members, and most countries we studied also  admit immigrants who are refugees or claim asylum. Countries also have  established temporary and permanent migration channels through which  individuals can legally enter for employment.
Social and political factors in countries may affect countries’ immigration  policies. For example, studies have noted that a country’s perception of its  national identity can affect the country’s policies for admitting and  integrating immigrants. A country that perceives itself as being culturally  homogeneous may view immigration differently than countries with long  histories of immigration. Relatedly, countries’ policies for granting  permanent residence or citizenship to immigrants may affect countries’  immigration programs. For instance, policies regarding permanent  residency and citizenship may help shape the types of programs countries  implement for admitting immigrants and facilitating immigrants’ social and  economic integration.
Studies have noted the importance of social and economic integration for  immigrants. Programs to integrate immigrants into a country provide  benefits to both the country and immigrants by promoting social cohesion;  fostering immigrants’ support for and participation in the country’s  political, economic, and social systems; and helping to ensure the  protection of immigrants’ rights and to enhance their ability to access the  labor market. These programs may provide immigrants with job training or  work experience, language or civics courses, and other educational  opportunities.
Countries may implement changes to existing immigration policies,  including to reduce immigrant admissions or, conversely, to provide  increased opportunities for legal immigration, based on different factors  or events. Countries may revise their immigration policies to respond to  external events, such as humanitarian crises in other countries or  international conflicts by, for example, changing the number of refugees  and asylum seekers admitted to the countries. Moreover, countries may  strengthen their border control efforts, for instance, in response to  increased illegal immigration flows from neighboring countries.
section_title: Economic and Demographic Factors Related to Immigration
paragraphs: Various economic and demographic characteristics are linked to  countries’ immigration policies. In particular, studies have noted that  economic factors, such as unemployment rates, economic growth rates,  and the size of the underground economy, may affect countries’  immigration policies. For example, high unemployment rates may limit  the number of foreign workers countries admit, as unemployed native  workers take jobs typically filled by foreign workers. Therefore, high  unemployment rates in certain countries may encourage foreign workers  to seek employment in other countries with lower unemployment rates.  Likewise, studies have suggested that the relative difference in the size and  growth of countries’ economies can affect immigration flows. Countries  with large or fast-growing economies are attractive to foreign workers— including unauthorized immigrants.
The employment of unauthorized foreign workers contributes to  countries’ underground economies. The underground economy includes  any employment in a country for which employers do not pay taxes or  social insurance contributions and is thus composed of both unauthorized  foreign workers and native workers for whom appropriate contributions  are not paid. Studies have noted that both employers and workers benefit  from working in the underground economy because in doing so, neither  group pays taxes or social insurance contributions. Employment in the  underground economy may negatively affect government revenue because  governments do not collect taxes and social insurance contributions on  underground employment. Likewise, workers in the underground  economy may find it more difficult to access social insurance benefits and  may be more at risk for exploitation.
Demographic factors, particularly countries’ birthrates and population  characteristics, may also affect immigration policies. Studies have noted  that aging, low-growth populations may have long-term effects on  countries’ fiscal and economic outlook, and these countries may be more  disposed to admitting foreign workers than other countries. For example,  as the number of younger people in a country decreases relative to the  increase in the number of older people, contributions made by younger  workers to countries’ social insurance systems may not be sufficient to  provide insurance benefits for the increasing older population. Therefore,  countries with aging, low-growth populations may have an incentive to  encourage legal immigration and admit large numbers of foreign workers  who can contribute to countries’ tax and social insurance systems and  may be more at risk for exploitation.
Yet foreign workers in countries may also be eligible to receive some  social insurance benefits, and foreign workers’ access to such benefits  varies among countries. For example, in some countries foreign workers,  including unauthorized foreign workers, can access unemployment and  health insurance but cannot receive retirement benefits. Given that foreign  workers contribute to tax and social insurance systems but also can  receive social insurance benefits, in most countries it is unclear whether  foreign workers’ contributions are greater than the benefits they receive or  whether foreign workers, particularly unauthorized workers, create net  fiscal costs for governments. In addition, studies suggest that unauthorized  foreign workers create other costs for governments, such as costs for  social services as well as for border and interior enforcement efforts.
Experts have reported that immigration provides economic benefits to  countries that may exceed any fiscal costs to governments resulting from  unauthorized immigration. These experts have suggested that migration  helps to allocate labor resources among global labor markets, creating net  gains for migrants and countries receiving the migrants. For example, in  some countries there is little direct competition between immigrants and  local workers for jobs in most sectors. In such instances, foreign workers  can fill needed jobs for which no native workers are available. In countries  with more direct competition between immigrant and resident workers,  particularly for low-skilled jobs, immigrants tend to compete with native  workers as well as with other immigrants already residing in the country  with similar skills. In these cases, resident workers, both citizens and  noncitizens, may experience declining wages or wages that rise slowly and  increasing unemployment rates. Moreover, studies have suggested that a  high concentration of foreign workers in certain industries or geographical  areas can depress employment and working conditions in the local labor  force.
section_title: Free Movement among EU Countries
paragraphs: Among EU countries, policies and practices established by the EU may  affect member countries’ immigration policies. In particular, within the  EU, nationals or citizens of member countries can move freely between  other member countries without being subject to border controls. In June  1985, five EU countries initially signed a treaty to create a territory within  the EU that did not have internal border checkpoints and controls, which  became known as the Schengen area. This treaty includes EU members,  other than the United Kingdom and Ireland, and does not yet fully apply to  the 10 new members that acceded to the EU in May 2004. When the  Schengen area came into effect, it abolished the internal borders of the  signatory states and created a single external border for immigration  checks for all states within the Schengen area.
In addition to the right of free movement, nationals of EU member  countries have the right to work in any other member country. However,  this right has not yet been fully extended to new member countries that  acceded to the EU in May 2004. For the first 2 years following accession,  new member countries’ access to labor markets in the existing member  countries depended on the national policy of each existing member  country. Among the existing member countries, Ireland, Sweden, and the  United Kingdom fully opened their labor markets to workers from all the  new member states. Other existing member countries limited workers’  access to labor markets under transitional arrangements for various  reasons, including to limit competition among domestic and foreign labor  forces. At the end of the initial 2-year period, the European Commission  assessed the transitional arrangements for workers from the new EU  countries. In addition, existing member countries decided whether to  continue the arrangements for an additional 3 years or to allow workers  from the new member countries full access to labor markets. Finland,  Greece, Portugal, and Spain opened their labor markets to workers from  the new EU countries as of May 1, 2006, while the other EU member  countries decided to continue the transitional arrangements. At the end of  this 3-year period, existing member countries can, under limited  conditions, restrict labor access for an additional 2-year period. Member  countries cannot extend the transitional arrangements beyond 7 years  after the new members’ EU accession.
section_title: Immigration-Related Programs in the United States
paragraphs: United States immigration policy distinguishes between temporary and  permanent admissions by providing for two types of U.S. visas for foreign  nationals entering the country. Immigrant visas are issued to foreign  nationals who intend to live permanently in the United States, while  nonimmigrant visas are for foreign nationals wishing to enter the country  on a temporary basis, such as for temporary work, study, or tourism. The  immigrant visas generally provide a path to eventual citizenship, while the  nonimmigrant visas require that, upon expiration of the visa, the visa  holder must either leave the country or change status to a new visa  category.
Permanent immigrant visas are issued for family reunification,  employment, or humanitarian reasons. Immigrants who apply to enter the  United States for work purposes are required to follow a multistep  process. First, the potential worker and employer determine if the worker  is eligible for a permanent employment-based visa based on the applicant’s  skills. Second, most employment categories require that the U.S. employer  complete a labor certification request for the applicant and submit it to the  Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration Office of  Foreign Labor Certification. This office provides labor certifications to  employers once employers have demonstrated that there are insufficient  qualified U.S. workers available and willing to perform the work at wages  that meet or exceed the prevailing wage paid for the occupation, and  employment of the immigrant will not adversely affect the wages and  working conditions of U.S. workers similarly employed. Third, once the  employer receives the labor certification, the employer files an immigrant  visa petition, which must be approved by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration  Services (USCIS) in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Finally,  the Department of State provides the applicant an immigrant visa number.  The visa number indicates that a visa has been assigned to the applicant,  but the applicant is required to wait, sometimes for years, for the visa  number to become available in order to complete the process of becoming  a permanent resident.
Current U.S. law allows for 140,000 permanent employment-based visas  per year and preferentially grants these visas based on skill level, with  highly skilled applicants receiving the highest preference. The first level of  preference is provided to persons of “extraordinary ability” in the arts,  sciences, education, business, or athletics; outstanding professors and  researchers; and multinational executives and managers all of whom must  meet certain specified criteria. The second level of preference is provided  to members of professions holding advanced degrees or persons of  “exceptional ability” in the sciences, art, or business who meet certain  specified criteria. The third preference level is provided to skilled  workers with at least 2 years’ training or experience, professionals with  baccalaureate degrees, and up to 10,000 unskilled shortage workers  performing work that is not of a temporary or seasonal nature.
The majority of work-related visas that are granted in the United States are  for a temporary period and require the employer to file a petition with  USCIS. The beneficiaries of the visa petition generally must provide  evidence that they are not coming to live permanently in the country, and  in some cases, as discussed above, employers must receive an  employment certification from the U.S. Department of Labor. The United  States currently has 72 specific types of temporary visas, and a subset of  these permit the visa holder to be employed while in the United States.  Table 1 provides examples of some of these temporary, employment-based  visa programs. Some work visas are designed to attract workers in specific  labor market sectors, such as nursing or corporate managers. One of the  largest categories for work-related visas is the H visa, which includes the  H-1B, H-2A, and H-2B visas, and is not specific to a particular market. H-1B  visas are for professional specialty workers with highly specialized  knowledge or distinguished fashion models and are renewable for up to   6 years. The H-2A visa is for seasonal or temporary agricultural workers  and allows for a maximum stay of 3 years. Finally, the H-2B visa is a  general, temporary visa for nonagricultural workers; is limited to   66,000 visas annually; and does not have requirements for skill levels.   After the temporary visas expire, the foreign worker is required to leave  the United States. Migrants who overstay their visas contribute to the  unauthorized foreign worker population in the United States, despite  provisions in the law that limit or control the ability of unauthorized  migrants to find employment. We have previously reported that the United  States has difficulty in tracking the status of immigrants who enter the  country legally and then overstay their visas.
U.S. immigration laws have also established a variety of means by which  immigrants can change their status after entering the country. For  example, some temporary visa categories allow a legal visa holder to apply  to adjust to lawful permanent resident status under a permanent  employment- or family-based category after a specified period of time of  working legally in the United States. In addition, IRCA established a  regularization program to provide legal status to aliens who had  continuously resided in the United States illegally prior to January 1, 1982.  It is estimated that the programs under IRCA regularized the status of  nearly 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
IRCA also established procedures for verifying the work authorization of  foreign employees and for enforcing laws to limit the employment of  unauthorized workers. The act made it illegal for individuals to knowingly  hire, continue to employ, or recruit or refer for a fee unauthorized workers  and established a two-pronged approach for helping to limit the  employment of unauthorized workers: (1) an employment verification  process through which employers verify newly hired employees’ work  eligibility and (2) a sanctions program for fining employers who do not  comply with the act.
Under the employment verification process, employees and employers  must complete the Employment Eligibility Verification Form (Form I-9) to  certify that the employees are authorized to work in the United States.  Employers must request that newly hired employees present a document  or documents that confirm employees’ identity and work eligibility.  Currently, there are 27 different documents that can be used to establish  work eligibility. On the Form I-9, employees must attest that they are U.S.  citizens, lawfully admitted permanent residents, or aliens authorized to  work in the United States. Employers must then certify that they have  reviewed the documents presented by their employees to establish identity  and work eligibility and that the documents appear genuine and relate to  the individual presenting them. In making their certifications, employers  are expected to judge whether the documents presented are obviously  counterfeit. Employers are deemed in compliance with IRCA if they have  followed the verification procedures, including instances when an  unauthorized alien may have presented fraudulent documents that  appeared genuine. We have previously reported that current weaknesses,  such as difficulty in detecting document and identity fraud and the large  number of acceptable documents for proving work eligibility, have  undermined the effectiveness of the employment verification process.
Those employers who do not follow the verification process can be  sanctioned for knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized  workers, or for improperly completing the Form I-9. Employers who fail to  properly complete, retain, or present for inspection a Form I-9 may face  civil or administrative fines ranging from $110 to $1,100 for each employee  for whom the form was not properly completed, retained, or presented.  IIRIRA of 1996 limited employer liability for certain technical violations of  Form I-9 paperwork requirements. According to the act, a person or entity  is considered to have complied with the employment verification process  if the person or entity made a good faith attempt to properly complete the  Form I-9. Employers who knowingly hire or continue to employ  unauthorized aliens may be fined from $275 to $11,000 for each employee,  depending on whether the violation is a first or subsequent offense.  Employers who engage in a pattern or practice of knowingly hiring or  continuing to employ unauthorized workers are subject to criminal  penalties consisting of fines up to $3,000 per unauthorized employee and  up to 6 months’ imprisonment. Efforts to enforce these sanctions are  referred to as worksite enforcement and are primarily the responsibility of  U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in DHS.
We reported in 2005 that worksite enforcement has been a relatively low  priority under both the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)  and ICE, and that since fiscal year 1999, INS and ICE have dedicated a  relatively small portion of overall agent resources to the worksite  enforcement program. Since September 11, 2001, INS and then ICE  focused worksite enforcement efforts mainly on detecting and removing  unauthorized workers from critical infrastructure sites, such as airports  and nuclear power plants, consistent with the DHS mission to combat  terrorism. Yet employers, particularly those not located at or near critical  infrastructure sites, who attempt to circumvent IRCA have faced little  likelihood that ICE would investigate them for knowingly hiring  unauthorized foreign workers. We reported that INS and ICE have faced  difficulties in setting and collecting fine amounts that meaningfully deter  employers from hiring unauthorized foreign workers and in detaining  unauthorized workers, though we noted that ICE has taken steps to  address these difficulties. In addition, in 2006 we reported that data on  individuals’ earnings collected by various agencies, including the Social  Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service, could help DHS  detect unauthorized work and enforce immigration laws. However, while  our prior work has highlighted the benefits of earnings information for  detecting unauthorized work, we noted that additional disclosure of  earnings information should be carefully weighed against the various  drawbacks—especially privacy considerations.
section_title: Countries’ Programs for Admitting Foreign Workers
paragraphs: The countries in our review have programs designed to recruit foreign  workers to fill jobs that cannot be filled by native workers, and these  programs generally focus on recruiting high-skilled or seasonal foreign  workers. Some countries facilitate the recruitment of workers by using  bilateral agreements or third party entities. The countries we studied  determine and manage the number of foreign workers that can be  admitted by studying labor market conditions or by implementing a quota  system. The countries also have admission requirements that employers  and potential foreign workers are required to meet in order to participate  in a foreign worker program. The majority of foreign worker programs  implemented in countries we studied are temporary, and the countries use  a variety of mechanisms to encourage or enforce the return of temporary  foreign workers after expiration of work permits.
subsections: section_title: Countries Recruit Foreign Workers Based on Skill Level and Can Use Bilateral or Other Agreements
subsections: section_title: Countries Recruit Foreign Workers with Different Skill Levels but Generally Focus Recruitment on High-Skilled and Seasonal Workers
paragraphs: Foreign countries in our review have programs designed to fill high- skilled, low-skilled, and seasonal jobs with foreign workers, but countries  vary in the ways they recruit foreign workers for these types of positions.  Countries such as Australia, Germany, and Belgium have programs  designed to actively recruit highly skilled workers. For example,  according to government officials, Australia offers numerous foreign  worker programs to recruit highly skilled foreign workers in specific  industry sectors that have experienced labor market shortages. The  country recruits high-skilled workers through, among other means, the use  of promotional campaigns within specific industrial sectors or foreign  countries to target foreign workers with specific business or trade skills  for positions in Australia, such as medical practitioners, visiting  academics, and business workers. In addition, Canadian officials stated  that about 55 percent of the temporary foreign workers admitted to  Canada in 2004 were employed in skilled occupations, such as  professionals, academics, and engineers. According to one expert, because  the education and training required to become high-skilled takes time to  acquire, an efficient way for a country to increase its numbers of high- skilled workers is to recruit these workers from abroad. For example,  during the 1990s, most industrial countries made it easier for foreign  professionals to enter and work temporarily or permanently in response to  the economic growth of that period.
While countries we studied, such as Canada, Australia, and Germany, have  programs designed to legally admit low-skilled foreign workers, they  generally do not focus their recruitment efforts on this type of worker.  However, jobs in low-skilled sectors, such as manufacturing, construction,  and cleaning services, are also the sectors in which employers with large  numbers of unauthorized workers are typically found. Government  officials and experts told us that the high amount of illegal work in these  sectors can be an incentive for governments to develop programs designed  to legally admit low-skilled workers. In addition, countries’ need for  foreign workers to fill low-skilled jobs is at least partially determined by  the economic situation of the countries. For example, experts from  Germany stated that the high unemployment rate in their country has  decreased the need for low-skilled foreign workers, and the German  government has taken steps to fill low-skilled job vacancies with  unemployed German citizens. In contrast, Canadian officials stated that  their country’s need for temporary foreign workers, of which about   45 percent are low-skilled, has increased as the economy has  strengthened.
While most of the countries in our review do not recruit significant  numbers of low-skilled foreign workers, government officials generally  told us they recruit foreign workers on a seasonal basis and have  implemented programs designed to fill those needs. For example,  Germany recruits seasonal workers by allowing employers to specify  individual foreign workers to fill positions or by allowing an employer to  request foreign workers through a local employment agency without  specifying particular workers. Seasonal work, while considered to be a  type of low-skilled employment, is generally regulated under specific  programs different from those regulating other types of foreign work  because seasonal work is of a defined amount of time. Seasonal work is  generally in the agricultural or tourism industries in which the length of  such work is defined by growing season and peak tourist season,  respectively. Foreign workers may therefore have the opportunity to  participate in seasonal programs on an annual basis. Government officials  and experts told us that this process of repeatedly participating in  seasonal programs provides an incentive for foreign workers to return to  their home countries at the end of the season because lapsing into illegal  status by overstaying their permits may jeopardize workers’ ability to  participate in future programs. In addition, government officials and  experts suggested that employers benefit from seasonal worker programs  under which the same workers participate year after year because  employers gain benefits from their investments in the seasonal workers,  such as in the provision of training. However, experts also noted that  seasonal workers may be vulnerable to exploitation because they may not  be fully aware of their rights or may not report mistreatment if they fear  doing so would jeopardize their employment.
section_title: Countries Can Use Bilateral Agreements or Third Party Entities to Recruit Foreign Workers
paragraphs: Some countries we studied use bilateral agreements to manage the flow of  workers between two countries or to manage foreign worker admissions  in specific labor sectors. For example, the Canadian government uses  bilateral agreements with Mexico and Jamaica to recruit and admit  seasonal foreign workers in the agricultural industry. Australia runs its  Working Holiday Maker Program through reciprocal bilateral agreements  with other countries. Under this program, Australia admits foreigners aged  18 to 30 from specific countries to enter Australia for up to 1 year for  travel around the country. During their time in the country, these  individuals can earn money by working for up to 6 months each with  different employers. An Australian government official stated that the  working holiday maker program has contributed to the Australian  economy because it allows employers to hire visiting foreigners to do  short-term work that the employers would likely not be able to obtain  Australian workers to do.
Government officials and experts told us that both the receiving and  sending countries have incentives to enter into a bilateral agreement. The  agreements provide the receiving countries with mechanisms to help  control the flow of illegal migration from sending countries by, for  example, including provisions that require the sending countries to  repatriate citizens who are found to be in the receiving country illegally. In  addition, bilateral agreements allow receiving countries to recruit foreign  workers from specific sending countries or with specific skills or other  characteristics to fill jobs in certain sectors with labor shortages. Bilateral  agreements also may provide employers in the receiving countries with  some control over recruiting workers with appropriate skills to fill job  positions, allow employers to compare foreign workers’ education with  the receiving country’s standards, and help ensure sending countries’  assistance in repatriating workers after work permits expire. In particular,  some receiving countries have set up offices in sending countries to  recruit and provide training for workers to be admitted. In other cases,  companies themselves have become involved in the recruiting process by  sending personnel to countries to train and recruit foreign workers. For  example, in Spain, the autonomous community of Madrid recently signed  an agreement with Colombia that allows employers to train and guarantee  jobs to potential workers while they are still in Colombia. France has  bilateral agreements with Romania and other countries that facilitate  unauthorized immigrants’ repatriation by stipulating that deported foreign  workers will not be able to secure a tourist visa enabling them to return to  France for at least a few months after repatriation. Moreover, experts told  us that receiving countries can use bilateral agreements to help manage  the flows of unauthorized immigrants by providing financial assistance to  the sending countries, helping to improve financial conditions in the  sending countries and thus reducing immigrants’ incentives to migrate  illegally.
Likewise, sending countries have a variety of incentives for participating in  bilateral agreements to manage foreign worker flows. Sending countries’  economies benefit from the remittances that foreign workers send back to  the countries, and bilateral agreements provide sending countries with a  vehicle to negotiate appropriate wages, living conditions, and job security  for their citizens abroad. In addition, sending countries may benefit  economically and socially from the skills and experiences that temporary  foreign workers bring back to the countries by, for example, encouraging  small business and community development. Experts have indicated that  helping to improve financial conditions in the sending countries reduces  immigrants’ incentives to migrate illegally.
Bilateral agreements also help sending countries ensure their workers’  rights, such as ensuring employers provide safe working conditions.  According to studies, the rights granted to foreign workers under bilateral  schemes vary by agreement and the terms and conditions negotiated  between the sending and receiving countries. Bilateral agreements can  ensure that workers admitted are entitled to the same working conditions  and wages as native workers, and some agreements also specify whether  and how foreign workers are able to collect social insurance contributions  made in receiving countries upon the workers’ return to their home  countries. However, nongovernmental officials and experts have stated  that sending countries, in some cases, may be reluctant to advocate for  their workers’ rights if the countries perceive that doing so may hinder  their participation in the bilateral agreements and thus the flow of  remittances.
In addition, countries use private sector entities, called third party entities  or operators, to recruit, select, or transport foreign workers from sending  to receiving countries. For example, the United Kingdom allocates a  defined number of work permits to several third party operators, who then  independently recruit workers from other countries to work in the  agricultural sector. Studies suggest that the use of third party entities is a  means to link employers in the receiving countries with appropriate  foreign workers. Government officials told us that the use of third party  entities requires the government to regulate these groups to ensure they  are complying with program requirements. For example, researchers have  stated that third party entities can exploit foreign workers by soliciting  money from foreign workers in exchange for job placement.
section_title: Countries Control the Admissions of Foreign Workers by Limiting Their Numbers and Setting Eligibility Requirements
subsections: section_title: Countries Manage Foreign Worker Admissions Using Various Methods But May Find It Difficult to Effectively Respond to Changing Labor Market Needs
paragraphs: Most of the countries we studied assess the need for foreign workers by  studying the labor market and using the results to determine the number  of foreign workers to admit to work in specific sectors, but the countries  varied in the extent to which they have formalized processes to assess  labor market needs for foreign workers. The officials and experts with  whom we spoke told us that basing the number of allowable admissions of  foreign workers on the results of labor market determinations helps  ensure that the number of foreign workers legally admitted matches the  actual economic need for workers in specific industries. For example,  Spain’s regional governments determine the need for foreign workers in  different labor sectors by discussing labor market needs with employer  and worker associations and submit the results to the national  government, which then uses the information to determine the number of  foreign worker admissions for each sector. Experts and officials told us  that a process for assessing labor market needs helps countries match the  number of foreign worker admissions to labor market needs for those  workers. In addition, many countries, including Argentina, the  Netherlands, and Switzerland, require a potential employer to prove that  no native workers are available to fill a job before the employer can apply  to bring in a foreign worker. Countries such as France and Canada require  employers to advertise job vacancies in local newspapers, trade  publications, or an employment office before the employers can seek  foreign workers. However, officials and experts told us that the burden on  employers for completing this requirement can encourage employers to  circumvent the assessment process and hire unauthorized foreign  workers, resulting in the need for enforcement tools to address  unauthorized foreign workers’ employment.
In addition to using labor market assessments to determine the need for  foreign workers, some countries we studied use quota systems to indicate  the number of legal foreign worker admissions. Quotas can be set at a  predetermined number or allow for some flexibility in the number of  foreign workers to admit based on labor market needs. Governments may  set quotas on an annual basis in consultation with relevant bodies such as  employers, trade unions, and local labor or employment offices to account  for labor market needs. Quotas can be set for each labor sector or  geographic region or by foreign workers’ countries of origin. For example,  Switzerland has implemented a national quota for both temporary and  long-term workers that limits the number of foreign workers admitted to  Switzerland each year. The United Kingdom introduced a sector-based  scheme in 2003 that created a quota of 10,000 workers in the hospitality  and food-processing sectors and limited the annual number of foreign  workers admitted to the United Kingdom in those sectors, although the  United Kingdom is moving towards an employment-based immigration  system based on a general points scheme to admit foreign workers, as  discussed below. Additionally, in Austria, the government sets quotas of  seasonal workers by sector. In 2006, Austria set quotas of 7,500 for  workers in the tourism sector; 7,500 for workers in the agriculture or  forestry sector; and 7,000 for seasonal harvesters.
However, it is difficult to implement a quota program that effectively  responds to changing labor market needs when the number of foreign  worker admissions has been set under a quota system. Government  officials, labor unions, and experts told us that quotas may not necessarily  respond to labor market needs, a situation that creates an incentive for  employers to hire unauthorized workers and necessitates enforcement  efforts to control the employment of unauthorized workers. Officials and  experts also stated that as a country’s economy changes, the need for  foreign workers may shift from one employment sector to another.
Some countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United  Kingdom, have used points-based systems for managing immigration  flows, which allow countries to tailor their admission requirements for  residence or work permits to migrants who meet certain characteristics. In  general, under points-based systems, immigrants, such as temporary  foreign workers, obtain points based on various skills and characteristics,  including educational or professional experience and ability to speak a  country’s native languages. These characteristics may be chosen based on  a country’s perception of attributes that predict a migrant’s potential to  succeed in the labor market. Immigrants whose point totals meet a  minimum point requirement can qualify for work permits and, in some  cases, permanent residence status. Under Australia’s points-based system,  immigrants can earn points for such things as skill, age, English language  ability, specific work experience, an occupation in demand, a job offer, an  intention to reside in regional Australia, and spouses’ skills. Under  Canada’s system, points are assigned to applicants based on age,  education, work experience, intended occupation, and knowledge of  Canadian national languages, among other things. Experts have said that  points-based systems are advantageous because they are transparent to  both the migrant and employer about the requirements a migrant must  meet in order to qualify for entry to the country.
section_title: Countries’ Foreign Worker Programs Specify Employer and Worker Requirements for Participation
paragraphs: Countries we studied have foreign worker programs with requirements  that employers and potential foreign workers are required to meet in order  for the government to issue a work permit. Most countries require either  the worker or employer to pay a fee in order to be granted a work permit.  For example, Canada charges individual workers a C$150 (about $140) fee  to apply for a work permit. The United Kingdom charges employers a £153  (about $280) fee to apply for a work permit on behalf of each potential  foreign worker. Experts have suggested that requiring employers to pay a  fee for foreign workers’ permits helps to ensure that employers hire only  those foreign workers for whom they truly have a need. However,  government officials and experts stated that the fee requirement may  create an incentive for workers to seek illegal employment and for  employers to hire unauthorized workers in order to avoid having to pay  the fee. In other cases, unscrupulous employers may illegally deduct the  cost of the fees from foreign workers’ wages.
Many countries’ work permits also stipulate that foreign workers can only  be employed by the employer listed on the permit. Therefore, if foreign  workers would like to change jobs, the workers must reapply for a new  permit or work for an alternate employer illegally. While such a  requirement can help regulate foreign workers’ employment, experts and  other nongovernmental officials told us that the requirement can also  make it difficult for foreign workers to escape unscrupulous employers  who may exploit the workers. In addition, the requirements of work  permits granted under foreign worker programs generally state whether  family members may accompany a foreign worker. For example, under  Austria’s seasonal worker program, foreign workers are not permitted to  bring their family members. According to government officials, employer  and employee groups, and experts, temporary workers may be less likely  to return to their home countries if their family members are permitted to  accompany them.
section_title: Countries’ Foreign Worker Programs Are Generally Temporary but Vary in Their Requirements for Return
paragraphs: Regardless of the skill level of the foreign worker, the majority of work  permits offered by the countries we studied are temporary, although the  permits vary in their requirement for the workers’ return at the end of the  permit’s duration. These permits generally expire after a set amount of  time—for the countries in our review from 3 months to 5 years after  issuance. However, not all temporary work permits require workers to  return home at the end of the permit. Some temporary work permits are  renewable and allow workers to renew the permit an unlimited number of  times. For example, the Spanish government offers foreign workers a   1-year temporary permit that is renewable indefinitely, and participants in  this program have the option to apply for permanent residency after   5 years. Nongovernmental officials and experts told us that an advantage  of renewable temporary work permits is that they provide a means for  employers to employ a legal workforce, help governments obtain financial  benefits from hiring legal foreign workers, and reduce employers’  incentives to hire unauthorized foreign workers.
Some countries’ foreign worker programs offer temporary work permits  that require the foreign worker to leave the country when the permit  expires, but government officials and experts noted that it is difficult to  ensure that the workers return to their home countries. Government  officials and experts noted that temporary programs are most successful  in ensuring worker return when the work is of a short, defined duration,  such as in seasonal labor sectors. Workers may also be more willing to  return to their home countries if they have the opportunity to participate  in future programs. For example, Canadian officials and experts stated  that employers in Canada have an incentive to hire legal foreign seasonal  workers because they have assurance that the workers will be available to  work in subsequent years. In addition, the foreign workers have incentives  to return home because they do not want to jeopardize their status in the  program and, because the agricultural work is located in rural areas of  Canada, it can be difficult for the foreign workers to integrate into or  travel to more populated areas of the country.
Experts and government officials noted that because it is difficult to  successfully ensure foreign workers’ return to their home countries, a  significant number of foreign workers overstay their work permits and  become unauthorized immigrants, contributing to countries’ illegal  immigrant populations. The countries we studied use a variety of tools to  encourage or enforce foreign workers’ return to their home countries  when their permits have expired (see table 2), and these tools are used in  conjunction with the countries’ laws and policies that limit the  employment of unauthorized workers. For example, government officials  stated that hiring foreign workers who have an existing attachment to  their home countries may help ensure that workers return when their  work permits expire. According to government officials, under Spain’s  seasonal agricultural worker program, the government recruits primarily  married women, because these workers may be more likely to return to  their countries in order to see their families. The United Kingdom’s  seasonal worker program primarily recruits foreign students who are on  vacation from their schools, as these workers have an existing reason to  return to their home countries. In addition, countries may withhold foreign  workers’ social insurance benefits or earnings, which workers can only  collect upon return to their home countries. Singapore requires employers  of non-Malaysian temporary foreign workers to post a bond of S$5,000  (about $3,200) per worker, which is returned to the employer after the  worker has returned home.
Some programs allow for permanent resident status after a certain period  of employment and residence, although countries’ programs for foreign  workers generally do not allow for workers to become naturalized  citizens. Experts stated that granting permanent status can help ensure  economic growth and sustain social welfare contributions, as well as allow  employers to retain high-quality workers. Experts, government officials,  and nongovernmental officials stated that offering permanent status is  generally reserved for high-skilled foreign workers and therefore can be  used as a means to recruit and retain skilled foreign workers. For  example, Germany instituted a program for recruiting information  technology specialists in which foreign specialists could reside and work  in Germany for a 5-year period, after which they could apply for  permanent residency and bring in family members if the specialists met a  minimum salary requirement. In Switzerland, settlement permits can be  granted to individuals who have resided continuously in the country for   10 years; foreigners from European Economic Area countries and the  United States can receive permits after 5 years of residence.
Some of the countries in our review have implemented measures to assist  with the integration of foreign workers and their families who are granted  long-term residency status and who may face difficulties in socially and  economically integrating into the countries. For example, immigration  experts in Germany stated that long term residents from Turkey may have  difficulty integrating into German society as, in general, neither they nor  their children could become German citizens. Germany has initiated  programs to help integrate new immigrants, such as requiring them to take  language and civics classes. France has also faced difficulties in  integrating immigrant populations, which, according to a government  official, have contributed to protests and civil unrest. The French  government has taken steps to help better integrate immigrants, such as  establishing a dialogue with immigrant organizations and providing  scholarships for immigrants. Other countries have also initiated programs  to help immigrants’ integration, such as language and culture classes and  programs to assist immigrants in obtaining employment.
section_title: Additional Insights from Countries’ Temporary Foreign Worker Programs
paragraphs: The countries whose temporary foreign worker programs we studied  noted that such programs have provided a variety of benefits to those  countries by, for example, helping countries fill labor market shortages in  specific sectors, such as in sectors where there are no native workers  available or willing to fill jobs. Temporary foreign worker programs have  also provided channels for legal immigration flows, which according to  experts, may have helped to reduce employers’ demand for unauthorized  foreign workers and foreign workers’ incentives to illegally migrate to  receiving countries. Yet, governmental and nongovernmental officials have  noted challenges faced by countries in implementing temporary foreign  worker programs. Experts have suggested that temporary foreign worker  programs or other initiatives that increase the number of foreign workers  legally admitted to countries do not help reduce illegal immigration flows  but rather help increase immigrant populations in receiving countries,  which may encourage further legal and illegal immigration flows. In  addition, countries have faced challenges in developing temporary foreign  worker programs that flexibly respond to changing labor market needs.  Countries have also experienced difficulties in enforcing requirements  specified on work permits, particularly in ensuring temporary foreign  workers’ return to their home countries upon expiration of their work  permits.
section_title: Countries Use Various Means to Limit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: The countries we studied generally require employers to report  information on workers’ employment, such as workers’ names and social  insurance numbers, to government agencies, and in some countries,  employers are required to review employees’ work authorization  documents. In taking worksite enforcement actions against unscrupulous  employers and unauthorized foreign workers, including those who do not  follow government reporting and verification requirements, some  countries focus enforcement efforts on detecting and penalizing all illegal  labor practices, while others focus more specifically on the employment of  unauthorized foreign workers. As part of their worksite enforcement  efforts, countries use a variety of enforcement tools, which are generally  focused more on employers than on unauthorized foreign workers. To  identify employers for investigation, enforcement agencies in these  countries obtain information or leads from sources, such as the public and  government databases, and use this information to investigate worksites.  According to government officials and experts, the frequency and publicity  of employer investigations helps deter employers from hiring unauthorized  foreign workers, but countries have faced challenges in investigating and  sanctioning employers and unauthorized foreign workers. These officials  also stated that monetary fines penalize employers for hiring unauthorized  foreign workers and may help deter future unauthorized employment, but  others have noted that fines alone may not be effective in deterring  unauthorized foreign worker employment. In addition to monetary fines,  countries we studied use other means, such as seizure of employers’  assets, to penalize employers for hiring unauthorized foreign workers.
subsections: section_title: Countries Require Employers to Report or Verify Workers’ Employment Information
paragraphs: In some countries we studied, the governments typically require  employers to report information on workers, including workers’ names  and social insurance numbers, to government agencies when the workers  are hired, and the agencies maintain this information for collecting taxes  and social insurance contributions, administering social insurance  benefits, and, in some cases, conducting worksite enforcement actions.  For example, in France employers are required to submit a declaration of  hire to the social security administration. In Belgium, employers are  required to submit native workers’ names and social insurance numbers to  the government’s social insurance database. In Germany, employers are  required to report workers’ employment information to the government  for the payment of taxes and social insurance contributions. In some of  these countries, employers are generally required to review noncitizens’  work authorization documents, such as work or residence permits, at the  time of hire because noncitizens typically do not have social insurance  numbers to report to government agencies. Employers can be subject to  penalties if they employ unauthorized foreign workers and failed to check  those workers’ work authorization documents. Government officials and  experts have stated that requirements for employers to report workers’  information to government agencies help governments maintain records  on individuals for tax and social insurance purposes, and can help  agencies detect possible cases of illegal employment. However, officials  and experts also stated that document fraud may undermine countries’  reporting requirements and adversely affect governments’ ability to hold  employers liable for hiring unauthorized foreign workers.
Some countries we studied require employers to review all workers’ work  authorization documents. In the Netherlands, employers are required to  check workers’ identity and work authorization documents, such as  passports, residence permits, or identity cards, before the workers start  their employment. Employers are required to maintain a copy of these  documents for at least 5 years after the workers cease their employment  with the employers. In the United Kingdom, employers are not required to  check workers’ employment authorization documents, such as passports,  birth certificates, or work permits, but they cannot establish an affirmative  defense against a charge of hiring unauthorized foreign workers unless  they have reviewed workers’ documents. While requirements for  employers to review workers’ employment authorization documents may  help employers ensure that they hire only authorized workers, according  to governmental and nongovernmental officials, the vulnerability of  verification processes to document fraud has made it difficult for  employers to verify individuals’ authorization to work. Officials told us  that unauthorized foreign workers have used false documents to illegally  obtain employment in their countries.
section_title: Some Countries Focus Enforcement Efforts on All Illegal Labor Practices, while Others Focus More Specifically on the Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: In some of the countries we studied, labor agencies are primarily  responsible for enforcing workplace laws and focus their enforcement  efforts broadly on identifying all types of illegal labor practices, of which  the employment of unauthorized foreign workers is part, including  employers’ provision of substandard working conditions or failure to  appropriately pay minimum wages, taxes, or social insurance  contributions (see table 3). In Germany, for example, worksite inspectors  can check employers’ records and practices to determine whether  employers have paid proper amounts of taxes and social insurance  contributions for workers and hired only authorized workers. Likewise, in  Belgium, France, and Switzerland, enforcement actions at worksites are  coordinated among multiple agencies and are focused on detecting illegal  labor practices by employers, though agencies focus on different elements  of those practices. These countries may have focused their enforcement  on all illegal labor practices for various reasons. For example, because  employers’ failure to appropriately pay taxes or social insurance payments  contribute to the underground economy, enforcement agencies may focus  on detecting all illegal labor practices that are linked to the underground  economy. Furthermore, by targeting employers for failure to provide  appropriate wages and working conditions along with other illegal labor  practices, nongovernmental officials have stated that government agencies  can improve working conditions for all workers and thus help reduce  employers’ incentives for employing unauthorized foreign workers.
In other countries we studied, particularly Australia and the United  Kingdom, the employment of unauthorized foreign workers is generally  considered less of a labor issue than it is in other countries we studied. In  these countries, immigration agencies are primarily responsible for  enforcing laws that prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign  workers and more specifically focus enforcement efforts in that area than  similar agencies in other countries we studied. Other agencies in Australia  and the United Kingdom focus on enforcing labor standards, such as  ensuring provision of safe working conditions and appropriate payment of  wages, taxes, and social insurance contributions, and these agencies often  coordinate their enforcement efforts with the countries’ immigration  enforcement agencies.
Regardless of the focus of enforcement agencies, nongovernmental  officials and experts have suggested that requiring employers to improve  working conditions for all workers may help deter employers from hiring  unauthorized foreign workers. In particular, they have suggested that  enforcement of laws that require employers to provide safe and equal  working conditions for all workers would help eliminate the advantage  employers may gain by hiring unauthorized foreign workers. They noted  that because employers often provide substandard wages and working  conditions for unauthorized foreign workers, it is less costly for employers  to hire unauthorized foreign workers than authorized workers. According  to these officials, requiring employers to provide the same standard wages  and working conditions to all workers, regardless of their work  authorization status, helps reduce employers’ incentives to employ  unauthorized foreign workers.
section_title: Countries Use Various Tools to Limit Unauthorized Foreign Worker Employment, but Face Difficulties in Enforcement Efforts
subsections: section_title: Countries’ Enforcement Efforts Are Employer-focused but Also Include Deportation of Unauthorized Immigrants
paragraphs: In some of the countries we studied, officials told us that enforcement  efforts at worksites are more focused on employers, but countries we  studied also implement enforcement actions to target unauthorized foreign  workers. Government officials in France and Spain noted that their  agencies focus worksite enforcement on investigating and penalizing  employers for illegal labor practices and place less emphasis on penalizing  unauthorized foreign workers. In particular, in countries such as Spain and  France, unauthorized foreign workers are viewed and treated as victims.  In France, government officials told us that unauthorized workers have the  same workplace rights as authorized workers and, therefore, in some  instances, can sue employers for back wages, payment of social insurance  contributions, or compensation for poor working conditions. As a result,  employers can be required to forfeit any profits gained from employing  unauthorized foreign workers, which can help deter employers from  employing such workers in the future.
Nevertheless, countries in our review also take enforcement actions  against unauthorized immigrants, including those detected at worksites.  Unauthorized immigrants can be deported and may also be prohibited  from reentry. Yet according to governmental and nongovernmental  officials, it can be difficult for countries to repatriate unauthorized  immigrants to their home countries, and countries may not be able to  deport all unauthorized immigrants they identify. In some cases,  immigrants’ home countries may delay or deny issuing necessary travel  documents for unauthorized immigrants’ readmission. These home  countries may seek benefits, such as visa facilitation or border control  training, in return for readmitting their citizens who worked illegally in the  other countries. Some countries we studied used tools, such as limiting  numbers of visas issued to individuals from sending countries, to  encourage other countries’ readmission of unauthorized immigrants.
section_title: Governments Receive Tips and Check Multiple Databases to Identify Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: To help detect illegal labor practices by employers, government agencies  receive information and tips from different sources. These sources include  workers, other government agencies, and the public. In addition to these  sources, agencies in some countries share information across government  databases to help identify possible illegal labor practices. If information in  social insurance or tax databases does not match employers’ records, it  may indicate that employers are engaged in illegal labor activities,  including the employment of unauthorized foreign workers. For example,  in France, government officials stated that when inspecting worksites,  labor inspectors may compare information reported by employers to the  French social security administration with information in employers’  records to determine whether employers have properly registered their  workers with the social security administration and whether workers are  authorized. In Spain, government agencies plan to use database  information collected under the country’s 2005 regularization program to  target employers for inspection and to identify unauthorized foreign  workers. Government officials and experts told us that the sharing of  information across government agencies and databases can generate leads  for investigating employers for illegal labor practices. However, some  governmental and nongovernmental officials noted data protection and  privacy concerns with the use of tax and social insurance information in  identifying possible illegal labor practices among employers. In  Switzerland, for example, a nongovernmental official told us that data  protection laws prohibit Swiss labor inspectors from comparing social  insurance and work authorization records.
section_title: Frequency and Publicity of Employer Inspections May Help Deter Unauthorized Foreign Worker Employment
paragraphs: In countries we studied, enforcement agencies conducted inspections or  investigations of employers to examine employers’ compliance with laws  that prohibit various illegal labor practices, including the employment of  unauthorized foreign workers. According to governmental and  nongovernmental officials, the frequency and publicity of these employer  investigations help deter employers from hiring unauthorized foreign  workers. For example, nongovernmental agency officials noted that an  increased frequency of employer investigations helps deter employers  from hiring unauthorized workers. Immigration experts and governmental  officials also suggested that to help deter employers’ hiring of  unauthorized foreign workers, government agencies should conduct  frequent inspections so as to increase employers’ perception that they are  likely to be investigated, contributing to the deterrent effect of employer  investigations and monetary fines on employers’ hiring of unauthorized  foreign workers. However, countries have faced challenges in conducting  employer investigations. For example, governmental and  nongovernmental officials told us that during investigations some  employers may claim that they did not knowingly hire unauthorized  foreign workers because workers presented false information at the time  of hire. The ability of employers to make such a claim creates difficulties  for government agencies in proving that employers knowingly hired those  workers. Additionally, nongovernmental officials and experts have noted  the importance of resources in conducting frequent employer  investigations. For instance, one expert told us that enforcement efforts do  not deter the employment of unauthorized foreign workers if countries do  not provide sufficient resources for enforcement actions so as to increase  the likelihood that employers will be investigated.
Furthermore, publicizing enforcement actions against employers helps to  deter employers’ hiring of unauthorized foreign workers. For example,  government and nongovernmental officials noted that publicizing  employer investigations and sanctions can be an important deterrent to  employers’ hiring of unauthorized foreign workers. Moreover, experts  stated that publicizing sanctions imposed on employers serves as a  deterrent to increase employers’ perception that they have a significant  chance of being penalized for employing unauthorized foreign workers.
section_title: Countries Use Monetary Fines to Penalize Employers’ Use of Unauthorized Foreign Workers, but the Deterrent Effect of Fines Is Unknown
paragraphs: Most of the countries we studied use civil or criminal fines to penalize and  deter employers from hiring unauthorized workers. As shown in table 4,  the amounts of civil and criminal monetary fines reported by country  officials, as well as the conditions under which fines can be imposed, vary  across the countries we studied.
Government officials noted that employer monetary fines may help deter  employers’ hiring of unauthorized foreign workers, but officials from other  countries suggested that the deterrent effect of current monetary fine  amounts in their countries is unclear. For example, nongovernmental  agency officials from France, Germany, and Spain noted that employer  monetary fines have helped to deter employers in those countries from  hiring unauthorized foreign workers. In 2005, Germany imposed about   €67 million (about $84.2 million) in civil fines, and France imposed about  €2.7 million (about $3.4 million) in civil fines. However, other officials  stated that fine amounts may be too low to provide a meaningful deterrent.  Governmental and nongovernmental officials noted that employers often  view monetary fines as the cost of doing business, and therefore, monetary  fines do not meaningfully deter employers from hiring unauthorized  workers. Officials suggested that it can be difficult to set fine amounts that  deter employers from hiring unauthorized foreign workers but do not  drive employers out of business or into the underground economy.
In addition, in some countries we studied, agencies have experienced  difficulties in imposing fines on employers and in collecting fine amounts  from employers. For example, governmental and nongovernmental  officials told us that document fraud hinders the ability of enforcement  agencies to prove employers hired unauthorized foreign workers and to  sanction them. Officials also noted that enforcement agencies in some  countries lack the resources needed to effectively investigate and sanction  employers, affecting the frequency with which employers are fined for  employing unauthorized foreign workers. Moreover, Belgian government  officials told us that the government has difficulty collecting monetary  fines from employers because employers have declared bankruptcy or  sold off company assets to avoid paying the fine amounts. French and  German officials similarly told us that employers have declared  bankruptcy to help avoid paying fine amounts, and other government  officials noted that, in many cases, employers went out of business before  the government collected fine amounts. French officials also stated that  the government plans to primarily pursue civil, rather than criminal,  penalties against employers, as civil penalties can be imposed and  collected more easily than criminal penalties in that country.
Countries we studied have developed tools to help collect fine amounts  from employers. In Spain, for example, government officials stated that if  an employer decides to appeal the government’s imposition of a monetary  fine, the employer is required to pay the fine amount to the government  prior to the appeal, and the government holds the fine amount in escrow.  One Spanish government official told us that as a result of this process, the  Spanish government collects payment on most of the fines imposed on  employers for hiring unauthorized foreign workers. In Switzerland,  government authorities may, in some cases, require employers to pay fine  amounts at the time of the worksite inspections. Additionally, some  countries, such as France and Belgium, have developed initiatives to  address the problems they have encountered when attempting to collect  fine amounts from subcontractors who may go out of business before  paying fine amounts. Under these initiatives, governments can hold main  contractors responsible for penalties assessed against their subcontractors  for employing unauthorized foreign workers.
section_title: Some Countries Require Employers to Forfeit Benefits or Pay Various Costs for Hiring Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: Some countries use other means in addition to monetary fines to penalize  employers for hiring unauthorized foreign workers, but may face  difficulties in applying the penalties. These penalties include prohibiting  employers from receipt of public contracts; requiring employers to pay  back wages, taxes, and social insurance contributions for unauthorized  foreign workers; closing businesses; seizing employers’ assets; requiring  employers to pay costs for deporting unauthorized foreign workers; and  sentencing employers to prison terms. Some government officials told us  that by requiring employers to pay back wages, taxes, and social insurance  contributions for unauthorized foreign workers, government agencies  eliminate any profits employers gained as a result of employing  unauthorized workers. In addition, in France and Spain, unauthorized  foreign workers may denounce, or report, their employers to government  agencies if the employers are engaged in illegal labor practices. In Spain,  unauthorized foreign workers who denounce their employers may be  eligible to obtain legal status.
section_title: Additional Insights from Countries’ Worksite Enforcement Efforts
paragraphs: The opportunity for employment is a strong motivator for migrants to  illegally enter a country and employers have a variety of incentives for  hiring unauthorized workers, including the employers’ desire to lower  costs to be more competitive in the economy. For this reason, strong and  workable enforcement of labor and immigration laws is a critical part of  implementing a credible immigration system in any country. By preventing  unauthorized migrants from finding employment, governments may reduce  the motivation for migrants to illegally enter the country. The countries we  studied use different mechanisms and government agencies to enforce  their laws against employing unauthorized foreign workers, yet all  countries face challenges in implementing effective worksite enforcement  policies. These challenges include making decisions about how to leverage  resources to meet the goals of their worksite enforcement programs.  Within that framework, it is important for countries to determine how best  to coordinate the various government agencies and to allocate resources  for enforcing employment laws. While employer sanctions play an  important role in countries’ worksite enforcement efforts, it can be  difficult to set penalties that are neither so low as to be considered simply  the cost of doing business by unscrupulous employers nor so punitive that  they are unlikely to be imposed for fear of bankrupting businesses, which  may cause native workers to lose their jobs. In addition, publicizing  worksite enforcement efforts can leverage enforcement resources by  reinforcing with employers the risk they take when they employ  unauthorized workers.
section_title: Countries’ Experiences with Regularization Programs
paragraphs: Some countries we studied have implemented regularization programs  that provide eligible unauthorized immigrants with the opportunity to  obtain legal status on a temporary or permanent basis for various reasons,  and countries have established different eligibility requirements for  program participation. Employers and unauthorized foreign workers may  have incentives for participating in regularization programs, but may  choose not to participate because they gain benefits from unauthorized  employment. Governments in countries that have implemented  regularization programs reported benefits from these programs, such as  collecting increased tax and social insurance contributions, yet  governments face a variety of challenges in managing such programs. In  addition, some experts have suggested that regularization programs can  create a magnet for future illegal immigration flows, but others have stated  that the impact of regularization programs on unauthorized immigration  and employment is unclear.
subsections: section_title: Countries Have Implemented Regularization Programs for a Variety of Reasons
paragraphs: Countries we studied have implemented regularization programs for  various reasons, according to experts. Greece, Italy, France, and Spain  have implemented regularization programs to help reduce the amount of  employment that occurs in the underground economy by collecting tax  and social insurance contributions from unauthorized foreign workers  who did not previously pay their taxes or required contribution amounts.  Moreover, regularization programs in France have been intended to help  facilitate the social and economic integration of immigrants and their  families. Countries, including Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, have also  implemented regularization programs to address perceived deficiencies of  previous regularization or other immigration policies, such as  unauthorized immigrant populations who failed to participate or who  subsequent to their regularization lapsed into an unauthorized status. In  addition, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom have initiated  regularization programs to allow family members to legally remain  together in a country or to meet humanitarian needs, such as those of  asylum seekers or individuals with health concerns.
section_title: Countries Require Unauthorized Immigrants to Meet Criteria for Participation in Regularization Programs
paragraphs: Some countries we studied, including Italy, Greece, and Spain, have  implemented programs through which unauthorized immigrants could  regularize or change their status to gain temporary or permanent legal  residency, and in some countries, such as Greece and Argentina,  unauthorized immigrants could eventually apply for citizenship. Other  countries, including the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, and the  Netherlands, have implemented regularization efforts on a case-by-case  basis for humanitarian or family reunification purposes, for individuals  residing in the countries for long periods of time, or for immigrants  awaiting decisions on asylum claims. Only a limited number of immigrants  are typically eligible for participation in these programs. In the United  Kingdom, individuals who applied for asylum before October 2000 and had  a dependent residing with them in the country between October 2000 and  October 2003 could apply for legal status for themselves and their  dependents. Moreover, unauthorized immigrants residing in the United  Kingdom continuously for at least 14 years are eligible for permanent  residency. Beginning in 1998, France implemented a program through  which unauthorized immigrants resident in the country for at least   10 years could apply for regularization.
Other regularization programs are designed to address countries’ large  unauthorized immigrant populations by providing these immigrants with  an opportunity to obtain legal status, typically on a temporary basis.  Governments established eligibility criteria, such as employment or  residency requirements, that unauthorized immigrants were required to  meet to be eligible for participation in the programs. For example, under  Spain’s 2005 regularization program, the Spanish government required  unauthorized immigrants to have job offers from employers in order to be  eligible for regularization. The government required employers to apply for  regularization on behalf of their unauthorized foreign workers and, in  doing so, demonstrate that the workers had been present in Spain for at  least 6 months and possessed a current contract for a job for a minimum  period of 6 months. Some unauthorized foreign workers, such as those  who worked in part-time jobs or for several employers, could directly  apply to the Spanish government for regularization without applying  through their employers. The Spanish government did not penalize  employers or unauthorized foreign workers who applied for regularization,  and only those unauthorized immigrants who met the residency and  employment criteria could apply for legal status. About 700,000  unauthorized foreign workers applied and qualified for the regularization  program out of an estimated 800,000 workers projected to be eligible for  program participation.
Similarly, other countries’ regularization programs have required  applicants to meet residence or employment requirements. For example,  experts have reported that under Italy’s 2002 regularization program,  unauthorized immigrants were required to provide proof of employment  and payment of 3 months’ social insurance contributions in order to apply  for the program. Under Greece’s 2001 program, unauthorized immigrants  were required to prove that they previously had legal residence status in  Greece and had continuously resided in the country since expiration of  their status or that they had lived in Greece for at least 1 year prior to  enactment of the program. Under France’s 1981-1982 regularization  program, unauthorized immigrants were required to show that they had  resided in France prior to January 1982 and were currently employed or  had a work contract valid for at least 1 year. Table 5 provides information  on selected countries’ regularization programs.
In addition, experts have suggested development and implementation of  earned regularization programs, which are generally characterized by  countries’ use of a points system for determining whether to regularize an  unauthorized immigrant’s status. Although experts differ on specific  requirements for earned regularization programs, in general, these  programs would link regularization to a temporary worker program and  allow unauthorized immigrants to apply for regularization only after  meeting specified criteria over a certain period of time. For example,  migrants residing illegally in a country would first be granted a temporary  residence and work permit for a certain amount of time, such as for   3 years, during which they would be required to collect credits or points to  eventually qualify for a permanent residence and work permit. The points  could be based on a variety of different criteria, like stable employment,  payment of taxes and social security contributions, legal presence of a  family member in the country, and documented language fluency.  Unauthorized migrants would be required to obtain a minimum number of  points during the length of their temporary permit in order to be eligible to  apply for permanent residency. Those migrants who failed to obtain the  required number of points could be required to return to their home  countries.
Experts have pointed out advantages to earned regularization programs.  They suggest that initially providing unauthorized foreign workers with  temporary legal status allows the largest possible number of unauthorized  immigrants to participate in the program and transfers work that  previously occurred in the underground economy into the formal  economy. Earned regularization programs also allow unauthorized foreign  workers who would like to work toward permanent residence status to do  so based on specific criteria for earning points. However, experts have  also noted drawbacks to earned regularization programs. For example,  requiring unauthorized foreign workers to earn the opportunity to apply  for permanent residence status may complicate these workers’ ability to  economically and socially integrate into a country. Moreover, an earned  regularization program based on a points system could favor high-skilled  workers over low-skilled workers, making it difficult for low-skilled  workers to obtain permanent residence status.
section_title: Employers and Unauthorized Foreign Workers Have Incentives to Participate in Regularization Programs but Have Not Always Done So
paragraphs: According to officials and studies, employers and unauthorized foreign  workers have incentives to participate in regularization programs but have  not always participated for various reasons. For example, employers may  participate in programs by applying for regularization on behalf of their  workers so as to avoid possible civil, also called administrative, or  criminal penalties for employing unauthorized foreign workers after  implementation of the programs. In implementing regularization programs,  countries such as Spain and France have introduced new or strengthened  enforcement programs, including increased employer monetary penalties,  for employing unauthorized foreign workers. Experts have suggested that  the credible threat of enforcement helps create an incentive for employers,  as well as workers, to participate in regularization programs.
Unauthorized foreign workers may want to participate in regularization  programs to be better able to seek fair or higher wages and safe working  conditions from their employers, and regularization programs thus can  help to address any employer exploitation of unauthorized foreign  workers. As a result of regularization, formerly unauthorized foreign  workers may also be better able to compete for higher-paying jobs and  obtain opportunities for acquiring or enhancing their work skills.  Regularization programs also allow formerly unauthorized foreign workers  to access social insurance benefits. In addition, participation in  regularization programs may help formerly unauthorized foreign workers  better integrate into a country by, for instance, helping them to acquire  education and language skills. Participation in regularization programs  may also provide formerly unauthorized foreign workers with the  opportunity to visit their home countries.
Government officials and experts have noted that not all employers and  workers may choose to participate in regularization programs. For  example, unscrupulous employers may not help unauthorized foreign  workers apply for regularization programs because the employers gain  benefits from employing unauthorized foreign workers and do not fear the  possibility of government penalties. Employers can save money or gain  greater profits by employing unauthorized foreign workers and thus not  paying taxes or social insurance contributions or providing safe working  conditions for those workers. Employers who hire unauthorized foreign  workers may have a competitive advantage over other employers who hire  only authorized workers and, as a result, may be less willing to provide  unauthorized foreign workers who want to regularize their status with the  documents needed to prove that the workers meet program eligibility  requirements. For example, studies have reported that during France’s  1981-1982 regularization program, some employers were unwilling to  provide unauthorized foreign workers with the appropriate  documentation, as initially required under the program, and in some cases,  employers fired unauthorized foreign workers who requested their  employers’ assistance in applying for regularization. To address this  problem, the French government modified program requirements to allow  third parties to assist unauthorized foreign workers rather than relying  solely on employers to do so.
In addition, unauthorized foreign workers may not want to participate in  regularization programs for various reasons. For example, workers  granted temporary legal residency status under regularization programs  may deliberately allow their legal status to expire and revert to  unauthorized status in order to better obtain employment. Because  employers can benefit from employing unauthorized foreign workers,  unscrupulous employers may seek to fill jobs held by workers who  obtained legal status with other unauthorized foreign workers, hindering  the ability of workers with new legal status to compete with unauthorized  foreign workers for jobs. Therefore, government officials and experts have  stated that it is important to implement new or enhanced worksite  enforcement efforts in conjunction with a regularization program to  maximize participation in the program by employers and eligible  immigrants and to help deter employers from hiring unauthorized foreign  workers in the future. Unauthorized foreign workers may also choose not  to participate in regularization programs because they lack knowledge  about program requirements and may fear expulsion if they register for  program participation. According to government officials and experts, lack  of information about regularization program requirements may hinder  unauthorized immigrants’ participation in such programs.
section_title: Governments Perceive Benefits from Regularization Programs but Face Difficulties in Implementing Such Programs
paragraphs: According to officials and experts, countries’ governments benefit from  regularization programs but may incur costs and face challenges in  implementing these programs. In particular, workers who resided and  worked illegally in a country likely did not pay taxes and social insurance  contributions to the government. However, after changing their status to  legal residency under regularization programs, governments could collect  taxes and social insurance contributions from formerly unauthorized  foreign workers by, for example, requiring workers to pay these  contributions prior to changing their status. As a result, formerly  unauthorized workers’ employment is transferred from the underground  economy to the formal economy. Furthermore, governments can collect  social insurance contributions from these workers who previously  accessed benefits but did not contribute to the social insurance system.
This collection of social insurance contributions from a greater segment of  countries’ populations may also help in the short term to address  demographic challenges faced by countries with aging, low-growth  populations and declining levels of social insurance contributions. In  Spain, for example, the government collected social insurance  contributions from previously unauthorized foreign workers by requiring  employers to pay 1 month’s contributions for their workers. As of  February 2006, officials from Spain reported that approximately 560,000 of  the nearly 700,000 individuals who applied for the regularization program  had paid the required social insurance contribution, and government  officials noted that as a result of the regularization program, the  percentage of individuals contributing to the social insurance system  increased.
In addition, governments may gain information on and estimates of the  size of the unauthorized immigrant population in the country as a result of  implementing regularization programs. For example, officials and studies  reported that regularization programs may provide governments with data  that can help in estimating the number of unauthorized immigrants  residing in the country prior to program implementation. Regularization  programs may also provide governments with information about the  demographics of migrants, which could assist countries in developing  policies to manage future migrant flows and employment. In addition,  regularization programs may help countries better understand and  regulate their underground economies by providing them with information  on unauthorized immigrants’ labor market participation.
Yet governments may incur costs and face challenges in implementing  regularization programs, according to officials and experts. For example,  while in many of the countries we studied unauthorized immigrants can  receive some social insurance benefits, particularly health and  unemployment insurance, these immigrants generally cannot access other  benefits, such as retirement benefits. After unauthorized immigrants’  status is regularized, these immigrants can fully access social insurance  benefits, and though they also contribute to the social insurance system, it  is uncertain whether immigrants’ contributions are greater than the  benefits they draw. In addition, according to studies, some unauthorized  foreign workers may qualify for regularization but continue to work in the  underground economy after gaining legal status. In such cases, the  formerly unauthorized foreign workers could continue to receive some  social insurance benefits available to all individuals residing in the country  regardless of their immigration status but may not be contributing to the  social insurance system. As a result, regularization programs may not  necessarily increase countries’ tax and social insurance revenue over time.
Governments also face difficulties in managing the application process for  regularization programs, particularly in reviewing large numbers of  applications and detecting fraud in the process. In Spain, nongovernmental  officials reported that in past regularization programs, large numbers of  applicants initially overwhelmed the application review process, resulting  in long lines of individuals waiting to apply and requiring the government  to modify application procedures. During the 2005 regularization program,  government officials told us that the Spanish government took steps, such  as developing an electronic database for processing applications, to  address some of the challenges experienced under prior regularization  programs. In Portugal, Italy, and Greece, studies have reported significant  delays in the application review process and a lack of government  oversight of the process. They also noted that unauthorized immigrants  have used fraudulent documents to apply for regularization. During  Canada’s 1974 regularization program, the government provided training  to immigration agency staff for reviewing and processing regularization  applications, which helped limit some problems in the application review  process, according to studies.
Moreover, governmental and nongovernmental officials told us that  regularization programs may be particularly difficult to implement in cases  where the programs require immigrants to return to their home countries  before applying for the programs. For example, between 1993 and 2000,  the Spanish government managed a program through which employers  could apply to hire unauthorized foreign workers residing in Spain, but  workers were required to return to their home countries to receive a legal  work permit. According to officials, the government granted exemptions  to this requirement for the majority of unauthorized workers because of  low participation in the program and limited government enforcement of  the return requirement. Because many unauthorized foreign workers  developed social and communal ties in the country, they did not want to  leave Spain to apply for regularization and chose rather to remain in the  country in an unauthorized status. According to some officials and  experts, it is important to implement enforcement efforts in conjunction  with a regularization program to help ensure that individuals comply with  program requirements and immigration law and to maximize participation  in the program.
In addition, governments have faced difficulties when individuals granted  temporary legal status under regularization programs do not renew their  status or lapse into an unauthorized status, contributing to countries’  decisions to initiate other regularization programs in the future. For  example, under regularization programs in Spain, unauthorized foreign  workers were granted temporary legal residence and work status and  were required to periodically renew this status. However, officials and  studies noted that a significant number of workers initially granted legal  status under Spain’s programs did not subsequently renew their status for  various reasons, such as unclear criteria for permit renewals or lack of  knowledge about renewal procedures, and lapsed into an unauthorized  status. Likewise, under other countries’ regularization programs, such as  Greece’s and Italy’s programs, studies have suggested that large numbers  of immigrants initially granted temporary legal status did not renew their  legal status and reverted to an unauthorized status. According to experts,  countries have faced difficulties in determining the number of  unauthorized immigrants eligible for regularization who were granted legal  status under previous programs but had reverted to illegal status. Thus,  countries that have implemented multiple regularization programs that  provide immigrants with temporary legal status may repeatedly provide  this status to the same group of unauthorized immigrants. As a result,  while countries claimed that each large-scale regularization program  would be the last such program offered, these countries have repeatedly  initiated such programs not only to address new unauthorized immigrant  inflows, but also to reregularize previously authorized immigrants.
Furthermore, experts have noted that countries have experienced  challenges in developing and implementing policies to address the status  of unauthorized immigrants who were not eligible or did not complete  applications for the programs. For example, Spanish government officials  stated that not all unauthorized immigrants eligible for the 2005 program  completed the application process. The Spanish government estimated  that about 140,000 immigrants who initially registered for the program did  not pay the required 1-month social insurance contribution, and thus these  immigrants remained unauthorized. Studies have also noted that  unauthorized immigrants’ difficulties in proving their eligibility, such as  providing documents that prove residency and employment status, may  undermine immigrants’ ability to complete the application process.  Additionally, experts have stated that countries such as Spain may face  challenges in implementing programs to address unauthorized immigrants  who do not gain legal residency status. Because not all unauthorized  immigrants are eligible for or participate in regularization programs, it can  be difficult for countries to develop policies to address remaining  unauthorized immigrant populations, such as determining whether to  deport these unauthorized immigrants or to provide them with other  opportunities to obtain legal status. According to experts, large-scale  removals are extremely expensive and require consideration of  humanitarian factors, such as impacts on families with members of mixed  legal statuses.
section_title: Impact of Regularization Programs on Illegal Immigration and Employment Is Unknown
paragraphs: Experts have noted that regularization programs may be viewed as a pull  factor in encouraging further illegal immigration. For example,  unauthorized immigrants may illegally enter or stay in a country that has  previously implemented regularization programs with the expectation that  the country will implement a similar program in the future. To guard  against such a perception, experts suggested that it is important for  countries that implement a regularization program to clearly indicate that  the program is a one time program by, for example, introducing new or  enhanced enforcement efforts in conjunction with a regularization  program.
However, other experts have suggested that the extent to which  regularization programs affect additional illegal immigration flows and  employment is unclear. Countries generally have not evaluated the results  of regularization programs, including the extent to which such programs  encourage further illegal immigration, and as a result, the long-term effects  of these programs are not known. Moreover, a variety of factors can affect  illegal immigration and employment, making it difficult to directly link  regularization programs to increased illegal immigration flows and  employment. For example, because employers have economic incentives  to hire unauthorized foreign workers, employers may continue to recruit  and employ those workers instead of hiring legal workers, such as those  whose status has been regularized. In addition, the extent to which  countries enforce laws that prohibit unauthorized employment as part of  regularization programs varies and thus affects programs’ outcomes  differently.
section_title: Additional Insights from Countries’ Regularization Programs
paragraphs: There are a number of difficult issues for countries contemplating a  regularization program to consider. For example, it is important for  countries to estimate the likely number of migrants that would be eligible  for regularization in order to effectively plan for the administrative  responsibilities that will be required for implementation. Countries we  studied have faced various administrative challenges in implementing their  regularization programs, and the largest of the programs in our study  regularized the status of approximately 635,000 immigrants. In addition, it  is critical for countries to evaluate the most appropriate legal status to  grant regularized immigrants—temporary, temporary yet renewable, or  permanent status—and to determine the extent to which regularized  immigrants granted temporary status renew their status or leave the  country upon expiration of their status. Furthermore, a committed effort  by countries to enforce laws that prohibit the employment of unauthorized  workers is a key element of a successful regularization program, as not all  unauthorized immigrants may qualify for the program and the opportunity  for employment may continue to motivate individuals to migrate illegally.  Regularized immigrants granted temporary legal status may also  subsequently lapse into an unauthorized state, which, in the absence of  effective worksite enforcement, may increase the likelihood that a country  undertakes future regularization programs.
section_title: Concluding Observations
paragraphs: Other countries’ programs for admitting foreign workers, enforcing laws  that prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign workers, and  regularizing the status of unauthorized immigrants are shaped by each  country’s unique political, social, cultural, and economic characteristics.  Therefore, these programs may not be readily applicable to the United  States. However, other countries’ experiences in developing and  implementing these programs are useful in identifying a range of issues for  consideration by any country contemplating reforms to its immigration  policy and can help highlight the potential advantages and pitfalls  associated with them.
Even with implementation of a range of foreign worker, enforcement, and  regularization programs, all countries, including the United States, face  challenges in fully eliminating all unauthorized immigration and  employment. Not all employers may want to comply with laws that  prohibit the employment of unauthorized workers, as it is often less costly  for employers to employ unauthorized, rather than authorized, workers.  Likewise, workers have economic incentives to illegally migrate to and  obtain employment in other countries, and even if given the opportunity to  gain legal status, they may perceive that there are benefits to remaining in  an unauthorized status. No one program or mechanism can fully address  the employment of unauthorized foreign workers. Therefore, efforts to  effectively address this problem may require development and  implementation of a strategic approach, including programs to assess  labor market needs for foreign workers and admit any needed workers, to  reliably verify the employment authorization status of workers, and to  enforce laws that prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign  workers.
As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 7 days after the  date of this report. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the  Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of  State, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the  appropriate congressional committees. We will also make copies available  to others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no  charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-8777 or stanar@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the  last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this  report are listed in appendix XIII.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To determine how countries’ programs for foreign worker admissions,  enforcement of workplace laws, and regularization function, we  interviewed officials and obtained documents from 8 countries and sent  questionnaires to 13 other countries. We interviewed government officials  during site visits to the following countries: Belgium, Canada, France,  Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. We also  interviewed officials from, but did not visit, Australia. We selected these  countries based on the following criteria: net immigration rate; size of  population; membership in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation  and Development (OECD); classification by the World Bank as high  income; range of immigration policies; and geographic location. In these  countries, we met with officials from the labor ministries, interior  ministries, finance ministries, treasury departments, social security  agencies, immigration agencies, law enforcement agencies, and local  government agencies. We also sent questionnaires to government agencies  in 13 countries. We selected these 13 countries based on the following  criteria: net immigration rate; population; membership in the OECD or  classification by the World Bank as high income; and geographic location.
We analyzed information and documents, such as agency annual reports,  manuals, and briefing materials, from the 8 countries to determine the  characteristics, functions, resources, and outputs of the countries’  programs to admit foreign workers, enforce laws that prohibit the  employment of unauthorized foreign workers, and regularize unauthorized  immigrants. We also examined this information to determine government  officials’ views on foreign worker programs, efforts to enforce laws that  prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign workers, and  regularization efforts, including to identify the advantages and  disadvantages of these programs. We did not independently examine  countries’ laws and regulations, but rather based characterizations of  countries’ programs on information provided by countries as of July 2006.  In addition, we analyzed this information to determine the extent to which  countries’ programs may provide insights or examples for development  and implementation of similar programs in the United States.
To develop the questionnaires, we analyzed reports and studies from the  International Labour Organization (ILO), the International Organization  for Migration (IOM), the OECD, and other organizations. We also spoke  with and examined reports from six experts. We received technical  comments on draft versions of the questionnaires from officials at the  Department of State and the ILO and from 2 experts. We also pretested the  questionnaires with officials from 4 countries. We made relevant changes  to the questionnaires based on the technical comments and pretests.
We sent the questionnaires to Department of State officials responsible for  each country. These officials then sent the questionnaires to U.S. embassy  officials in each country we surveyed. The embassy officials provided the  questionnaires to the appropriate foreign government agencies and  returned the agencies’ questionnaire responses to us upon completion. As  of August 1, 2006, we received questionnaire responses from 6 countries— Argentina, Austria, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, and  Singapore. We encouraged countries to complete and return the  questionnaires by contacting Department of State desk officers and  embassy officials on multiple occasions and sending additional copies of  questionnaires when requested. We performed this work from October  2005 through August 2006.
Because our sample was not designed to be representative of a defined  universe of countries, questionnaire results cannot be generalized beyond  the countries we surveyed. Moreover, since our survey used a  nonprobability selection of countries, there are no sampling errors.  However, the practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce  errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example,  measurement errors are introduced if difficulties exist in how a particular  question is interpreted or in the sources of information available to  respondents in answering a question. In addition, coding errors may occur  if mistakes are entered into a database. We took extensive steps in the  development of the questionnaires, the collection of data, and the editing  and analysis of data to minimize total survey error. As noted above, to  reduce measurement error and ensure questions and response categories  were interpreted in a consistent manner, we pretested the questionnaires  with several countries.
We analyzed data reported by countries during interviews and on the  questionnaires regarding the outputs and resources of their foreign worker  programs, worksite enforcement efforts, and regularization efforts. We  assessed the reliability of this data by reviewing the data for obvious  errors and inconsistencies and interviewing agency officials  knowledgeable about the data. If necessary, we contacted respondents  and government officials we had interviewed to clarify responses and,  when documentation about the data was provided, we reviewed it. We  determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our  review. However, we could not compare data on resources and outputs  across the countries because each country we reviewed collects and  maintains information on resources and outputs differently.
In addition to interviewing and surveying government officials, we  interviewed officials from ILO, IOM, OECD, the European Union (EU), the  United Nations High Commission for Refugees, the United Nations High  Commission for Human Rights, and the Intergovernmental Consultations  on Asylum, Refugee, and Migration Policies. We also interviewed officials  from 6 employer associations, 10 labor groups, and 1 advocacy group, as  well as 19 immigration experts, in Belgium, Canada, France, Germany,  Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States (see app.  XII). We selected the experts based on the following criteria: type and  depth of experience, recognition in the professional community, relevance  of published work, employment history, and researchers’  recommendations. We also interviewed officials from the Department of  Labor and the Department of Homeland Security in the United States. We  analyzed information from these groups and experts to determine their  views on the advantages and disadvantages of countries’ temporary  foreign worker programs, regularization efforts, and efforts to enforce  laws that prohibit the employment of unauthorized foreign workers.
We also examined reports from various nongovernmental agencies and  immigration experts. We analyzed reports from ILO, IOM, OECD, and the  EU. We also examined reports and studies from various research  organization and immigration experts, including reports from the  Migration Policy Institute; the Center on Migration, Policy and Society at  Oxford University; and the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies.  We selected these reports and studies based on their relevance to our  review, recognition in the professional community, and experts’  recommendations. We analyzed information in these reports and studies to  identify the advantages and disadvantages of countries’ temporary foreign  worker, enforcement, and regularization programs.
We conducted our work from September 2005 through August 2006 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Appendix II: Information on Immigration- Related Programs in Selected Countries
section_title: Appendix III: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in Australia
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
subsections: section_title: Employer-Sponsored Program
paragraphs: Immigrants can enter Australia for work purposes under various visa  programs, including programs for employer-sponsored migrant workers,  state or regional-sponsored workers, and skilled independent workers  (e.g., foreign workers not sponsored by employers).Australia recruits  high-skilled workers through, among other things, the use of promotional  campaigns within specific industrial sectors or foreign countries to target  foreign workers with specific business or trade skills for positions in the  country. Information on some of Australia’s primary employment-based  visa programs is provided below.
subsections: section_title: Temporary Business–Standard Business Sponsorship
paragraphs: The Temporary Business-Standard Business Sponsorship is the most  commonly used program for employers to sponsor foreign workers to  work in Australia on a temporary basis. Employers pay a fee of   A$270 (about $200) to apply for status as a sponsor, a A$55 (about $40) to  apply to nominate skilled positions that they have been unable to fill, and a  fee of A$185 (about $140) for the foreign worker to apply for a visa.  Minimum skill and salary levels apply. Foreign workers who receive a visa  under this program can legally work in Australia for the employer who  sponsored them for a period of between 3 months and 4 years. These  foreign workers can apply to bring family members with them and have no  restrictions on the number of times they travel in and out of Australia.
section_title: Labor Agreements
paragraphs: Labor Agreements are formal arrangements between the Commonwealth  Government and an employer or industry peak body that enable  employers to recruit a number of workers from overseas in response to  identified or emerging labor market shortages. Employees may come to  Australia on either a temporary or a permanent basis. Advantages of  Labour Agreements are that an employer may negotiate the entry of a  number of people to fill a group of positions across a wide range of skilled  occupations without having to test the domestic labor market each time it  wishes to recruit from overseas, and visa applications for overseas recruits  receive priority processing. Agreements generally run for three years. They  are negotiated free of charge and there is no nomination fee for permanent  positions. Employers pay a A$55 (about $40) fee for each temporary  nominated position and a fee of A$185 (about $140) for issuing the visa to  the foreign worker. Foreign workers admitted under a temporary visa can  work in Australia for up to 4 years, bring family members, and travel in  and out of Australia without restriction. Foreign workers admitted under a  permanent visa can include family members in their visa applications.  Family members receive permanent residence status on arrival in  Australia and may be eligible for Australian citizenship after a qualifying  period.
section_title: Employer Nomination Scheme
paragraphs: The Employer Nomination Scheme allows Australian employers to  sponsor skilled migrants for a permanent visa to work in Australia.  Nominations are acceptable if they are for permanent full-time positions  and the occupation is listed on the Employer Nomination Scheme  Occupation List. Nominees can be located either inside or outside of  Australia, but must have the necessary skills and qualifications for the  nominated positions. For foreign workers residing outside Australia, the  employer is required to pay a A$350 (about $260) nomination fee and the  nominee pays a A$1,340 (about $1,000) visa fee. For foreign workers  residing in Australia, employers are required to pay a A$350 (about $260)  nomination fee and the nominee pays a A$1,990 (about $1,500) visa fee.  Foreign workers admitted under this program can include family members  in their visa applications, and their family members can receive permanent  residence status. In addition, these foreign workers may be eligible for  Australian citizenship after a qualifying period.
section_title: Regional, State, or Territory Visa Programs
subsections: section_title: Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme
paragraphs: The Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme is designed to help employers  in regional Australia fill skilled positions for which they are unable to find  local workers. Under this scheme, employers can nominate skilled  overseas workers who reside outside Australia or who reside in the  country as temporary residents. For skilled overseas workers residing  outside Australia, the employer is required to pay a A$1,340 (about $1,000)  fee to apply for a permanent visa, and for skilled overseas workers  residing in Australia, employers are required to pay a fee of A$1,990 (about  $1,500) to apply for a permanent visa. Skilled overseas workers admitted  under this program can include family members in their visa applications,  and their family members can receive permanent residence status. In  addition, these foreign workers may be eligible for Australian citizenship  after a qualifying period.
section_title: Independent Regional Visa
paragraphs: This visa program allows skilled workers who are unable to meet the  criteria for a permanent visa the opportunity to eventually apply for  residence in Australia provided they are prepared to live for 2 years and  work at least 12 months in a regional or low population growth  metropolitan area in Australia. Successful applicants are initially granted a  3-year visa to give them time to satisfy the residence and employment  criteria for a permanent visa. Applicants must have the skills and  qualifications that meet the Australian standard for an occupation on the  Skilled Occupation List and are one of the following:    a person in Australia or outside Australia who is unable to meet the  pass mark on the points test for a permanent Skilled - Independent  visa, as discussed below, but who can meet the pass mark for this  visa, which is slightly lower, or    a person who has a Skilled-Independent visa application which has  been held at the pass mark and been invited to apply for this visa, or    a holder of a Working Holiday Maker visa who has been in Australia  on that visa for at least 6 months, or    a holder of an Occupational Trainee visa who has completed the  period of training for which the visa was granted.
Applicants are required to pay a visa issuance fee of A$185 (about $140).  Under this visa, foreign workers are allowed to reside in Australia for up  to 3 years and must live and work in a regional or low-population growth  area of Australia. Accompanying family members can also work and study  but must do so in a rural or low-population growth area of Australia.
section_title: State-Territory Nominated Independent Visa
paragraphs: Under this visa program, participating state or territory governments can  nominate skilled migration applicants who are interested in permanently  settling in states and territories where their skills are in demand. To apply  for this visa, applicants must nominate an occupation that is listed on  Australia’s Skilled Occupation List and have their skills and qualifications  assessed by the relevant assessing authority. Each state or territory  government has its own skill shortage list and nominates applicants with  skills in demand in their particular state or territory. Foreign workers are  required to pay a fee of A$1,990 (about $1,500) for issuance of a permanent  visa. Foreign workers admitted under this program can include family  members, who can also receive permanent residence status, and may be  eligible for Australian citizenship after a qualifying period.
section_title: Skill Matching Visa
paragraphs: The Skill Matching visa is designed to link skilled migrants who do not  meet the points requirement for the Skilled-Independent visa with  employers or state and territory governments by placing the potential  migrant’s details on the Skill Matching Database. Applicants of the Skill  Matching Visa must be nominated by an employer or state/territory  government for permanent migration to Australia. Applicants nominated  for migration by a state or territory government for the Skill Matching visa  are required to pay a fee of A$1,940 (about $1,500) for issuance of a  permanent visa. Applicants nominated by an employer under employer- sponsored migration are required to pay a fee of A$1,305 (about $980) for  issuance of a permanent visa. Foreign workers admitted under this  program can bring in family members, who can also receive permanent  residence status, and may be eligible for Australian citizenship after a  qualifying period.
section_title: Skill Matching Database
paragraphs: The Skill Matching Database contains the educational, employment, and  work details of applicants for the following programs: the Skill Matching  visa, the Skilled-Independent visa, the Skilled-Australian Sponsored visa,  the Skilled-Independent Overseas Student visa, and the Skilled-Australian  Sponsored Overseas Student visa. Applicants remain in the database for  up to 2 years, or until they migrate to Australia. The database provides the  opportunity for applicants to secure employment in Australia before they  migrate. The database is accessed by state and territory governments and  by employers who may then nominate an applicant for migration. The Skill  Matching database provides a means to match skilled migrants with  Australia’s skill needs. Many applicants listed on the Skill Matching  Database do not require formal sponsorship by an employer or  state/territory government for their visa to be granted. Employers can  contact these applicants directly and negotiate and offer of employment  without involving the Australian Department of Immigration and  Multicultural Affairs. Employers also have the option to offer sponsorship  to all applicants on the database that have not had their visa granted or  been sponsored by a state/territory government. Employer sponsorship  expedites the visa application processing.
section_title: Professionals and Other Skilled Migrants Programs
paragraphs: Under these programs, foreign workers who are not sponsored by an  employer and who have skills in particular occupations required in  Australia, can apply to work in the country. Applicants must be over   18 and under 45 years of age, have English language skills, and have recent  skilled work experience. Applicants must also have skills and  qualifications for an occupation listed on Australia's Skilled Occupation  List.
subsections: section_title: Skilled–Independent Visa
paragraphs: Under this visa program, foreign workers can apply to work in Australia if  they are under 45 years of age, have good English language skills, and  skills and qualifications in an occupation required in Australia. The  Australian government selects applicants based on a points test. Each  occupation listed on the Skilled Occputation List is allocated a point value  for use in the assessment process. Applicants must obtain a minimum  amount of points to qualify for an independent visa to live and work in  Australia. Applicants earn points for such things as skill, age, English  language ability, specific work experience, an occupation in demand, a job  offer, an intention to reside in regional Australia, and spouses’ skills.  Applicants pay a fee of A$1,990 (about $1,500) to apply for a permanent  visa. Foriegn workers admitted under this program can bring in family  members, and their family members can receive permanent residence  status. In addition, these foreign workers may be eligible for Australian  citizenship after a qualifying period.
section_title: Working Holiday Maker and Work and Holiday Visas
paragraphs: The Working Holiday Maker and the Work and Holiday Programs allow  foreigners aged 18-30 from specific countries to enter Australia for up to   1 year for travel around the country. Visa holders under these programs  are able to supplement their travel funds through incidental employment,  however, the holiday should be the main reason for visiting Australia.  During their time in the country, these individuals can earn money by  working for up to 6 months with each employer. Visa holders should  holiday for at least part of their stay rather than work for the full period of  their stay. Both visas allow a stay of up to 12 months, however, Working  Holiday Makers who have done 3 months’ seasonal work in regional  Australia while on their first Working Holiday Maker visa are able to apply  for a second Working Holiday Maker visa. Work and Holiday visa holders  are able to apply for a subsequent Work and Holiday visa with no  requirement to do seasonal work. Visa holders under both programs are  not permitted to bring dependents with them. There are no restrictions on  their ability to travel in and out of Australia. There are additional  requirements for Work and Holiday visa applicants, such as they must  provide a letter of support from their government, hold a degree or  diploma, and provide proof of English proficiency. Working Holiday Maker  visa applicants are required to pay a visa application fee of   A$185 (about $140); Work and Holiday visa applicants are required to pay  a visa application fee of A$175 (about $130). Australia manages its  Working Holiday Maker Programs through reciprocal bilateral agreements  with selected countries.
section_title: Employment Verification Process
paragraphs: In Australia, all employees must register with their local tax office and  obtain a tax file number, which is used by employers to report employees’  income tax information. The government encourages employers to verify  job applicants’ eligibility to work, by checking the applicants’ Australian  passport, birth certificate, or certificate of citizenship. However, there is  no requirement for employers to check or verify workers’ identity or  immigration status. There are five types of documents that workers can  present as evidence of work eligibility:    Australian birth certificate;    Australian citizenship certificate;    Australian passport;    evidence of permanent resident status; and    visa with entitlement to work.
The Australian Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs  provides various tools that employers can use to verify foreign workers’  authorization status. For example, the department provides a voluntary  Web-based service to employers, called Entitlement Verification Online,  through which employers can verify the identity and work eligibility of  their employees. When employers request a confirmation of an employee’s  authorization to work through the Web-based service, the system checks  the employee’s information against information maintained in Australia’s  central visa database, which contains information on visa-holders’ work  authorization status. System users are required to enter the employee’s  date of birth, passport number, and country of origin. The system returns a  match when it matches an immigrant’s visa with the foreign country  passport number of the immigrant in question. The system then provides  the user with a report on the conditions associated with the immigrant’s  visa, including right to work. A match could indicate that the applicant has  a right to work, that the applicant is lawfully present but under a visa  condition that does not allow the individual to work, or that the applicant  is unlawfully present and thus unable to legally obtain employment.
In addition to the Web-based service, the department provides a faxback  entitlements service to employers to help employers verify employee’s  work authorization. Under this service, employers provide employees’  information, such as name, passport number, and nationality, to the  department. The department checks this information against information  maintained in its databases and confirms the individual’s work  authorization status with the employers. In 2003-2004, employers made  about 36,000 information requests through the faxback service.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: Australia’s Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs is  responsible for enforcing the country’s immigration laws, including laws  that prohibit the employment of unauthorized workers. The department  has about 4,000 staff responsible for enforcing laws related to non- humanitarian entry and stay, refugee and humanitarian entry and stay,  enforcement of immigration law, and asylum seeker management.
Australia requires all individuals seeking to enter the country to possess a  valid visa. Individuals may be denied entry at an Australia port of entry if  they arrive without travel documents or a valid visa, or if they present  documentation that is false but which they used for check-in at overseas  airports. Individuals can also be denied entry if they hold valid visas, but  immigration inspectors determine that they are not likely to abide by the  visa conditions. Reasons for which immigration inspectors may determine  that individuals do not intend to abide by their visas include that  individuals are found to have an intention to seek employment which is  prohibited under their visas, information presented in support of their visa  applications is found to be false, and the reason the visa was issued no  longer exists (e.g., the visa was issued on the basis that the visa-holder  intended to travel to Australia for a specific event, but the date of the  event has passed). The majority of individuals denied clearance at  Australian ports of entry are returned within 72 hours.
Overstays are those non-citizens who do not depart by the expiration date  of their temporary visa and remain in Australia unlawfully. Twice each  year in June and December, Australia’s Department of Immigration and  Multicultural Affairs prepares an estimate of unlawful noncitizens—visa  overstayers—in the country. A person who was unlawful for a period of  time but departed or was granted a further visa and became lawful again  prior to the estimate date is not included. At each estimate date, records  are collected for all people who arrived in Australia, who have an expired  visa, and whose records indicate they have not subsequently left Australia.  The data are then filtered through various departmental systems to  exclude persons who were actually lawful (for example, persons who have  been granted citizenship). The remaining records are then sampled to  check for any other lawful persons or persons who have actually left  Australia and have not been identified during the initial filtering. The  statistical corrections obtained through this process are then applied to  the raw data, and the adjusted data are used to prepare the estimates. In of  June 2006, there were estimated to be about 46,400 visa overstayers in the  Australian community.
In 2005-2006, Australian compliance officers found about 10,500 visa  overstayers and persons who had otherwise violated their visa conditions  (e.g., violated no work right provisions). Persons found to have overstayed  or otherwise violated their visa conditions are typically removed from the  country or granted a bridging visa. Bridging visas allow foreigners whose  visas have expired and have requested permission to extend their stay in  Australia to remain in the country for a short, specified period of time  during which the individuals must make arrangements to leave Australia  or obtain a new visa authorizing them to remain in the country. An  example of a case in which Australia may issue a bridging visa would be  when a student accidentally overstays his or her visa, self-reports this  overstay, but needs to remain in Australia for a few additional weeks to  finish schoolwork and make arrangements to leave.
Those individuals who are detained for overstaying or violating their visas  are required to pay the costs for the time during which they were in  detention before they can receive a visa to return to Australia. Australia  maintains a list of individuals who were detained and have not yet repaid  the detention costs; immigration officers are not to issue visas to these  individuals to enter Australia until they paid their detention costs.
Australia does not currently have a system for sanctioning employers  found to have employed unauthorized foreign workers, although proposed  legislation for doing so is before the Australian Parliament. However, any  person or group that aids or abets unauthorized foreign workers in  Australia can be fined up to A$10,000 (about $7,500). In addition, the  Australian government can issue illegal worker warning notices to  employers or labor suppliers who have employed unauthorized workers or  referred unauthorized workers for employment. The warning notices alert  employers to the fact that they have employed unauthorized workers and  help to deter future breaches by advising employers of the possibility of  future prosecution. In 2005-2006, Australia issued over 1,050 warning  notices to employers and labor suppliers of unauthorized foreign workers.  In the same period, the Department of Immigration and Multicultural  Affairs located about 1,900 noncitizens who were found to be working  illegally.
section_title: Appendix IV: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in Belgium
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: After World War II, labor shortages in Belgium led the government to  conclude bilateral agreements to recruit foreign workers from countries  such as Italy, Spain, Greece, Morocco, Turkey, and other countries. The  1973 oil crisis led Belgium to enact legislation controlling the entry of  foreigners into the country to only allow people into the country with  qualifications that were not available through the local labor pool.
In order to be able to work in Belgium, foreign workers, other than those  from member states of the European Economic Area, generally are  required to have a valid work permit. These foreign workers also require a  visa to stay in Belgium for longer than 3 months. A foreigner entering  Belgium for work purposes requires the following documents: a passport  or other travel document that is valid for at least 1 year, a medical  certificate by a Belgian embassy-recognized physician, a recent certificate  of good conduct covering 5 years, and an employment authorization  document. A Belgium-based employer applies for the employment  authorization on behalf of the foreign worker and a visa is issued to the  foreign worker together with the work permit.
Foreign workers can legally work in Belgium under three types of permits:  A, B, and C. Work permit A covers all kinds of salaried employment in  Belgium and is valid indefinitely. Employers are not required to apply for  employment authorization for workers with work permit A. Rather,  foreign workers apply for work permit A on their own through their  regional employment office. Workers who are eligible for work permit A  include those with a valid work permit B who have worked in Belgium for  more than 4 years and those who have resided legally in Belgium for an  uninterrupted period of at least 5 years.
A work permit B is valid for employment by only one employer and has a  maximum validity of 12 months, but can be renewed. A foreign worker is  eligible for a work permit B after an employer is issued an employment  authorization for the worker. Prior to obtaining work authorization for a  foreign worker, the employer must show that there are no workers  available in Belgium to fill the vacant position. The foreign worker can  obtain the work permit B from the local government office where the  worker resides in Belgium or, if the worker is not yet resident in Belgium,  from the worker’s employer upon the start of employment. Employers can  apply to renew a work permit B for foreign workers 1 month before  expiration of the work permit. In 2004, more than 4,300 type A and B work  permits were issued to foreign workers.
Under work permit C, foreigners already residing in Belgium for reasons  other than work can apply to receive work authorization. These types of  foreigners include asylum seekers, victims of trafficking, or a foreigner  living with, but not married to, a Belgian citizen. These foreigners can  apply for and receive a C permit, which allows them to work for any type  of employer, but before hiring them, the employer must check as to  whether the foreigners’ residence permits are valid and must continue to  check residence permit validity. The permits are only valid for as long as  the individual’s residence permit is valid.
section_title: Employment Verification and Registration Process
paragraphs: Employers are required to electronically report information on new  employees to the social security administration. This information includes  the employees’ social security number and employment entry date. In  addition, employers are required to check the residence and work permits  of foreign workers to verify foreign workers’ authorization to work in  Belgium.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: In 2003, the Belgian government introduced a new institutional framework  for coordinating worksite enforcement efforts. The government  introduced a federal committee to coordinate efforts to combat illegal  labor practices, social fraud, and human trafficking. Each month, this  committee plans worksite enforcement actions all over the country  targeted against employers in specific industries, such as construction or  restaurants, and coordinates the activities of various enforcement  agencies in Belgium, including the Belgium labor inspectorate, police, and  other government agencies, in conducting the enforcement operations.  These collective enforcement actions generally occur over a 3-day period  each month, and the government allocates about 1,100 inspectors for the  enforcement actions, who also execute everyday individual actions against  nondeclared work or unauthorized workers. According to the Belgian  government, employers in the following sectors typically employ a  significant number of unauthorized foreign workers: lodging, food service,  cleaning service, farming, horticulture, textile, manufacturing,  meatpacking, and construction.
In Belgium, employers can be subject to civil and criminal penalties for  engaging in various illegal labor practices. Employers who do not properly  report employees’ information to the social security administration can be  administratively fined from €750 to €3,750 (about $940 to $4,700) per  worker. Employers can also be subject to criminal fines ranging from  €2,500 to €12,500 (about $3,100 to $15,700) and/or prison sentences  ranging from 8 days to 1 year.
Employers can be subject to penalties for hiring unauthorized foreign  workers. The minimum civil fine for hiring workers without residence and  work permits is €3,750 (about $4,700) per worker, and the minimum  criminal fine is €15,000 (about $18,800) per worker. The minimum civil  fine for hiring foreign workers without work permits is €375 per worker  (about $470), and the minimum criminal fine is €1,700 (about $2,100) per  worker.
In 2004, Belgium conducted about 6,000 employer investigations and filed  approximately 3,000 criminal charges against employers for illegal labor  practices.
section_title: Subsidization of Legal Work
paragraphs: To help reduce undeclared work in the in-home cleaning sector, the  Belgian government has established a program to subsidize in-home  cleaning work completed by Belgian workers. Under this program, the  federal government subsidizes private households’ use of Belgian cleaning  persons who are registered with the government. The program allows  formerly unemployed persons, such as former housewives, to register with  a local agency. Households pay the agency for work completed by the  registered worker, and the agency then pays the worker his or her wages,  which are partially subsidized by the government. Since the program was  established in 2002, approximately 25,000 cleaning persons have registered  to participate in the program.
section_title: Regularization Efforts
paragraphs: Belgium initiated a regularization program in 1973. Approximately 8,400  unauthorized immigrants applied for the program, and about 88 percent of  these applicants were granted a legal work permit. Subsequent to this  large-scale regularization program, Belgium regularized long-term resident  migrants and other unauthorized immigrants for humanitarian reasons on  a case-by-case basis.
In 2000, Belgium implemented a large-scale regularization program. In  order to be regularized, applicants had to have been in Belgium before  October 1, 1999, and had to fulfill one of the following conditions:    asylum petition pending for a long period (4 years for individuals or  3 years for families with minor children) without having been  informed about the decision of their case,  inability to return to their country of origin for humanitarian  reasons,  residence in the country for 6 years without receiving an order to  leave in the past 5 years.
The application process lasted 3 weeks, and approximately 52,000  individuals applied for regularization for themselves or their families.
section_title: Appendix V: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in Canada
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: Canada uses various foreign worker programs to manage the admission of  high-skilled, low-skilled, and seasonal foreign workers. Canada’s  temporary foreign worker programs are driven by labor market needs, and  Canada does not use quotas to manage the number of temporary foreign  worker admissions. Canada charges individual workers a C$150 (about  $130) fee to apply for a work permit.
Canadian employers can choose to recruit and hire foreign workers from  any country. In doing so, employers submit an application for foreign  workers to Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC).  Employers who apply to bring in foreign workers must prove to HRSDC  that they made reasonable efforts to fill their positions with native  Canadian workers. Reasonable efforts include running advertisements for  the positions in newspapers, magazines, and trade journals for several  weeks. When HRSDC is aware of a labor shortage in a particular industry,  such as in the oil industry in Alberta, HRSDC may impose less of a  requirement for employers to prove reasonable efforts to hire native  workers, such as requiring employers to run advertisements for positions  for a shorter time period.
After receiving an employer’s application, HRSDC conducts a labor market  assessment in which the agency considers the following factors: the  existence of ongoing labor disputes in the industry or with the specific  employer requesting the foreign workers; prevailing wages for the  positions that employers request foreign workers to fill; labor conditions;  benefits to the economy from the employment of foreign workers; and the  possible transfer of skills between foreign and native workers. On the  basis of consideration of these factors, HRSDC issues a positive or  negative labor market assessment for the admission of foreign workers. A  positive labor market assessment means that employers are approved to  recruit foreign workers, while a negative labor market assessment means  that employers are not approved for the recruitment of foreign workers.
After HRSDC issues a positive opinion on a labor market assessment, data  on this positive opinion are entered into HRSDC’s database. This database  shares information with Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s (CIC)  database that CIC uses in Canadian missions in foreign countries. When  foreign workers who have been accepted into a temporary foreign worker  program visit the Canadian mission to obtain their work permits, CIC  agents access the CIC database to check on the results of HRSDC’s labor  market assessment and issue work permits for foreign workers in cases of  a positive labor market assessment.
In 2004, HRSDC received requests from about 30,000 employers for  approximately 100,000 temporary foreign workers, for which HRSDC  issued about 91,000 positive labor market assessments. About 55 percent  of the temporary foreign workers admitted to Canada in 2004 were  employed in skilled occupations, such as professionals, academics, and  engineers. The other approximately 45 percent were employed in low- skilled occupations, such as live-in caregivers, construction, and  agriculture as part of Canada’s seasonal agricultural worker program.
subsections: section_title: Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program
paragraphs: Under the seasonal agricultural worker program, Canada admits workers  from other countries to fill needed jobs in agriculture for a maximum of   8 months. Canada’s seasonal agricultural worker program is managed  through bilateral agreements with Mexico, Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad  and Tobago, and the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States. The  majority of seasonal foreign workers come from Mexico and Jamaica and  typically return to Canada year after year through participation in the  program.
section_title: Low Skilled Foreign Worker Pilot Program
paragraphs: In addition to the seasonal agricultural worker program, Canada admits  low-skilled workers for 12 months under a pilot project for hiring foreign  workers in occupations that require a high school diploma or limited job- specific training. Under this pilot program, employers can apply for  foreign workers to fill jobs that require a high school diploma or a  maximum of 2 years of job-specific training, such as restaurant servers,  cleaners, retail salespersons, and heavy equipment operators.
section_title: Foreign Worker Change of Status
paragraphs: Among Canada’s temporary foreign worker programs, the live-in caregiver  program is the only program that provides foreign workers with a method  for changing their status to permanent residency. If live-in caregivers  accumulate 2 years of experience in Canada within a 3-year time period,  they can apply for permanent residency.
Provinces can also nominate temporary foreign workers for permanent  residency status based on provincial labor market needs. The foreign  workers must receive a permanent job offer from an employer before a  province can nominate the workers for permanent immigration  consideration. According to Canadian government officials, provinces  have nominated a few hundred foreign workers for permanent  immigration status.
section_title: Points-Based System
paragraphs: Canada uses a points-based system to evaluate foreign workers’  applications for permanent skilled immigration to Canada. Generally,  assessment of foreigners’ applications to immigrate to Canada is based on  a system that assigns points for age, education, work experience, intended  employment, knowledge of Canadian languages, and adaptability. For  details on the points awarded on the basis of specific factors, see table 12.
Individuals with a score that is the same or higher than the pass mark may  qualify to immigrate to Canada. Individuals with a score less than the pass  mark are unlikely to qualify to immigrate to Canada as a skilled worker. In  addition, applicants for skilled migration are required to meet minimum  work experience requirements according to the Canadian National  Occupation Classification, a system that describes the duties, skills,  aptitudes, and work settings typical of jobs in Canada. They are also  required to prove that they have the funds to support their family in  Canada, unless the applicants have prearranged employment in the  country.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws that Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: In Canada, employers who employ unauthorized foreign workers can be  subject to criminal penalties. These penalties include, depending on the  type of conviction, a maximum fine of C$50,000 (about $43,800) and/or a  maximum prison term of 2 years, or a maximum fine of C$10,000 (about  $8,800) or a maximum prison term of 6 months. According to Canadian  government officials, Canadian law does not clearly set forth any  administrative or civil penalties for employers who employ unauthorized  foreign workers. Unauthorized workers can be subject to detention and  deportation.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police is primarily responsible for  investigating employers and issuing criminal sanctions against employers  for hiring unauthorized foreign workers, but this responsibility is being  transferred to the Canadian Border Services Agency. This agency has  about 350 to 400 officers responsible for all of its inland enforcement  functions, including for investigating unauthorized workers.
section_title: Regularization Efforts
paragraphs: In 1973, Canada implemented a regularization program. Applicants were  required to have resided in the country before November 1972 and  demonstrate a stable employment history and family ties in Canada. About  50,000 individuals applied for the program, and approved applicants were  granted long-term residence status. The Canadian government provided  training to immigration agency staff for reviewing and processing  applications, which helped limit some problems in the application review  process.
section_title: Appendix VI: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in France
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: After World War II, the French government introduced measures to attract  foreign labor to regions and economic sectors with labor shortages. In  particular, France concluded bilateral agreements with numerous  countries for managing labor migration to France. The first such  agreement was signed with Italy in 1947 and was followed by agreements  with Spain in 1956, Morocco in 1963, Portugal in 1964, and the former  Yugoslavia in 1965. Other agreements were signed with Tunisia, Turkey,  and Algeria, among others. France also has bilateral agreements with  Romania and other countries to facilitate unauthorized immigrants’  repatriation by stipulating that deported foreign workers will not be able  to secure a tourist visa enabling them to return to France for at least a few  months after repatriation. In 1974, France instituted a ban on most forms  of immigration in response to the economic downturn of that period and  introduced employer sanctions to deter employers from hiring  unauthorized foreign workers.
All French work permit applications are processed by the local  employment office, or Direction Departmentale du Travail, de l’Emploi et  de la Formation Professionelle (DDTEFP). Temporary work permits can  be issued to foreigners invited to work, for a period initially not to exceed  1 year, performing a job which is temporary in nature (e.g., trainees,  researchers and scientists, performers, workers assigned to a French  subsidiary by a foreign “parent” company). Employers are required to  submit their request for a temporary work permit to DDTEFP, which  evaluates the current and future job situation, the employers’ compliance  with labor regulations, the terms and conditions of employment and  remuneration, and provisions for housing.
For permanent foreign workers, only those employers who cannot find  available, qualified workers within France may petition to bring in a  permanent worker who is not a European Union (EU) national. DDTEFP  reviews applications for permanent foreign workers on a case-by-case  basis, considering such factors as the job situation in the relevant  professional and geographic area, the applicable conditions for applying  regulations related to work, the conditions of employment and  remuneration offered to the foreign worker, the steps taken to ensure  workers’ housing, and the technological and commercial interest of the  request.
French residence permits are valid for 10 years and allow a foreigner to  work in the country. To obtain a 10-year residence permit, foreigners must  have been living in France for 5 years and demonstrate that they are well  integrated into French society. Temporary permits are valid for 1 year and  are given to foreigners who can prove family ties, as well as to certain  types of workers, such as scientists, artists, and students, and to visitors.  The French government has also taken steps to help better integrate  immigrants, such as establishing a dialogue with immigrant organizations  and providing scholarships for immigrants.
In addition, French employers can apply to bring in foreign workers for  seasonal employment from countries with which France has entered into  an agreement—Tunisia, Morocco, and Poland. The maximum length of a  seasonal contract for seasonal work generally cannot exceed 6 out of   12 consecutive months. For Moroccan and Tunisian seasonal workers, the  term of the employment agreement is set at a minimum of 4 months. Prior  to receiving an assignment, Moroccan and Tunisian seasonal workers sign  a document at a national agency for foreigners and immigration, or Agence  Nationale de l’Accueil des Etrangers et des Migrations (ANAEM), mission  agreeing to return to their countries upon expiration of their employment  agreements and to appear at the mission office in their home country to  record their return.
section_title: Employment Verification Process
paragraphs: All workers outside the EU or Switzerland must possess authorization to  work in France, and employers are required to check these workers’ work  authorization status. Employers are required to photocopy non-EU  workers’ work permits and maintain a copy of the permit in each worker’s  file.
Employers are also required to file a declaration of hire with the French  social security administration for each worker, regardless of the worker’s  nationality. The declaration of hire contains the employee’s name,  nationality, and date of hire. Employers file the declaration by fax or  registered mail or over the Internet.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: In France, responsibility for enforcing laws that prohibit the employment  of unauthorized foreign workers is coordinated among multiple agencies.  French police, gendarmerie, labor, and customs officers are responsible  for worksite enforcement efforts and work together to conduct worksite  enforcement operations. When inspecting worksites, labor inspectors may  compare information reported by employers to the French social security  administration with information in employers’ records to determine  whether employers have properly registered their workers with the social  security administration and whether workers are authorized.
At the local level, departmental boards to curb illegal employment,  referred to as CODELTIs, are responsible for coordinating worksite  enforcement efforts. These boards bring together relevant government  services and agencies, consular chambers, and other social partners, and  set guidelines for worksite enforcement actions. An operational committee  for curbing illegal employment, or Comité Opérationnel de Lutte contre le  Travail Illégal (COLTI), is established from among the local boards’  members and is chaired by the chief prosecutor. At the national level, the  interministerial delegation for curbing illegal employment, or Délégation  Interministérielle à la Lutte contre le Travail Illégal (DILTI), coordinates  worksite enforcement efforts.
In France, employers can be subject to civil and administrative penalties  for employing unauthorized foreign workers. Employers can be fined  administratively €3,110 ($3,900) per unauthorized worker and fined  criminally a maximum of €15,000 ($18,800) per offense. Employers can  also be sentenced to a maximum prison term of 5 years. In 2005, France  imposed about €2.7 million (about $3.4 million) in civil fines on employers.
In addition to these fine amounts, the French government can require  employers to pay costs for deporting unauthorized foreign workers.  Moreover, the government can require employers to pay any previously  unpaid wages to unauthorized foreign workers, and unauthorized foreign  workers can sue employers for damages, such as for poor working  conditions or abuse.
section_title: Regularization Efforts
paragraphs: France has undertaken several regularization programs. In 1981-1982,  France undertook a large-scale regularization program under which  unauthorized immigrants residing in the country before January 1, 1982,  could apply for legal status. The French government approved about  121,000 individuals for regularization. The program was intended to reduce  employment in the underground economy and help integrate unauthorized  immigrants into the country. The French government modified program  requirements to allow third parties to assist unauthorized foreign workers  rather than relying solely on employers to do so as specified under initial  program requirements.
In 1997, France implemented a regularization program that provided the  opportunity to obtain legal status for unauthorized immigrants who had  continuously resided in the country for 7 years and had family ties in the  country or who had resided in the country for 5 years, had family ties, and  had documentation from an employer showing the employer’s intention to  hire. About 78,000 applicants were granted residence and work permits,  and the majority of approved applications were based on family ties.
Additionally, in 1998 France instituted a program for regularizing the  status of unauthorized immigrants on a case-by-case basis. Under this  program, unauthorized immigrants who have resided in France for a  specified period of time can apply for regularization. The length of time  required to obtain residency is 3 years for families with children, 15 years  for students, and 10 years for other applicants.
section_title: Appendix VII: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in Germany
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
subsections: section_title: German Guest Worker Programs
paragraphs: During the 1950s and 1960s, Germany established bilateral agreements  with various countries, including Italy, Spain, Greece, Turkey, and  Morocco, for the admission of guest workers. As a result, foreigners as a  percentage of the German labor force increased from about 1 percent in  1960 to about 12 percent in 1973. According to the German Interior  Ministry, the original intent of these guest worker admissions was to limit  the length of time foreign workers could stay in Germany. After the  allotted time had run out, the foreign workers were supposed to return to  their home countries to be replaced by new foreign workers. However, the  Interior Ministry reported that starting in the late 1960s, a growing number  of foreign workers stayed in Germany permanently. In 1973 Germany  issued a ban on the recruitment of foreign workers, and the Interior  Ministry noted that this ban may have acted as an incentive for temporary  foreign workers to stay in Germany permanently because it made it  impossible for workers to return to their home countries temporarily and  then come back to Germany to work.
section_title: Current Foreign Worker Programs
subsections: section_title: High-Skilled Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: Germany uses various foreign worker programs to admit high-skilled, low-  skilled, and seasonal foreign workers. Highly skilled workers, such as  senior academics, researchers, and top business managers, can obtain  authorization to work in Germany without a requirement for employers to  prove whether German workers are available to fill the positions. In  addition, these highly skilled workers may be granted permanent  residence upon arrival in Germany. Germany also admits skilled foreign  workers in other occupations, including scientists, foreign language  teachers, specialty chefs, chaplains, artists, models, professional athletes,  and trainers.
In 2000, Germany instituted a program for recruiting information  technology specialists in which foreign specialists could reside and work  in Germany for a 5-year period, after which they could apply for  permanent residency and bring in family members if the specialists met a  minimum salary requirement.
section_title: Seasonal Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: Germany has a seasonal foreign worker program to recruit and admit  foreign workers on a temporary basis to fill jobs in the agriculture   (e.g., farming, forestry, and food processing), hospitality (e.g., hotels and  catering), and carnival sectors. Seasonal work permits are issued for a  maximum of 4 months to workers in agriculture and hospitality and for a  maximum of 9 months to workers in the carnival sector. Under Germany’s  seasonal worker program, foreign workers are required to return to their  home countries after expiration of their work permits. These workers are  also required to work only for the employers specified on their permits.
In 2005 Germany admitted about 330,000 seasonal foreign workers. For  2006, the German government reduced the number of seasonal foreign  worker admissions to encourage the employment of unemployed German  workers in the agriculture and hospitality sectors. For 2006, the German  government guaranteed each employer in these sectors 80 percent of the  number of work permits for foreign workers received in 2005. Employers  could receive an additional 10 percent of the number of foreign worker  permits received in 2005 after proving that no native German workers  were available to fill needed jobs. The German government intended that  employers fill remaining needed jobs with unemployed German workers.
Employers can recruit and apply for seasonal foreign workers in two  ways: (1) the employer identifies a specific foreign worker by name for his  or her vacant position; or (2) the employer requests a foreign worker to fill  a position through a local employment agency without specifying a  particular foreign worker. The employer may specify the country from  which he or she would like the foreign worker. Under this latter case, the  local employment agency submits the employer’s application to the  German Federal Employment Agency. The Federal Employment Agency  then works with its counterpart in another country to identify a foreign  worker from that country for the position. The Federal Employment  Agency sends a job description from the employer to the other country,  and the employment agency in the other country suggests a few workers  for the position to the Federal Employment Agency. These suggestions are  then sent from the Federal Employment Agency to the employer, and the  employer then decides which worker he or she wants to fill the position.  After the foreign worker needed for a position is identified (either by the  employer or the Federal Employment Agency), the worker picks up a copy  of the employment contract at his or her country’s employment agency. On  average, it takes about 6 weeks from the time that an employer submits an  employment contract to the local employment agency to the time that the  employer receives the foreign worker.
To obtain a work permit for a foreign worker, an employer must pay a   €60 (about $75) fee to the local employment agency and provide an  employment contract to the agency that guarantees the foreign worker will  have a position upon the worker’s arrival in Germany. The employment  contract specifies housing conditions for workers, agreed-upon wages,  and any fees charged for food or housing. Employers usually pay or  provide transportation costs for foreign workers to get from their home  countries to the worksite.
The local employment agency conducts a labor market test to determine  whether there are German or European Union (EU) citizens who could fill  the position. If there are no available German or EU citizens for the  position, the position can be filled by a foreign worker. As part of the labor  market test, the local employment agency publishes the employer’s job  description on its Web site and may check with the EU placement office to  determine whether there are EU citizens available for the position.
section_title: Low-Skilled Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: Germany has established bilateral agreements with countries to manage  the admission of temporary foreign workers from those countries into  Germany. These countries include Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Latvia,  Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Turkey, among others. In 2003, Germany  admitted approximately 44,000 foreign workers under these bilateral  agreements.
Germany admits foreign workers under other types of programs. For  example, Germany annually admits between 3,000 and 6,000 young people  from Central and Eastern European countries for a maximum of   18 months under a worker training program. Germany also admits  foreigners to work as au pairs on 1-year permits.
section_title: Integration Courses
paragraphs: In 2005, Germany established integration courses for foreigners admitted  to Germany. The courses are financed by the German federal government  and are available to all migrant groups. For some migrants, such as new  arrivals from non-EU countries who have limited German knowledge, the  courses are mandatory, and the German government can cut social  benefits to migrants who are required to participate in the courses but fail  to do so. The courses comprise 630 hours, of which 600 hours are basic  language training and 30 hours are an orientation to German history,  culture, and the political system.
section_title: Employment Verification and Registration Process
paragraphs: In Germany, foreign workers are required to present identity and work  eligibility documents, such as a passport or work permit to employers.  Employers are required to check these documents to verify foreign  workers’ authorization to work in Germany. For native German workers,  employers are required to report workers’ information to the German  government for the payment of taxes and social insurance contributions  for the workers.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: The Department for the Financial Investigation of Clandestine Labor of the  German Customs Authority is primarily responsible for enforcing laws that  prohibit illegal labor practices, including the employment of unauthorized  foreign workers in Germany. The department, which has about 7,000 staff  members, checks whether employers have paid appropriate taxes and  social insurance contributions on behalf of workers and have employed  only authorized workers. Employers in the following sectors in Germany  have traditionally employed a significant number of unauthorized foreign  workers: construction, transportation, cleaning services, hotel, and  restaurant businesses.
The Department for the Financial Investigation of Clandestine Labor of the  German Customs Authority conducts inspections and investigations of  worksites. During an inspection, customs officers check employment  records for compliance with labor and social laws as well as the law to  combat illegal labor practices. If suspicion arises during an inspection that  the employer is engaged in illegal employment activities, the customs  officers at the worksite can cease the inspection and initiate a criminal  investigation of the worksite. During an investigation, which usually  requires a warrant, customs officers interview workers and collect  evidence to determine whether the employer has engaged in any criminal  or minor violations of labor and social laws.
Employers can be subject to various administrative fines and criminal  penalties for engaging in illegal labor practices. Employers can be fined   for noncriminal violations of labor or social laws from €5 up to   €500,000 (about $6 to $628,800) total for employing unauthorized foreign  workers. Criminal fine amounts are imposed on a daily basis ranging from  a minimum of 5 days to a maximum of 360 days. German courts determine  the daily rate of fine amounts, taking into account the personal and  financial circumstances of each employer. In general, courts use the  average net income of the employer as a starting point for determining fine  amounts. The daily rate of fine amounts range from a minimum of €1 to a  maximum of €5,000 (about $1 to $6,300). The German government can  seize the assets of employers who do not pay the appropriate amount for  social security contributions, taxes, or wages. Employers can be sentenced  to a prison term of up to 10 years for employing unauthorized foreign  workers. In addition, employers who hire unauthorized foreign workers  can be excluded from public contracts, be required to pay deportation  costs for unauthorized foreign workers, and be required to pay back taxes  and social security contributions that were not initially paid for the  unauthorized foreign workers.
Unauthorized foreign workers identified in Germany can also be subject to  various penalties. For example, administrative fines ranging from €5 up to  €5,000 (about $6 to $6,300) can be imposed on unauthorized foreign  workers. Unauthorized foreign workers can also be subject to criminal  penalties. Criminal fine amounts are imposed on a daily basis ranging from  a minimum of 5 days to a maximum of 360 days. The daily rate of fine  amounts range from a minimum of €1 to a maximum of €5,000 (about $1 to  $6,300). Additionally, unauthorized foreign workers can be expelled from  Germany and prohibited from reentering the country. Table 13 provides  data on the enforcement actions of the Department for the Financial  Investigation of Clandestine Labor for 2003 through 2005.
section_title: Efforts to Streamline Employment Processes
paragraphs: The German government has streamlined the hiring process and tax and  social insurance payment procedures for certain types of jobs in Germany.  Called mini jobs, these jobs are one for which workers earn less than   €400 (about $500) per month. The goal of the mini jobs program is to  provide incentives to employers so that they employ workers legally and  pay taxes and social insurance contributions for those workers.
section_title: Appendix VIII: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in Spain
paragraphs: Spain has traditionally been a country of emigration rather than one of  immigration. Following World War II, many individuals left Spain to work  in other European countries, but by the 1980s, Spain had started attracting  increasing numbers of immigrants.
Spain is organized into 17 autonomous communities, each with its own  laws in addition to national level legislation, which has precedence. When  Spain joined the European Union (EU) on January 1, 1986, citizens of  other EU countries gained free access to the Spanish labor market and  social services. Citizens of the 10 newest EU member countries that joined  on May 1, 2004, must meet specific requirements to work in Spain for  longer than 180 days, including the following:  the permit must be requested by the employer or company  representative;  the worker must not be in an illegal situation in Spain when  applying for the permit;  the permit will be restricted to a specific sector, work activity, and  geographical area; and  the permit is valid for 1 year and may be renewed.
The potential employer must receive authorization from the Spanish  government to employ a foreign worker before a work visa will be issued.  Prior to arrival, the foreign worker must obtain the residence and work  visa from the Spanish Consular Office in the worker’s home country. The  initial residence permit has a validity of 1 month and may be renewed.  Permanent residence permits are issued to those who have lived in Spain  for at least 5 consecutive years with a temporary resident permit.
Spain also has 9-month seasonal work permits. Under this program,  20,000-30,000 foreign workers are admitted per year, primarily in  agriculture. Employers are required to provide housing and pay for travel  for the foreign workers. Once a foreign worker has participated in the  program for 3 years, participants are given preference to apply for a permit  leading to permanent residence.
subsections: section_title: Employment Verification and the Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: Non-EU nationals who wish to live and work in Spain for more than 3  months are required to register with a local police station and receive an  Alien Registration Card within 1 month of entering the country. To receive  the Alien Registration Card, a foreign national must show:  receipt of fee payment, and   the appropriate visa, obtained prior to arrival in Spain, if applicable.
Spain requires all inhabitants of a city or village to register by enrolling in  the Municipal Register, which lists all residents. Both Spanish nationals  and foreigners can register, irrespective of their legal status. To register, a  person must provide a home address, as well as proof of residence, such  as a tenancy agreement or gas, electricity, or telephone bills. Foreigners  from outside the EU who have no permanent residence permit must renew  their registration every 2 years.
Potential employees must present documents to employers to prove  identity and work authorization at the time of hire. Employers are required  to check the documents and report employee identity and work  authorization information to the Spanish government. Spain’s labor and  social security inspectorate is responsible for investigating all potential  worksite violations at the national level, which may include employment  of unauthorized foreign workers, health and safety violations, and failure  to make social insurance contributions. The inspectorate currently  employs 800 inspectors and 850 deputy inspectors. Half of the labor  inspectors work under the authority of the central government and are  responsible for offenses related to social contributions and work by  foreigners. The remaining inspectors work under the authority of the  autonomous regions and are responsible for occupational health and  safety and labor relations-related violations.
The inspectorate targets its worksite enforcement actions using  information generated from Spain’s regularization effort and comparing  this information to the employer’s hiring records submitted to the Spanish  government. For example, an employer who requested regularization for a  greater number of employees than were officially submitted by an  employer would likely face an inspection. This was made possible because  the database of regularization data was available to all the other agencies  with responsibility for controlling illegal work, including the labor and  social security inspectorate, as well as the tax collection agency and the  ministries of justice, interior and foreign affairs.
Spain sanctions employers for hiring unauthorized workers. If an  unauthorized worker remains illegally employed for at least 1 year, the  worker can denounce the employer and receive permanent resident status.
Employers can be fined administratively from €6,000 to €60,000 (about  $7,500 to about $75,500) per unauthorized worker. After inspectors  uncover and record a violation, the process for assessing employer  sanctions goes through two phases: (1) an administrative phase, and, in  the case of employer appeals, (2) a court/judicial phase. An employer  wishing to appeal the case, it must first pay the sanction in escrow to the  central government’s tax agency. The employer then pays interest on the  fine for the length of the appeal process. As a consequence of this process,  government officials estimate the Spanish government collects an average  of 80 percent of total sanctions imposed, but this varies among  autonomous communities.
section_title: Regularization Efforts
paragraphs: Spain implemented a regularization program in 1985. Applicants were  required to have an employment contract and to have been present in  Spain before July 24, 1985. About 44,000 unauthorized immigrants applied  for regularization. In 1991, the Spanish government held another  regularization program for workers who had resided in Spain prior to May  15, 1991, and to asylum seekers whose applications had been rejected or  were under review. About 110,000 individuals were regularized.
In 1996, Spain implemented another regularization program for  unauthorized immigrants. To be eligible, applicants needed to prove that  they had been employed (without a permit) since January 1, 1996; had a  working or residence permit issued after May 1986 (regardless of current  employment status); or were a family member of an applicant. The  program regularized about 21,000 unauthorized immigrants.
Spain implemented a fourth large-scale regularization program in 2000. To  apply for the program, unauthorized immigrants had to prove that they  had been in Spain before June 1, 1999, and had applied for or received a  residence or work permit at some point. About 164,000 unauthorized  immigrants were regularized under the 2000 program. Spain also  implemented a regularization program in 2001. The 2001 program targeted  those who had been in Spain since January 23, 2001, and were employed  or were family members of a foreign worker or Spanish citizen. The  government issued about 235,000 permits under this program.
Under the most recent regularization, in 2005, employers generally applied  for regularization on behalf of their unauthorized foreign workers.  Unauthorized foreign workers were required to provide proof of  registration with a local municipality in Spain before August 7, 2004, and  had to be in Spain at the time of application. They were also required to  have a work contract and a clean criminal record. In applying for their  workers, employers were required to demonstrate that they were enrolled  in and paying into the Spanish social insurance system, that they had no  history of breaking immigration laws in the previous 12 months, and that  they had not been sanctioned for violating the rights of workers or  immigrants. Employers were also required to provide unauthorized foreign  workers applying for regularization with a work contact for a minimum of  6 months for most workers, a minimum of 3 months for agricultural  workers, and a maximum of 12 months for construction and hotel  workers. Work permits granted under the regularization program were  valid for 1 year and are renewable indefinitely as long as the regularized  immigrants maintain their employment. Some unauthorized foreign  workers, such as those in part-time jobs or working for several employers,  could directly apply to the Spanish government for regularization without  applying through their employers. The Spanish government established a  database for maintaining information on regularization applicants. About  700,000 unauthorized foreign workers applied and qualified for the  regularization program out of an estimated 800,000 workers projected to  be eligible for program participation. The 700,000 unauthorized foreign  workers who applied and qualified for the regularization program do not  include the approximately 400,000 family members of those workers who  qualified for regularization with the workers. As of February 2006,  approximately 560,000 workers had paid the required social insurance  contribution. In addition, Spain introduced enhanced enforcement  measures in conjunction with the regularization program.
section_title: Appendix IX: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in Switzerland
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: In 1948, Switzerland was one of the first European countries actively to  recruit foreign workers by signing a bilateral agreement with Italy.  Switzerland did not have public recruitment agencies for recruiting foreign  workers. Rather, recruitment was organized by Swiss employers  themselves. In 1963, Switzerland introduced a ceiling on the number of  foreign workers each employer could admit. In 1970, the Swiss  government introduced a global quota, which placed an upper limit on the  number of new foreigners allowed to enter the country.
Current access to the Swiss labor market differs according to whether or  not a worker is a European Union (EU) national. EU nationals have free  access to the Swiss labor market, as granted by an agreement between  Switzerland and the EU, and this agreement will be extended to the   10 newest members of the EU after a transitional period. Switzerland has  implemented a national quota for both temporary and long-term workers  from EU and non-EU countries, which limits the number of foreign  workers admitted to Switzerland each year. In 2005, Switzerland set quotas  for EU workers of 115,000 and 15,000 for short-term and long-term  workers, respectively, and set quotas for non-EU workers of 4,000 and  5,000 for short-term and long-term workers, respectively. Quotas for  nationals of the old 15 EU-member states will be abolished as of June 1,  2007. In recruiting and admitting foreign workers, priority is granted to  workers from EU member states, and there are restrictions on the  admission of non-EU workers except for specialists and skilled workers.
Any foreign national seeking admission to Switzerland for employment  must first obtain a work and residence permit from the cantonal  authorities, which is arranged by the prospective employer. Residence  permits exceeding 4 months are, with some exceptions, subject to a quota  set by the Swiss Federal Council. Before granting a permit, the labor  market authorities consider the economic situation and the labor market  in the country, as well as other conditions governing paid work. For  example, they must check to see whether the pay and working conditions  are consistent with those prevailing locally in the industry concerned, and  whether a resident worker or a citizen from the EU is able and willing to  fill the vacancy under the same conditions. Exceptions may be made for  an industry experiencing labor shortages in both the Swiss and European  labor markets.
There are currently four types of permits available to foreign workers.
Cross-border commuter permits are for gainful employment of  people resident in neighboring countries. These permits are not  subjected to quota. They are valid for 1 year and are renewable.
Short-term work and residence permits are granted to people from  the EU who are offered employment of up to 364 days in the  country; if their contract lasts longer than that they will be given a   5-year EU annual permit. Should a contract after 364 days be  renewed for another year, for example, a new EU short-time permit  will be issued. Non EU-nationals can obtain a short-time permit that  is valid for up to 12 months but can be extended up to 24 months  only in specific instances.
Annual residence permits are issued to EU nationals to live and  work in Switzerland for 5 years. After that time, EU nationals can  receive a residence permit. For non-EU nationals, there are two  types of annual permits—one that is temporary and one that is  indefinite. Authorities generally renew the temporary annual  permits each year (subject to the employee still being employed),  although a claim for renewal exists only in certain cases. Annual  permits are subject to a quota only if, they are granted for the first  time. Once foreigners have obtained an annual permit of either type,  they are considered to be part of the domestic labor market.
Settlement permits are granted to people who have resided in  Switzerland without interruption for 5 years for residents of  European Economic Area (EEA) countries and the United States  and for 10 years to all other nationals.
Once a year, the Swiss government sets a quota for the following year. The  quota is set by taking account of past experiences and the current  economic and labor market situation. Part of the yearly quota for each  labor sector category remains with the federal government, though the  bulk is at the discretion of the cantons. The quota for each canton is  determined by a complex system, taking into account the population,  industrial structure, and gross domestic product per capita. As a rule, the  federal quota is mainly complementary to that of the cantons, for example,  in cases where the interests of several cantons are affected, such as the  opening of a new large-scale factory.
A new Foreigners Law passed the Swiss Parliament and will be voted upon  by the Swiss population in September 2006. The present system for the  admission to the Swiss labor market for non-EU nationals will be largely  the same under the new law, but would provide foreign workers from non- EU countries with more rights after entry. The draft law also envisages  allowing family reunification for temporary residents, which is not  possible under the current system. To obtain an annual permit,  consideration will be given to applicants’ characteristics that will help  them integrate into the Swiss labor market: qualification, occupational  adaptability, knowledge of languages, and age. How these criteria are  interpreted and weighted, is likely to remain within the discretion of the  cantonal authorities under the new law. However this will not affect  qualified workers from outside the EU who enter the Swiss labor market  for the first time since their qualification guarantees for sufficient  integration. After 5 years, permit-holders have a legal claim to an  extension, provided they have not committed any serious crimes and are  not dependent on welfare services. After an additional 5 years, foreigners  may claim a settlement permit, but not citizenship, which requires a  minimum of 12 years residence in Switzerland.
section_title: Employment Verification and Registration Process
paragraphs: Foreign workers have 8 days after entering Switzerland in which to  register with the authorities in their local commune. The commune then  sends registration papers to the competent cantonal authority, which  processes the application and issues the appropriate residence permit.  Workers must show the following documents in order to register:    a valid identity card,    a certificate from a health insurance provider to prove that the  worker is a member of a recognized health insurance scheme,    a passport photograph,    a registry office documents (e.g., family record book, marriage  certificate, birth certificates of minor children), and    an employment contract or confirmation of enrollment at a  university.
For foreign workers from non-EU countries, employers are required to  obtain confirmation about workers’ work permits, which are issued  through the cantonal authorities after confirmation by the federal  authority. After arriving in Switzerland, foreign workers contact their local  commune to obtain their permits.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: Cantons in Switzerland are primarily responsible for enforcement of Swiss  immigration law. Among other things, the cantons are responsible for  deporting unauthorized immigrants and investigating cases of illegal  residency and labor. The cantons’ police forces, immigration authorities,  and labor authorities carry out these functions, and these bodies  coordinate with one another, with the agencies of the other cantons, and  with the federal authorities.
Under current Swiss law, unauthorized immigrants can face criminal  sanctions of up to 6 months imprisonment or a fine of up to SwF 10,000  (about $8,000). In addition, the current law imposes sanctions on those  who facilitate illegal immigration on a commercial scale or as a member of  a criminal organization that engages in human trafficking. Such individuals  are punishable with up to 3 years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to SwF  100,000 (about $79,800), or both.
Under the proposed immigration reform legislation, the penalty for illegal  entry and presence would be increased to a maximum of 1 year  imprisonment or a fine of up to SwF 20,000 (about $16,000) for  intentionally committed offenses, and a fine for negligent conduct. The  proposed act would also provide more severe penalties for anyone  engaged in human trafficking, either individually or in a group—up to   5 years imprisonment or a fine of up to SwF 500,000 (about $399,000).
Under current Swiss law, employers of unauthorized foreign workers are  subject to a fine of up to SwF 5,000 (about $4,000) per intentionally  employed unauthorized worker, in addition to a possible conviction for  aiding and abetting illegal immigration. A fine of up to SwF 3,000 (about  $2,400) is can be imposed for negligent conduct. However, Swiss courts  have discretion to lower or raise these fines for. The Swiss government  can, in some cases, require employers to pay fine amounts at the time of  the worksite inspections. In 2003, the Swiss government issued 412 civil or  administrative fines and 42 criminal fines against employers for employing  unauthorized workers. Under the proposed act, employers who employ  persons who do not have visas that entitle them to work can face penalties  of up to 1 year imprisonment (3 years imprisonment in aggravated cases)  and a fine of up to SwF 500,000 (about $399,000).
In addition to violating immigration laws, employers who employ  unauthorized immigrants as well as the unauthorized immigrants who  work for them are likely to commit criminal violations of the social  security law by not reporting employment and by not submitting  contributions. Repeat offenders among employers may be barred from  government contracts for 5 years and any subsidies that they receive may  also be forfeited. The cantons that impose these measures are required to  publish lists of sanctioned employers.
section_title: Appendix X: Information on Selected Immigration-Related Programs in the United Kingdom
subsections: section_title: Foreign Worker Admissions
paragraphs: The United Kingdom has various programs for admitting foreign workers.  These programs include the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme, the  Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme, the Sector-Based Scheme, and the  Working Holidaymakers Scheme. However, the United Kingdom  government generally plans to phase out these programs as it implements  a points-based immigration system announced in March 2006. The United  Kingdom charges employers a £153 (about $280) fee to apply for a work  permit on behalf of each potential foreign worker.
subsections: section_title: Highly Skilled Migrant Programme
paragraphs: Under the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme, skilled migrants can be  admitted to the United Kingdom for employment or self-employment. The  program does not require migrants to have a preexisting job offer before  entering the United Kingdom. Highly skilled migrants are initially granted a  24-month permit for working in the United Kingdom. Near the end of the  24-month period, highly skilled migrants can apply to extend their permit.  In 2005, the United Kingdom admitted about 7,000 migrants under its  Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.
section_title: Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme (SAWS)
paragraphs: Under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme, foreign workers’  participation is limited to foreign students. These foreign workers are  granted a maximum 6-month permit to work in the United Kingdom. These  foreign workers are required to return to their home countries after  expiration of their work permits and are not allowed to bring dependents  with them to the United Kingdom. In 2006, the United Kingdom set a quota  of 16,250 foreign workers for admission under the SAWS. recruits foreign students who are on vacation from their schools for  seasonal agricultural work because these workers have an existing reason  to return to their home countries.
section_title: Sector-Based Scheme
paragraphs: The United Kingdom introduced its Sector-Based Scheme in 2003 to  address labor market shortages in the hospitality and food-processing  sectors, although in 2005 the United Kingdom ended the program for the  hospitality sector. In 2003, the United Kingdom government set a quota of  10,000 foreign workers to be admitted for each sector, according to  government officials. In 2004-2005, the United Kingdom approved about  12,300 foreign worker admissions under the Sector-Based Scheme.
Under the Sector-Based Scheme, employers in the United Kingdom recruit  foreign workers to fill job vacancies. Work permits issued under the  program are valid for a maximum of 12 months, but if foreign workers  return to and reside in their home countries for at least 2 months after  expiration of the initial permit, the workers can apply for another   12-month permit under the Sector-Based Scheme. Foreign workers  admitted to the United Kingdom under the Sector-Based Scheme are not  allowed to bring dependents with them.
section_title: Working Holidaymakers Scheme
paragraphs: The Working Holidaymakers Scheme enables British Commonwealth  nationals aged 17 to 30 to come to the United Kingdom for 2 years for a  working holiday. The nationals are permitted to work to supplement their  funds while in the United Kingdom, but must be able to support  themselves without relying on welfare benefits. Working holidaymakers  may work only for 12 months in total during their stay in the United  Kingdom, and the 12 months work may be spread over the 2-year period of  stay, or taken in one block. In 2005, the United Kingdom admitted about  62,000 foreigners under its Working Holidaymakers Scheme.
section_title: Points-Based System
paragraphs: In March 2006, the United Kingdom announced that a points-based system  will be introduced for managing labor migration that will largely eliminate  its other labor immigration schemes. The new point-based system will use  a 5-tier framework.
Tier 1: highly skilled individuals    Tier 2: skilled workers with a job offer to fill gaps in the labor force    Tier 3: limited numbers of low-skilled workers needed to fill specific    Tier 4: students    Tier 5: youth and temporary workers allowed to work in the United  Kingdom for a limited period of time to satisfy primarily  noneconomic objectives Tier 1 is designed to bring into the United Kingdom those migrants with  the very highest skills. These migrants do not need a job offer and will  have unrestricted access to the labor market. A migrant who enters under  Tier 1 will not need a sponsor under the new system. Tier 1 will replace  the current Highly Skilled Migrant Programme, which already takes a  points-based approach to assessing which migrants are granted entry to  the United Kingdom. Under the points-based system, migrants seeking to  enter the United Kingdom under Tier 1 will need to accumulate 75 points  to be considered for admission. Table 14 provides information on the  points system for Tier 1.
Appendix X: Information on Selected  Immigration-Related Programs in the United  Kingdom Previous earnings or qualifications were gained in the UK    15 (bonus) specified skill level, and that the job has been advertised in the United  Kingdom. For jobs not identified as ones with a shortage, points will be  used to ensure that applicants have the appropriate combination of skills  and prospective salary. Workers in Tier 2 will be able to change employers  within the United Kingdom but will be reassessed against the points test  and will be required to have a certificate of sponsorship from the new  employer. Tier 2 provides foreign workers with a route to permanent  settlement. Foreign workers who reside in the United Kingdom for a  minimum of 5 years can qualify to apply for permanent residence. The  initial grant of permanent status will be linked to the length of the contract  up to a maximum period. Tier 2 migrants will be able to bring in  dependants and to switch into Tier 1 if they meet the points requirements  for Tier 1. for ensuring the return of temporary foreign workers to their home  countries. The United Kingdom is considering options such as compulsory  remittances, requiring open return tickets for foreign workers, and  capturing biometric data on foreign workers to ensure their return. These  schemes would be run by a contracted operator.
Under Tier 4, which would apply to foreign students seeking the  opportunity to study in the United Kingdom, each student, before making  an application, will be able to self-assess against a set of published criteria  to see whether he or she will have sufficient points to be granted leave to  enter or remain in the United Kingdom. These criteria will include a valid  certificate of sponsorship from an educational institution at which the  student has been offered—and accepted—a place in a course of study.
Tier 5 would apply to youth exchanges and other temporary foreign  workers seeking employment in the United Kingdom. Under Tier 5 for  youth exchanges, participating countries will need to agree to the terms of  the scheme, including the existence of an effective return arrangement, an  acceptance that the foreign government will act as the sponsor, and  country limits set according to immigration risk. The scheme will allow  nationals aged 18 to 30, from participating countries, to come to the United  Kingdom for up to 24 months, after which time they will have to leave the  United Kingdom. In order not to undermine the rationale of the scheme,  which is principally about people coming to the country for a holiday and  doing incidental work to support themselves and not an avenue for  economic migration, participants will generally be restricted to working  for a maximum of 12 months out the total of 24 (as with the current  Working Holidaymaker Scheme). Participants will not be allowed to be  self-employed or play professional sports. In addition, those entering  under the scheme will not be able to bring dependants and will be unable  to switch to any other tier. These restrictions underline the temporary  nature of the route. be 24 months (12 months in some cases) and switching into other tiers will  not be permitted. Dependents will be allowed but will be entitled to work  only if the principal is granted more than 12 months’ leave.
section_title: Employment Verification Process
paragraphs: It is a criminal offense for employers to employ someone subject to  immigration control who has no right to work in the United Kingdom or no  right to do the work being offered. Employers can establish an affirmative  defense against conviction for employing an unauthorized worker by  checking and copying certain original documents presented by potential  new employees. As shown in table 16, potential new employees can  demonstrate their work authorization by providing one document from  List 1 or two documents from the combinations in List 2.
subsections: section_title: A United Kingdom passport describing the holder as a British citizen or as a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies and having the right of abode in the United Kingdom.
paragraphs: A passport containing a certificate of  entitlement issued by, or on behalf of the  Government of the United Kingdom,  certifying that the holder has the right of  abode in the United Kingdom.
A passport or national identity card, issued  by a State which is party to the European  Economic Area Agreement, or any other  agreement forming part of the Communities  Treaties which confers rights of entry to or  residence in the United Kingdom, which  describes the holder as a national of a state  which is a party to that agreement.
A letter issued by the Home Office to the  holder confirming the same.
section_title: A passport or other travel document endorsed to show that the holder has current leave to enter, or remain in, the United Kingdom and is permitted to take the employment in question, provided that it does not require the issue of a work permit
paragraphs: An Immigration Status Document issued by  the Home Office to the holder endorsed  with a UK Residence Permit, which  indicates that the holder has been granted  limited leave to enter or remain in the  United Kingdom and is entitled to take to  employment in question in the United  Kingdom.
In checking and copying the original documents presented by potential  employees, employers are required to check any photographs to ensure  that they are consistent with the appearance of the potential employee, the  dates of birth listed on the documents to ensure that they are consistent  with the appearance of the potential employee, the expiration dates of  employees’ documents, and any United Kingdom government stamps or  endorsements to verify that the potential employee is able to do the type  of work being offered.
section_title: Enforcement of Laws That Prohibit Employment of Unauthorized Foreign Workers
paragraphs: In the United Kingdom, the Immigration and Nationality Directorate within  the Home Office is primarily responsible for enforcing laws that prohibit  the employment of unauthorized foreign workers. The Home Office  reported initiating about 2,900 investigations of illegal work practices in  2005 and about 1,600 investigations in 2004. Table 17 provides data on the  number of prosecutions against employers for each year from 2000  through 2004.
In 2003, the United Kingdom Home Office detected about 1,800  unauthorized workers at worksites and in 2004, about 3,300 unauthorized  workers. Enforcement staff are primarily focused on the removal of failed  asylum seekers from the United Kingdom.
section_title: Regularization Efforts
paragraphs: The United Kingdom has not implemented any large-scale regularization  programs for foreigners working illegally in the country. However, in cases  where individuals have resided unlawfully in the United Kingdom for a  continuous period of 14 years or more, the individuals can apply to remain  in the country legally on a permanent basis. In addition, in 2003 the United  Kingdom initiated a program under which individuals who applied for  asylum before October 2000 and had a dependent residing with them in  the country between October 2000 and October 2003 could apply for legal  status for themselves and their dependents.
section_title: Appendix XI: Foreign Country Questionnaires
section_title: Appendix XII: Acknowledgement of Government and Other Entities’ Assistance
section_title: Appendix XIII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Frances Cook, Michelle Cooper,  Katherine Davis, Rebecca Gambler, Alison Martin, Amanda Miller,   Jason Pogacnik, and Robert E. White made key contributions to   this report.
section_title: Bibliography
paragraphs: Commission of the European Communities. Communication from the  Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European  Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions:  Study on the Links between Legal and Illegal Migration. Brussels,  Belgium: June 4, 2004.
Commission of the European Communities. Report on the Functioning of  the Transitional Arrangements set out in the 2003 Accession Treaty.  Brussels, Belgium: 2006.
Congressional Research Service. Impact of Illegal Immigration and  Background on Legalization: Programs of Other Countries. Washington,  D.C.: November 1985.
Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs,  2004-05 Annual Report. Canberra, Australia: 2005.
Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs.  Managing the Border: Immigration Compliance. 2003-04 edition.  Canberra, Australia: 2005.
GAO. Immigration Enforcement: Benefits and Limitations to Using  Earnings Data to Identify Unauthorized Work. GAO-06-814R.  Washington, D.C.: July 11, 2006.
GAO. Immigration Enforcement: Weaknesses Hinder Employment  Verification and Worksite Enforcement Efforts. GAO-05-813. Washington,  D.C.: August 31, 2005.
GAO. Overstay Tracking: A Key Component of Homeland Security and a  Layered Defense. GAO-04-82. Washington: D.C., May 21, 2004.
Global Commission on International Migration. Migration in an  Interconnected World: New Directions for Action. Switzerland:   October 2005.
International Labour Office. Towards a Fair Deal for Migrant Workers in  the Global Economy. Geneva, Switzerland: 2004.
International Organization for Migration. Managing the Movement of  People: What Can Be Learned for Mode 4 of the GATS. Geneva,  Switzerland: 2005.
International Organization for Migration. World Migration 2005: Costs  and Benefits of International Migration. Geneva, Switzerland: 2005.
Kuptsch, Christiane, ed. Merchants of Labour. International Institute for  Labor Studies. France: 2006.
Kuptsch, Christiane, and Pang Eng Fong, eds. Competing for Global  Talent. International Institute for Labor Studies. France: 2006.
Law Library of Congress. Immigration Law Sanctions and Enforcement  in Selected Foreign Countries. Washington, D.C.: April 2006.
Levinson, Amanda. The Regularization of Unauthorized Migrants:  Literature Survey and Country Case Studies. Centre on Migration, Policy  and Society. Oxford, United Kingdom: 2005.
Marie, Claude-Valentin. Preventing Illegal Immigration: Juggling  Economic Imperatives, Political Risks and Individual Rights.  Strasbourg, France: January 2004.
Martin, Philip, and Mark Miller. Employer Sanctions: French, German  and US Experiences. Geneva, Switzerland: 2000.
Meissner, Doris, Demetrios Papademetriou, and David North. Legalization  of Undocumented Aliens: Lessons from Other Countries.
National Academy of Sciences. New Americans: Economic, Demographic,  and Fiscal Effects of Immigration. 2003.
Niessen, Jan, and Yongmi Schibel. EU and US Approaches to the  Management of Immigration: Comparative Perspectives. Migration  Policy Group. Brussels, Belgium: May 2003.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Combating  the Illegal Employment of Foreign Workers. Paris, France: 2000.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. International  Migration Outlook. Paris, France: 2006.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Migration for  Employment: Bilateral Agreements at a Crossroads. Paris, France: 2004.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Trends in  International Migration. Paris, France: 2005.
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, International  Organization for Migration, and International Labour Office. Handbook on  Establishing Effective Labour Migration Policies in Countries of Origin  and Destination, 2006.
Papademetriou, Demetrios. The “Regularization” Option in Managing  Illegal Migration More Effectively: A Comparative Perspective. Migration  Policy Institute. Washington, D.C.: September 2005.
Papadopoulou, Aspasia. Regularization Programmes: An Effective  Instrument of Migration Policy? Geneva, Switzerland: 2005.
Passel, Jeffrey S. The Size and Characteristics of the Unauthorized  Migrant Population in the U.S. Pew Hispanic Center. Washington, D.C.:  March 7, 2006.
Policy Briefs and Recommendations. The Greek Presidency Conference  on Managing Migration for the Benefit of Europe. Athens, Greece: May   15-16, 2003.
Ruhs, Martin. Temporary Foreign Workers Programmes: Policies,  Adverse Consequences, and the Need to Make Them Work. Center for  Comparative Immigration Studies. San Diego, CA: June 2002.
Ruhs, Martin. The Potential of Temporary Migration Programmes in  Future International Migration Policy. Global Commission on  International Migration. September 2005.
Schneider, Friedrich. and Robert Klinglmair. Shadow Economies around  the World: What Do We Know? Linz-Auhof, Austria: April 2004.
United Kingdom Home Office. A Points-Based System: Making Migration  Work for Britain. United Kingdom: 2006.
U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform. Becoming an American:  Immigration and Immigrant Policy. Washington, D.C.: 1997.