Furor in Britain over Tier-2 Visa

Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 10:40 PM

<<<<< JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER No. 2072 -- 1/20/2010 >>>>>

A furor is erupting in Britain over a new visa called the Tier 2
intra-company transfer. It s equivalent to the U.S. L-1 visa, which is
also called an intra-company transfer. Both visas are almost identical in
name, purpose, and the harmful effects it has on its citizens. The
similarities between the two visas are no coincidence because world trade
conferences and seminars are held to standardize visas and to harmonize
immigration policies worldwide.

The similarities between the British Tier 2 and the American L-1 don t
stop with just the name. They both have unlimited yearly caps (visas per
year) and neither visa program protects native workers from salary
stagnation or from being replaced by foreign guest workers. Call it
conspiracy, globalism, harmonization, or coincidence but the UK Border
Agency is equivalent to our USCIS, and the UK Home Office is sort of like
our DHS.

The UK Border Agency made a Freudian slip on their website that seems to
tacitly admit that they will give a wink and a nod to employers who use the
visa to replace British workers. On their "How do I sponsor a migrant?" web
page:

Additionally, any migrant entering the United Kingdom under the
tier 2 - intra-company transfer category must not be directly
replacing a settled worker.

Working for your organization for the past six months

You do not have to carry out a resident labour market test before
sponsoring an intra-company transfer. However, a migrant coming
to the United Kingdom on an intra-company transfer must have
been working for your organization for at least six months
directly before their transfer.

In order to understand the contradiction in that statement it s necessary
to understand what a "labour market test" is. The UK Border Agency explains
the test on a page that has has an Orwellian title that is almost funny
because it s soooo not true: "Giving UK-based workers a better chance to
find jobs".

In April 2009, the government tightened the resident labour market
test, which prevents employers from offering skilled jobs to
overseas workers unless workers living in the UK have had a chance
to apply for them first. The test now requires employers to
advertise these jobs in Jobcentre Plus offices for up to two weeks,
as well as advertising them by another method set out in the codes
of practice for their industrial sector.

So, the tests require employers to make attempts to find native workers
before they can hire a foreign worker. Then why isn t one required for
Tier 2 visas? That question is especially important since the same agency
claims that the intra-company transfer "must not be directly replacing a
settled worker". Claims that there are protections for British citizens is
nothing but empty rhetoric -- it s sort of like setting a speed limit for
cars, and then announcing that police will not be able to use equipment to
judge the speed of cars.

The British government likes to do studies, and once their studies are
complete they are ignored by the policy makers that paid for them --
another striking similarity to the U.S.

As an example, the UK Border Agency formed a group called the Migration
Advisory Committee (MAC). They did research studies which came to
preconceived conclusions that British immigration programs are A-OK. WHAT A
SURPRISE!

In August 2009, the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) published a report
titled "Analysis of the Points Based System". In it Ron Hira, a well known
expert on H-1B, offered his opinion on the efficacy of labour market tests:

The US H-1B route has been criticized for using attestation rather
than certification. Hira (2007) argues that the attestation
requirement for H-1B employers is not enforced and that firms are
very rarely audited or investigated.

Attestation, which is a claim made by employers to make good faith efforts
to hire domestic workers, is nothing but empty rhetoric. The advice that
Hira and other experts gave the committee were ignored. Professor David
Metcalf, who is Chair of the MAC, concluded in a press release that the
visa program is working as it should, which disappointedly might actually
be true! He said:

"In our first analysis of the PBS, the committee thinks that Tier 2
is working well, but our advice to the Government is that the
labour market could be helped by requiring higher standards from
skilled workers outside of the EU before we allow them to work in
the UK.
"We believe that selective immigration that favours skilled workers,
as the PBS does, is vital to ensure that the UK continues to be a
good place to do business or invest.
"However, it is important that British workers are not displaced.
We have therefore made a number of recommendations which will help
to avoid undercutting and any disincentives to raise the skills of UK

workers."

The same MAC press release reiterated Metcalf s statement:

The report s main findings:
The structure of Tier 2 is, as a whole, well designed for achieving
its economic aims and for encouraging immigration to adjust to
changing demand over the economic cycle. The MAC does not consider
that it needs to be substantially revised in light of the recession.

MAC says one thing, but the British press gives a whole different story:
Britain s Tier 2 visa is routinely used to replace British workers and to
force wages down -- and there is plenty of complaining going on by British
labour (sorry but after awhile I get used to the English spelling!). Notice
the similarity of the complaints seen in the U.S. media, and the callous
responses from the British government are similar to the indifference of
U.S. politicos.

http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/inside-outsourcing/2010/01/ousted-it-blogger-speaks-out.html
Ousted IT blogger speaks out, January 19, 2010

I was happily working for a well-known UK insurance company until
they outsourced their IT to a well-known Indian BPO provider.
Usual story.

Adding insult to injury, my former colleagues and I were required
to train our Indian replacements before being made redundant.
I remember one as saying that it was rather like being forced to
dig your own grave, kneel in front of it, then take a bullet in
the back of the head" . A tad over dramatic perhaps, but apt
nonetheless.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/support_services/article6975922.ece
Arrival of 30,000 migrant IT workers deprives Britons of jobs ,
January 5, 2010

Tens of thousands of foreign IT workers are being sent to work
for their companies subsidiaries in Britain, sparking fears that
British workers are being denied job opportunities.

Almost 30,000 non-EU technology workers entered the country under
so-called intra-company transfers last year, with the
overwhelming majority coming from India.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/aug/19/skilled-migrant-workers-recession
Labour warned not to cut skilled migrant numbers, 19 August 2009

The UK must not make deep cuts in the number of skilled migrant
workers coming from outside Europe to fill jobs here simply
because of the turmoil in the labour market, government advisers
have warned.

LINKS:

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2010/01/20/furor-in-britain-over-tier-2-visa/

Vdare blog version of newsletter

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/
UK Border Agency

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/
UK Home Office

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/aboutus/workingwithus/indbodies/mac/aboutthemac/
Migration Advisory Committee (MAC)

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/workingwithus/mac/pbsanalysis-09/0809/mac-august-09?view=Binary
Analysis of the Points Based System

ARTICLES COPIED:

http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/inside-outsourcing/2010/01/ousted-it-blogger-speaks-out.html
Ousted IT blogger speaks out

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/support_services/article6975922.ece
Arrival of 30,000 migrant IT workers 'deprives Britons of jobs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8209635.stm
Migration points 'need changes'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/aug/19/skilled-migrant-workers-recession
Labour warned not to cut skilled migrant numbers

http://migration.ucdavis.edu/ceme/more.php?id=107_0_5_0
TLC Final Report, December 1999, Summary

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/employers/points/sponsoringmigrants/sponsorshipduties/tierspecificduties/tier2intracompanytransfer/
How do I sponsor a migrant?

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/managingborders/managingmigration/apointsbasedsystem/uk-workers/
Giving UK-based workers a better chance to find jobs

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/workingwithus/mac/pbsanalysis-09/0809/press-release-190809?view=Binary
Press release: Meeting the needs of British workers while maintaining the
interests of the UK economy

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/inside-outsourcing/2010/01/ousted-it-blogger-speaks-out.html

Ousted IT blogger speaks out
By Karl Flinders on January 19, 2010 11:44 AM | 8 Comments | No TrackBacks

With stories all over the IT press about UK IT workers losing their jobs to
offshore staff we thought it would be good to hear the story from the
horse's as it were.

An IT worker who lost his job at a major financial services business has
agreed to do a series of blogs for us describing life during and after an
Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) changed his life.

From earning over #40,000 a year he gets just over #64 a week. And his
skills are idle.

Here is the first blog in a series:

1 - Situation vacant

By IT Jobseeker

Like Karl Flinders I was glad to see the recent report in The Times
highlighting the loophole in the inter-company transfer system that allows
Indian IT workers into the UK, at the expense of their local counterparts.
I speak from the heart, as well as the wallet: I am just one of many who
have lost their jobs as a result of this abuse.

I was happily working for a well-known UK insurance company until they

outsourced their IT to a well-known Indian BPO provider. Usual story.

Adding insult to injury, my former colleagues and I were required to train
our Indian replacements before being made redundant. I remember one as
saying that it was 'rather like being forced to dig your own grave, kneel
in front of it, then take a bullet in the back of the head...'. A tad over
dramatic perhaps, but apt nonetheless.

According to The Times report, Phil Woolas, the Immigration Minister,
defended the ICT system. He is quoted as saying that the system 'made
Britain an attractive place in which to do business'. This may be true for

Tata and Infosys, but not so for UK Plc. Six months ago I was paying tax

and National Insurance on my #40k + salary; now I receive #64.30 a week
Jobseeker's allowance. Do the sums, Phil.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/support_services/article6975922.ece

January 5, 2010
Arrival of 30,000 migrant IT workers 'deprives Britons of jobs
Indian workers at Tata Consultancy Services

Many of those coming to Britain, the majority of whom are from India, are
employed in low or mid-level posts
Richard Ford, Home Correspondent

Tens of thousands of foreign IT workers are being sent to work for their
companies subsidiaries in Britain, sparking fears that British workers
are being denied job opportunities.

Almost 30,000 non-EU technology workers entered the country under so-called
intra-company transfers last year, with the overwhelming majority coming
from India.

Most of those arriving came for low and mid-level IT jobs where there are
not significant skills shortages among British-born workers, fuelling
suspicion that British workers are losing out to foreign workers who are
being paid lower wages.

Ann Swain, the chief executive of the Association of Professional Staffing
Companies, which represents recruitment companies, said that such transfers
were designed to allow specialists within a particular company to fill
senior positions abroad. But he added that they were being abused to fill
lower level roles in which the skills used are largely standardised.

"Intra-company transfers are being done on an almost industrial scale," she
said.

The system allows international companies to transfer their staff to
Britain without having to advertise a job vacancy here. They are supposed
to pay their employees an equivalent British salary.

Staff can stay in the country for three years with a possible extension of
two years. From next year they will have to work for the company for twelve
rather than six months before being eligible for transfer and will no
longer be able to apply to settle.

A total of 45,000 non-EU foreign workers came to Britain under the scheme
last year -- up from 15,400 when Labour came to power. Almost 70 per cent
of them were Indians, according to Home Office figures.

Damian Green, the Shadow Immigration Minister, said: "It seems
extraordinary that when British workers can t find jobs we are bringing
foreign workers from halfway round the world.

"This is another sign that Gordon Brown s British jobs for British
workers was a meaningless soundbite."

Figures released by the Border and Immigration Agency show that seven of
the top ten companies bringing in IT workers were Indian. Topping the list
is Tata Consultancy Services, which sponsored 4,465 intra-company transfers
last year, followed by Infosys Technology with 3,030.

Many of the applications approved were in low-level jobs, including almost
18,000 in what were described as "other IT-related occupations".

There were 7,430 approved applications for software engineers and 3,470 for
analyst programmers.

Ms Swain said that many of the transfers were for jobs for which there were
not shortages of British workers. She said: "These figures show how easy it
is for foreign companies to bypass the UK labour market."

She added: "Foreign companies are supposed to pay workers brought in on
intra-company transfers UK market rates but you have to wonder whether
there is some economic benefit to transferring Indian workers from a
low-wage economy to Britain."

Tata Consultancy Services, which builds and maintains IT systems for
government departments and British-based firms, said that it needed to
bring in additional staff to meet an increased demand for its services and
expertise.

"Intra-company transfers are temporary, typically only lasting for around
17 months, when the employee will return to their home base.

"Where we can identify the need for a permanent UK-based role then it is
our preference to have UK nationals doing that work," Keith Sharpe, the
European marketing director at Tata, said.

Phil Woolas, the Immigration Minister, defended the transfers, saying that
they made Britain an attractive place in which to do business. He said:
"Workers that come in via this route must display the appropriate level of
earnings and qualifications and the numbers are strictly controlled by the
points-based system, meaning only those the UK needs can come here."

Peter Skyte, the national officer for IT at the trade union Unite,
highlighted the "need to strike the right balance between enabling
employers to recruit or transfer skilled people from abroad and providing
fair access for UK workers".

Infosys did not answer questions put to it by The Times, including whether
it pays its Indian workers "broadly similar" wages to British-born staff as
required under the rules.

A statement said: "As standard practice, we cannot disclose any information
related to wages and employee payment in the UK."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8209635.stm

Wednesday, 19 August 2009

Migration points 'need changes'

The new points-based immigration system for bringing in skilled workers
from outside the EU needs strengthening, a group of economic advisers has
said.

Earning thresholds should be raised and jobs advertised in the UK for
longer, said the Migration Advisory Committee.

Also, arrangements for transfers within firms should be strengthened and
penalties for abusing rules increased.

The Home Office said the government would carefully consider the "robust
and thorough" report.

Job offer

The report concerned itself with "tier two" of the points-based system,
which was introduced last year.

This refers to skilled people who have a job offer - often those who work
in sectors such as health, management, science and finance.

Workers gain points if they would fill gaps in the labour market - the
committee advises ministers on which skills the economy needs.
" It is important that British workers are not displaced "
Prof David Metcalf Committee chairman

Some 50,000 such workers are expected to arrive in the UK this year.

Nearly half of them come from India, but also significant numbers from the
US and Australia.

The committee's chairman, Professor David Metcalf, said tier two was
"working well".

"But our advice to the government is that the labour market could be helped
by requiring higher standards from skilled workers outside of the EU before
we allow them to work in the UK.

"We believe that selective immigration that favours skilled workers, as the
PBS [points-based system] does, is vital to ensure that the UK continues to
be a good place to do business or invest.

"However, it is important that British workers are not displaced. We have
therefore made a number of recommendations which will help to avoid
undercutting and any disincentives to raise the skills of UK workers."

Recommendations include:

Specific qualfications should be seen as equivalent to NVQ level 3, or

bachelors or masters degree level

Workers should earn #20,000 and those without qualifications at least

#32,000

There should be a new category for key public workers

Adverts for vacancies should be increased to four weeks.

Home Office Minister Lord West said the points-based system had "proven
itself to be a powerful and flexible tool in meeting the needs of the
British workforce and business in these changing economic times.

"From the outset we demonstrated that flexibility by putting a stop to low
skilled labour entering the UK from outside Europe.

"In light of the economic downturn we have taken further steps to be more
selective of migrants that come to the UK and to give resident workers
every opportunity to fill vacancies.

"The MAC has delivered a robust and thorough report and the government will
consider it carefully over the coming weeks."

But shadow immigration minister Damian Green said there was "one big gap"
in the system.

"There is no overall limit on how many permits can be issued in any one
year. This is why the public has a lack of confidence in the immigration
system, which people regard as being out of control," he said.

"This is why a Conservative government would introduce an annual limit, so
that Britain can continue to attract those who will help our economy
without putting too much pressure on our essential public services."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/aug/19/skilled-migrant-workers-recession

19 August 2009

Labour warned not to cut skilled migrant numbers

The UK must not make deep cuts in the number of skilled migrant workers
coming from outside Europe to fill jobs here simply because of the turmoil
in the labour market, government advisers have warned.

The government's migration advisory committee (Mac) resoundingly rejected
the idea as a response to the economic downturn.

Professor David Metcalf, chair of the committee, said todaythat selective
immigration which favoured more skilled workers was vital to ensure that
Britain was still thought of as a good place to do business, invest or
study. But he said that the rules for skilled migrants in the government's
points-based immigration system needed to be tightened to ensure that
British workers were not being undercut or displaced in the labour market.

The report yesterday on the operation of tier two -- the skilled workers
category for those from outside the EU -- followed a request in February
from Jacqui Smith when she was home secretary asking if there was a case to
restrict skilled migration to just those jobs where there was a shortage of
labour.

The flow of skilled migrants has already started to fall since the
recession began to bite. A total 69,000 skilled workers from outside Europe
came to Britain under the old work permit system last year and it is
estimated that about 50,000 will arrive this year under tier two of the new
points system which came into force last November.

More than 60% came as part of "intra-company" transfers of staff by
multinationals, principally Indian-based IT companies. A further 32%
involved jobs that had gone through the resident labour market test and
been advertised in a jobcentreplus first and only 8% involved jobs in
occupations with a shortfall of skilled labour.

Metcalf said the changes in the rules the committee was proposing were not
a "knee-jerk reaction to the recession" and would be needed whatever the
state of the economy.

The committee's analysis published today shows that for the first time in
recent years there is a net outflow from Britain of non-European migrants
who either had a definite job or were looking for work. The figures show
that even in 2007, before the recession broke, 18,000 more skilled migrants
left Britain than arrived. That number is expected to have increased last
year.

"The Mac believes that, ideally, the points-based system should act as an
automatic stabiliser and not be constantly adjusted in response to the
economic cycle," Metcalf said in his foreword to the report.

He said it was important that both the "resident labour market test" and
the intra-company routes were kept: "But any positive narrative surrounding
immigration will be undermined unless it can be demonstrated that
immigrants are not displacing or undercutting UK workers. Nor should such
immigrants provide a disincentive to upskill the UK workforce.

We have made a number of recommendations which, if adopted, will help
ensure that such displacement, undercutting or disincentive to upskill does
not occur," wrote Metcalf.

The report says the number of work permits issued for "intra-company
transfers" rose from about 16,000 foreign nationals in 2000 to 23,000 last
year and mostly involved Indian companies in the IT sector.

Metcalf suggested the rules should be tightened to deny any route to
citizenship for these migrants, a requirement that they have been with
their company for at least 12 months rather than the current six months and
a longer period required for the vacancy to be advertised in Britain first.

The effect of the last recommendation which would double the period
from two weeks to four weeks would mean that all jobs have to be
advertised. This is an idea which has already prompted a promise of
exemptions for senior posts in blue-chip companies by the immigration
minister, Phil Woolas.

The Conservative immigration spokesman, Damian Green, said the one big gap
in the points-based system was the lack of any overall limit on the number
of permits that could be issued in any one year.

Key changes

All vacancies to be advertised first at UK jobcentre for four weeks

instead of two.

Earnings entry threshold raised to #24,000 for a graduate skilled

migrant.

Professional as well as academic qualifications to be counted towards

migrant points total.

Five extra points for filling a vacancy in key public sector job, such

as teaching.

Minimum service with overseas company in intra-company transfer

extended from six to 12 months.

No right to apply for permanent residence for intra-company transfers.

Intra-company transfers to be more closely monitored to curb abuse.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://migration.ucdavis.edu/ceme/more.php?id=107_0_5_0

TLC Final Report, December 1999, Summary

SUMMARY OF POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

IMMIGRATION POLICIES

There is an increasing convergence of migration issues to be addresses by
western States, and an increasing convergence of solutions adopted.
Governments should continue to strive to harmonize immigration policies
within Europe and across the Atlantic. Greater transparency in immigration
policy will ensure greater consistency and credibility. Harmonization in
collection of data about immigrants, using agreed upon definitions, will
facilitate transparency and consistency.

Recommendations regarding admission policies include:

Family Reunification. Governments should give priority to the reunification
of nuclear families without setting specific numerical limits/quotas on
these admissions. Eligibility should extend to the nuclear families of
citizens and legal immigrants alike. Family reunification of minor children
should take place as quickly as possible.

Asylum. Continued adherence to the principles of the 1951 Convention
Relating to the Status of Refugees should be the cornerstone of refugee
policy. European and North American governments should seek further
harmonization of the substantive criteria for asylum. To protect bonafide
refugees while deterring abuse of the asylum system, governments should:
enhance exchange of information on conditions in countries of origin;
ensure that asylum decisions are taken by competent authorities;
increase the timeliness and efficiency of asylum procedures;
reduce use of detention for asylum seekers who meet minimum criteria (e.g.,
manifestly unfounded or credible fear tests) and are not a threat to public
safety;
adopt procedures through which those with a well-founded fear of
persecution may request admission to a country of destination while they
are still within their countries of origin; and
improve the capacity to repatriate asylum seekers whose claims to refugee
or other humanitarian status are refused.

Others in Need of Protection. Harmonization of temporary protection
policies during mass influxes is a high priority for policy makers in
Europe and North America. Harmonization should include the following
elements:
Governments may (but have no obligation) to defer decisions on individual
status for a short and reasonable period in the case of mass influx.
If the emergency causing the mass influx continues beyond the short and
reasonable period, an individual status determination procedure should be
instituted. Asylum should be granted to persons meeting the Convention
criteria, and a complementary status should be granted to those whose
return would otherwise endanger them.

Governments should develop mechanisms through which the financial costs of
providing temporary protection are shared. In addition, the credibility of
temporary protection requires concerted efforts to repatriate those granted
this status as soon as conditions in the country of origin permit safe and
orderly return. Provisions should be made, however, for alternate solutions
(permanent settlement in the host country or resettlement in a third
country) if conditions preventing repatriation prevail for more than a
determined period (e.g., five to seven years).

High-Skilled Migration. Policies regulating admission of high skilled
immigrants should provide incentives to foreign students and workers to
invest in their home countries. For example, foreign workers from
developing countries should be able to take assignments in their home
country without jeopardizing the ability to return to their new country.
Governments must enhance the benefits of high skilled migration for both
countries of origin and destination. In addition, admission policies should
balance the interest of business in having access to a global labor market
and the interest of domestic workers in gaining protection against unfair
competition from foreign workers.

Lesser-Skilled Migration. Seasonal worker programs should be implemented
only under certain conditions:
there is an adequate level of control over unauthorized entry and work;
incentives are in place for employers to hire domestic workers or take
other actions, such as mechanization, to reduce dependence on foreign
workers; and
bilateral agreements enlist the cooperation of source countries in curbing
illegal movements and readmitting their nationals.

A credible immigration policy necessitates controls over entry. The control
mechanisms must be consistent, however, with the values embraced by liberal
democracies.

Visa and Border Control Policies. Governments should continue to give
priority to visa and border control policies that facilitate legal
admissions while deterring unauthorized entry. Policies needed to help
ensure that visa requirements and border control balance the twin goals of
facilitation and control include:
formal, independent review of visa decisions, particularly when a citizen,
resident legal immigrant, or domestic business is seriously affected by a
negative decision;
coordination and cooperation between the European and North American visa
and border control information systems;
appeals processes for persons whose names appear without due cause on
information systems used to establish eligibility for admission (either in
visa issuance or border controls); and
harmonization of the rules implemented to sanction carriers who violate
their immigration related responsibilities (harmonization of the amount of
the fines, of potential imprisonment and of the payment of the costs
related to repatriation of those without permission to enter).

Anti-smuggling/Anti-trafficking Activities. There is urgent need for
enhanced cooperation of European and North American governments in
combating alien smuggling and trafficking.
Sanctions against Employers. Governments should assist bonafide employers
to determine if applicants are authorized to work by: 1) specifying a
limited number of counterfeit-resistant identification documents to be used
to establish work authorization, and 2) facilitating employer access, under
appropriate safeguards, to information systems that can be used to verify
the authenticity of the specified documents. The most effective sanctions
target enforcement against businesses that purposefully hire unauthorized
migrants, with special attention to those who violate immigration as well
as labor laws.

Detention Policies. Governments should seek to harmonize administrative
detention policies. Harmonization could include the following components:
1) prioritization of those to be detained, with top priority given to
detaining those who are a threat to public safety, recidivists who have
demonstrated that they are likely to abscond if released, and persons who
have already been ordered deported and can be removed within a reasonably
short time; and 2) imposition of reasonable time limits on detention.

RELATIONS WITH SENDING COUNTRIES

Governments should continue to foster bilateral and multilateral
cooperation on the management of international migration. Because of the
complex factors within both source and destination countries that motivate
and sustain migration, cooperation in the management of international
migration makes a great deal of sense.

Migration, Trade and Development. Governments should link trade and
migration discussions explicitly, recognizing that closer cooperation on
economic issues can also lay the basis for cooperation on migration. They
should also use closer economic integration to create forums to discuss
migration issues. Governments should target efforts to reduce emigration
from particular geographic areas within source countries.

Governments should seek to maximize the development payoff of remittances
and migrant returns, for example, by fostering investments in projects that
will create jobs and make migration unnecessary.

Managing Shared Land Borders. Managing migration across shared land borders
must facilitate legal crossings (that is, for trade, investment, tourism,
family visits and consumer activities) while deterring unauthorized entry.
A number of practices can help facilitate legal and prevent unauthorized
entries across shared borders:
issuing border crossing cards that serve as multiple entry visas (for
example, up to 25 miles and 72 hours inside the US) for residents of border
areas who are most likely to commute;
cooperating with neighboring countries to develop Dedicated Commuter Lanes
for frequent border crossers;
increasing staffing at border crossing points to reduce waits for entry;
adding agents, fences, lights and other devices to deter unauthorized
entries between ports of entry;
promoting cooperative policing in border areas, as occurs with German and
Polish Border Patrol agents volunteering to patrol jointly along the
German-Polish border; and
permitting visa-free entry for border residents, linked to agreements that
the country sharing the border will cooperate in preventing the entry of
third country nationals across the shared border.

Neighboring countries should institute regular consultations involving all
levels of government as well as the private sector in border communities to
discuss ways to foster cooperation and to make explicit any linkages
between trade, aid, and migration.

ECONOMIC, CIVIC AND SOCIAL INTEGRATION

There is urgent need for North American and European countries to take
action to address barriers to full economic, social and civic incorporation
of legal immigrants residing in their communities. Although other barriers
to full integration exist, discrimination against foreigners remains a
major problem that must be addressed.

Economic Integration. Governments and the private sector should take
immediate action to improve the economic integration of immigrants in
Europe and North America. The following strategies help immigrants overcome
the barriers to economic integration. Examples of such approaches can be
found on both sides of the Atlantic, attesting to their broad
applicability.
literacy, host country language acquisition, and basic skills upgrading for
both new arrivals and immigrants already residing in host countries.
Special attention should be given to the children of immigrants to help
ensure that educational barriers do not persist into the second and third
generation;
programs to stimulate immigrant business development and help immigrant
entrepreneurs to do more effective planning, comply with labor, tax, and
other business requirements, identify sources of capital and otherwise take
the steps needed to operate successful enterprises;
efforts to combat racism and discrimination at the workplace and encourage
businesses to make positive efforts to recruit immigrant workers; and
eliminating unnecessary and inappropriate restrictions that limit certain
jobs to citizens.

Civic Incorporation. European and North American countries should take
immediate steps to encourage naturalization by:
reducing legal and administrative barriers to citizenship; and
facilitating citizenship for children born to immigrants in host countries.
Beyond facilitating citizenship, countries should adopt programs to help
empower new citizens to participate fully in the civic, social, and
economic life of their host societies.

Social and Community Relations. National authorities should work closely
with local communities to facilitate the social integration of immigrants
and to reduce community tensions that may arise. Strategies used on both
sides of the Atlantic to improve community relations include:
educational programs to promote tolerance;
programs to orient new immigrants to accepted ways of life in the host
society;
conflict mediation programs;
vigorous prosecution of hate crimes and similar offenses committed against
immigrants because of their race, nationality or religion;
programs to build positive relations between immigrants and the police; and
reduction in discrimination against immigrants.

Exchange of Best Integration Practices. Governments should expand
opportunities to share their experiences in facilitating the economic,
civic and social integration of immigrants.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.socialresearch.no/About-ISF/News/Seminar-Harmonization-in-the-European-Union-Asylum-irregular-migration-and-integration

Seminar: "Harmonization in the European Union: Asylum, irregular migration
and integration"

Tuesday 15 December 2009

On November 24 2009, the Institute for Social Research hosted a seminar on
asylum policies, irregular migration and integration in the EU.

.

.

1. Programme

10.00-10.15 Opening comments (Jan-Paul Brekke)
10.15-11.15 Towards a Common European Asylum System - an Update (Vigdis
Vevstad)
11.15-11.30 Coffee break
11.30-12.15 Irregular migration in Europe (Ryszard Cholewinski)
12.15-12.45 Lunch
12.45-13.30 Integration efforts in Europe (Sergio Carrera)
13.30-13.45 Coffee break
13.45-14.30 A common European integration policy - in Sweden (Christian
Rebergh)
14.30-15.00 European integration policies - a Norwegian perspective
(Katarina Heradstveit)

2. Summary

The conference was held at the Institute of Social Research (ISF) in Oslo
on 24 November 2009. It was initiated and organised by Vigdis Vevstad and
Jan-Paul Brekke for the third consecutive year with financial support from
the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The purpose of the conference is
to create a meeting point for researchers, NGOs and government officials,
and to discuss the harmonization of asylum and immigration policies in the
EU. This year, the main topic was irregular migration and integration.

Present were more than 50 representatives from the Norwegian parliament,
governmental institutions (including the EU Commission Delegation, Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Labour and Social
Inclusion, Directorate of Immigration, Immigration Appeals Board and
Country of Origin Information Centre), NGOs (including Norwegian
Organisation of Asylum Seekers, Amnesty International, and Norwegian
People`s Aid) and academia (including the University of Oslo, ISF,
International Peace Research Institute in Oslo and FAFO Institute). The
broad participation reflected the wide interest in field of migration and
integration.

The conference benefited greatly from the presence of Vigdis Vevstad
(Vevstad Consulting), Katarina Heradstveit (Senior advisor, The Directorate
of Immigration and Diversity), Ryszard Cholewinski (Labour Migration
Specialist, Research and Communication, IOM), Sergio Carrera (Head of
Section and Research Fellow, Centre for European Policy Studies), and
Christian Rebergh (National Coordinator, Swedish National Network Asylum
& Integration).

Summaries of presentations

Vigdis Vevstad - "Towards a Common European Asylum System - an Update"

Vigdis Vevstad presented the main legal instruments in CEAS and highlighted
the key developments in 2009. She noted that the same ambitions and
protection concerns underlying Dublin II regulation were present in the
discussion on Dublin III. She addressed the existing flaws and deficiencies
in the current legal framework, in particular the derogation clauses in the
Procedures Directives, which remains the most contested directive. The
evaluation of the common European asylum systems reveals that there is
still a long way to go before asylum policies and practices are harmonized.
The divergent national practices lead to significant differences in the
recognition rate, causing inequalities in the level of protection across
the EU. This was clearly the case for Afghan, Iraqi and Chechen asylum
seekers. Amendments have been proposed by the Commission. It depends on the
will of the member states. There had been some positive achievements. She
pointed to the fact that the Qualification Directive represents a
development of international law in many ways (non state actors, gender
based persecution, best interest of the child and subsidiary protection).

Two preliminary conclusions could be drawn. First, the different
interpretations and derogation clauses allow the member states to maintain
their national policies and interests. There is a lack of harmonization,
both in terms of recognition and reception conditions. This should be a
concern for Norway when considering our obligations under Dublin II.
Second, asylum, immigration and border control policies should be seen in
context. A comprehensive approach is needed.

Furthermore, she emphasized that asylum policies in neighbouring EU member
states are relevant for Norway. There is need for cooperation. She briefly
touched upon the Norwegian viewpoints on the Stockholm programme, European
Asylum Support Office etc.

She addressed various aspects of the Stockholm programme, which will
determine the asylum policies from 2010 to 2014, in particular the
cooperation with the Mediterranean countries outside EU, access to
procedures, resettlement and internal relocation in EU. There is a need for
greater solidarity and burden-sharing between member states, supporting
those members who are overburdened due to their geographical location. She
mentioned that UK and the Netherlands had recently accepted asylum seekers
from Malta. Although it was a relatively small number, it was an example of
the emerging cooperation between the states.

She concluded that until we have one asylum body and one procedure, there
will be different state practices. The Court could have some impact. But
the practices and policies are still left to the discretion of the states.
There is a need to ensure a higher degree of harmonization and better
substantive and procedural standards of protection, for example through the
European Asylum Support Office. While important progress has been made, the
work must continue in the next phase of CEAS to establish a real level
playing field across the EU, where all asylum seekers will be treated in
the same way with high standards, wherever in the EU they make their asylum
claim. The future CEAS need to be comprehensive and coherent.

Ryszard Cholewinski "Irregular migration in Europe".

Ryszard Cholewinski made a presentation on irregular migration in Europe.
He raised concerns about the negative and misleading term "illegal
migrants", which is manifested in the principal EU instruments, e.g. Return
Directive and Frontex regulation, and the Stockholm programme. Language
matters. The terminology tends to criminalize and stigmatize migrants, and
generate stereotypes. A fundamental right is to be recognized as a person
everywhere before the law. He underlined the need for neutral wording and
preferred the expression "irregular migrants", which is used by the
Commission s October 2008 Communication on "Strengthening the Global
Approach to Migration" and by other international organizations dealing
with migration.

He discussed the inevitable linkage between irregular and regular
migration, and the recent developments in law and policymaking, in
particular Blue Card Directive. A great deal of policy attention tends to
fall on the highly qualified workers. The "blue card" scheme is designed to
attract highly-qualified workers from third countries. Most skilled
migrants prefer US, Canada or Australia to EU. He emphasized that the Blue
card scheme is optional. There is no obligation on the member states to
replace their own schemes with the Blue card. He raised the question
whether the Blue Card system will meet expectations of third countries in
terms of regular migration to the EU.

He commented on the Commission proposal for a General Framework Directive
on a single application procedure for a single permit for third-country
nationals to work and reside in member states. It would encompass admission
of low and semi-skilled workers. However, there is no obligation on the
states to admit such workers. The bottom line is that if demand for
low-skilled workers is not met, employers will turn to the informal labour
market, which is also pole of attraction for irregular migrants.

He discussed the human rights dimension of irregular migration. There are
currently no legally binding EU instruments devoted to protection of all
migrants irrespective of their status. EU measures are silent on the rights
of third-country nationals who work in the EU without authorization. They
must rely on international human rights instruments (e.g. ECHR) or the
goodwill of local authorities and NGOs. The 1990 Migrant Workers Convention
affords fundamental rights to all migrant workers and would increase the
standards in EU. However, it has not been ratified by a single EU or EEA
state.

He addressed the management of mixed flows, which are particularly visible
in the Mediterranean (Lampedusa, Malta) and Eastern Atlantic (Canary
Islands). Focus is often on asylum-seekers and refugees, but mixed flows
also comprise other vulnerable groups. When no explicit legal framework for
protection of the rights of all migrants in EU, it is difficult to envisage
how asylum-seekers, refugees as well as particularly vulnerable migrants in
mixed flows can be adequately assisted and protected.

His conclusion was that politicians often find themselves between a "rock"
(of fundamental human rights standards applicable to all) and the "hard
place" (of negative media and public opinion). There is still room for
policymakers to engage on the issue of irregular migration. This should be
done in a positive, honest and holistic manner.

Sergio Carrera - "Integration efforts in Europe"

Sergio Carrera presented his perspectives on integration in Europe and
focused in particular on the new concept and legal implication of
integration as a control mechanism.

The notion of integration has traditionally been perceived as something
positive - promoting social inclusion, equal treatment and access to
rights. However, it has evolved ("mutated") into a condition or derogation
clause for access to member states - a way to maintain and justify
restrictive immigration policies towards certain groups of immigrants.
Civic integration is a condition to acquire regular residence status and
access to family reunion, not only citizenship. Migrants must demonstrate
their knowledge and respect for traditions, institutions and values in the
member state the national identity and perceived way of life
through programmes, tests and "contracts". These programmes and tests have
become part of the national implementation of EU immigration law (see for
example Family Reunification Directive article 7). Integration is still a
national domain. There are no legally binding EU policies on integration,
only handbooks, guidelines and recommendations. Civic integration
programmes are also promoted outside EU in consulates and embassies,
where third-country nationals are required to do tests and courses before
entering the member states. When looking at the driving force behind these
policies at EU level, he pointed to the decisive role of certain member
states, like Germany, The Netherlands and Austria.

He expressed deep concerns about the legality of these programmes. There
are several legal deficits related to the principles of proportionality,
non-discrimination and legal certainty. First, the proportionality of the
civic integration tests is highly questionable in countries where the
requirements to acquire a legal permit to stay are as high as those applied
to future citizens. The mandatory civic integration measures affect
migrants in a rather disproportionate manner. They will often need a more
comprehensive understanding of the state s institutions and values than
many its citizens. Second, the tests and programmes are primarily designed
for certain immigrant groups and can therefore be perceived as
discriminatory. This is underlined by the exceptions to the civic test for
immigrants from US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan (etc) and for the
highly skilled workers. Is it really true that a US citizens or highly
skilled worker share our values, while others do not? Third, the concept of
national "values" is by definition vague and subject to divergent
interpretations and ideologies. The standards are not sufficiently clear
and predictable to meet the principle of legal certainty.

Christian Rebergh - "A common European integration policy - in Sweden"

Christian Rebergh made a presentation on the European integration
policies from a Swedish perspective. He stated that Sweden had made a
U-turn in terms of CEAS and raised the question whether Sweden had made a
J-turn in terms of integration.

He provided an overview of the historic background by referring to the
number of immigrants in Sweden from 1900-2001, the employment rate for
foreign citizens in the last three decades and the early intgration
policies. The Swedish government had started reacting to clashes with other
cultures in the mid-1970s with realistic legislation supported by all
parties, which made it possible to consistently integrate foreign-born
citizens. Key elements of the policy were equal access to the Swedish
social welfare system and full integration into communities. In 1992 Sweden
won the Carl Bertelsmann Prize for this progressive immigration and
integration policies.

He ran briefly through the European integration policies from Tampere in
1999 to Stockholm in 2009 and addressed the civic dimension of integration.
Civic integration implies respect for the basic values of EU. Basic
knowledge of language, history, and institutions was considered
indispensable to integration. There were new demands, for example in France
for a "contract", the Netherlands for test and courses and tests and in UK
for "Britishness".

He referred to the European Year for intercultural dialogue, which was
supposed to improve communication and understanding between citizens,
cultures and religions in Europe. Although culture can include values,
customs, traditions, language and norms, it is hard to define. What is
"culture"? As he demonstrated, the perception of culture differs greatly
from state to state.

In recent years, Sweden has transformed. The traditional focus had been on
access to employment. However, the Swedish government had introduced a
shared set of values. The aim was to strengthen the social cohesion the
respect between individuals and enhance the knowledge about and the respect
for democracy and human rights. The mandatory social and civic orientation
courses require an understanding of what it takes to live in the Swedish
society, and is supposed to give a sort of social and cultural "driving
licence". Had Sweden made a j-turn? Had Sweden spoken with a forked tongue?
There were clear discrepancies between the national policies and the
Swedish input in the Stockholm programme. In the Stockholm programme,
Sweden had emphazised that access to employment is central to successful
integration. However, the national programmes were focused on values,
traditions, culture and civic education.

Katarina Heradstveit - "European integration policies - a Norwegian
perspective"

Katarina Heradstveit examined the various aspects of Norwegian integration
policies. She noted that access to work had been a main priority. The
preservation of welfare state and social cohesian was also important. In
principle, all immigrants should have the same rights and opportunities.
However, this was not always the reality. Furthermore, she referred to
surveys which indicated that many Norwegian are sceptical to Islamic
traditions. She also mentioned that there is today a development towards
more obligations on immigrants.

A major component in the integration policies are the mandatory
introduction programme for newly-arrived refugees. The programme was
established in 2004. It had been quite effective. 53% of the participants
continue with work or education after the programme. This would help the
immigrants to participate actively in the society. However, she believed
that there is room for improvement. The integration system could be better
towards women. She also mentioned a recent OECD report where the government
had received some critizism. She briefly touched upon the cash benefit for
parents staying at home with children ("kontantstxtte") and the symbolic,
welcoming ceremony for new citizen. Although it would not make them fully
integrated, it was still a nice event.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/employers/points/sponsoringmigrants/sponsorshipduties/tierspecificduties/tier2intracompanytransfer/

How do I sponsor a migrant?

Tier 2 - intra-company transfer
Tier-specific duties

This page explains the duties you have as a sponsor under the tier 2 -
intra-company transfer category of the points-based system.

On this page

* Your sponsor duties when assigning a certificate of sponsorship
* Working for your organisation for the past six months
* Appropriate salary level - exchange rate and allowances

Your sponsor duties when assigning a certificate of sponsorship

Before you assign a certificate of sponsorship you must make sure that:

* the migrant has been working for your organisation, either inside the

United Kingdom as an intra-company transferee or outside the United
Kingdom, for at least six months directly before the transfer;

* the job is at S/NVQ skill level 3 or above; and
* the migrant will be paid the appropriate salary rate for the job.

Additionally, any migrant entering the United Kingdom under the tier 2 -
intra-company transfer category must not be directly replacing a settled
worker.

back to top
Working for your organisation for the past six months

You do not have to carry out a resident labour market test before
sponsoring an intra-company transfer. However, a migrant coming to the
United Kingdom on an intra-company transfer must have been working for your
organisation for at least six months directly before their transfer.

This work can have been done inside or outside the United Kingdom, or a
combination of both. However, if any of it was done inside the United
Kingdom, the migrant must have had permission to work for you as a tier 2 -
intra-company transfer migrant and/or as an intra-company transfer work
permit holder.

The only exception to this six-month rule occurs where the migrant has been
on maternity, paternity or adoption leave during the previous six months.
If this is the case, and you have employed the migrant for at least six
months in the last 18 months, they can still be employed in this category
as long as they meet all the other requirements.

When they make their tier 2 - intra-company transfer application, the
migrant may have to send us evidence of that they have been working for you
over the previous six months. Evidence may take the form of:

* payslips for the past six months; or
* personal bank or building society statements covering the past six

months; or

* a building society pass book.

If the migrant sends payslips, you may have to certify them. They should be
either formal payslips or on company-headed paper. If payslips are on
unheaded paper or are printouts of online payslips, the migrant will have
to send us a letter from you confirming the payslips' authenticity. This
letter must be on company-headed paper and signed by a senior official.

back to top
Appropriate salary level - exchange rate and allowances

The migrant must be paid the appropriate salary rate for the job, which
must be at or above S/NVQ level 3.

Salary may be paid in the United Kingdom or abroad. If the migrant will be
paid abroad in a currency other than pounds sterling, the salary amount
entered on the certificate of sponsorship will be based on the exchange
rate for that currency on the day the certificate is assigned, taken from
the rates published on the currency website Oanda.

When calculating the migrant's total salary for the purposes of awarding
points and assessing whether the salary passes the 'appropriate rate' test,
we will take account of:

* basic pay excluding overtime; and
* allowances (daily payments to cover the additional cost of living

while the migrant is in the United Kingdom, but not expenses to cover
travel between the source country and the United Kingdom).

If an allowance is made available solely for accommodation purposes
(whether in cash or in kind), the maximum that the allowance can contribute
to the total gross salary package is 30%. If the accommodation allowance
accounts for more than 30% of total gross salary, we will disregard the
excess.

However, we will allow the accommodation alllowance to contribute up to 40%
of total gross salary in situations where:

* you have issued a certificate of sponsorship for 12 months or less to

a migrant who is applying from outside the United Kingdom; or

* the migrant is applying for an extension from with in the United

Kingdom, but their total stay here will still be 12 months or less.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/managingborders/managingmigration/apointsbasedsystem/uk-workers/

Giving UK-based workers a better chance to find jobs

In April 2009, the government tightened the resident labour market test,
which prevents employers from offering skilled jobs to overseas workers
unless workers living in the UK have had a chance to apply for them first.
The test now requires employers to advertise these jobs in Jobcentre Plus
offices for up to two weeks, as well as advertising them by another method
set out in the codes of practice for their industrial sector.

Advertising jobs in Jobcentre Plus is straightforward and free of charge -
employers can submit their advertisements online, by email, by fax or over
the phone, in a process that can take as little as five minutes.

The resident labour market test is part of the UK's points-based system,
which ensures that migrants from outside Europe have the skills we need.
The test covers skilled jobs such as primary school teachers, some nurses,
architects, farm managers, hotel managers, graphic designers and air
traffic controllers. An employer must take the test before they recruit a
migrant through Tier 2 (General) of the points-based system, unless the
vacancy is included on the shortage occupation list.

To coincide with the tightening of the test, the UK Border Agency launched
an advertising campaign to make sure that employers knew their
responsibilities.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/workingwithus/mac/pbsanalysis-09/0809/press-release-190809?view=Binary

Meeting the needs of British workers while maintaining the interests of the
UK economy, the Migration Advisory Committee recommends today

Immigration plays an important role in supporting the UK economy the
Migration Advisory Committee s (MAC) report into the workings of Tier 2
of the Points Based System (PBS) highlights.
However, the report recommends that the earnings thresholds for gaining
points should be raised, jobs should be advertised within the UK for longer
and the arrangements for intra-company transfers should be strengthened.
Strong monitoring and enforcement of Tier 2 is also required.
Sponsored skilled workers from outside the EU can work in the UK under Tier
2 of the PBS. This gives British workers priority on all advertised jobs,
but where British workers are not available, Tier 2 will let companies
employ people from outside of the EU, making sure that there are no skill
gaps in the British economy.
Chair of the Migration Advisory Committee, Professor David Metcalf said:

In our first analysis of the PBS, the committee thinks that Tier 2 is

working well, but our advice to the Government is that the labour market
could be helped by requiring higher standards from skilled workers outside
of the EU before we allow them to work in the UK.

We believe that selective immigration that favours skilled workers, as

the PBS does, is vital to ensure that the UK continues to be a good place
to do business or invest.

However, it is important that British workers are not displaced. We have

therefore made a number of recommendations which will help to avoid
undercutting and any disincentives to raise the skills of UK workers.
The report s main findings:
The structure of Tier 2 is, as a whole, well designed for achieving its
economic aims and for encouraging immigration to adjust to changing demand
over the economic cycle. The MAC does not consider that it needs to be
substantially revised in light of the recession.
The MAC recommends that all routes in Tier 2 remain in place. However, it
does recommend that some changes are made and that the UK Border Agency
(UKBA) considers whether there are enough resources devoted to enforcement
and the penalties for employers are sufficient.
The MAC was not asked to make recommendations on the economic contribution
of dependants of PBS immigrants but found that, on the basis of the
available evidence, they tend to be skilled individuals employed in
unskilled or lesser skilled occupations. There was not sufficient evidence
to enable the MAC to conclude if dependents had made an impact on UK
workers and this requires further research.
The following recommendations are made with regard to the design and
operation of Tier 2:

UKBA considers whether specific professional qualifications should be
regarded as equivalent to National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) level 3,
or bachelors or masters degree level when allocating points under the PBS;

masters degree be awarded 15 points in Tier 2, instead of the current 10
points;

a requirement that migrant workers outside of the EU will earn #20,000
and workers without qualifications earn at least #32,000

a new category to be established for key public service workers, with an
added 5 points.
In terms of the Resident Labour Market Test route the MAC recommends that:

the route be kept in place;

the required duration of vacancy advertising be increased to four weeks for
all jobs;

the Government considers the scope for introducing a certification regime
for at least those employers identified as high risk.
In terms of the intra-company transfer route the MAC recommends that:

the route be kept in place;

the route should not lead to a right to permanent residence;

the qualifying period with the company overseas is extended from 6 to 12
months;

a separate scheme is created for graduates only which would require 3
months prior experience with the company, but with a maximum stay in the UK
of 12 months; and

the Government gives consideration to whether the level of resource
currently being devoted to enforcement of the intra-company transfers route
is sufficient and whether the degree of transparency around enforcement of
the system could be increased.
Notes to editors:
For an on-line copy of the report, please following the below web address:
www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/mac
Click here for biogs of the MAC chair and members:
www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/mac
For further details on Tier 2 please follow the below web address:
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/workingintheuk/tier2/

Newsletter Homepage:
http://www.JobDestruction.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm

Support this Newsletter and www.JobDestruction.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Be removed from this mailing list, reply to this
email with UNSUbSCRIBE in the subject window

Back to archives