European Employment Law Update 2020

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

European Employment Law Update 2020 EUROPEAN EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATE 2020 EDITION INTRODUCTION Our annual Employment In the 2020 edition of our European security contributions were also a hot Law Update aims to help Employment Law Update, we look topic with Cyprus’ Social Insurance organisations with a pan- at the most important legislative Fund and Belgium’s National Social changes from 2019, focusing Security Office strengthening their European presence keep on those that are likely to affect positions following a Supreme Court up-to-date with changes to businesses in the coming year. This decision. We also see some positive legislation and best practice. guide compiles updates from 34 progress on parental leave in Estonia, leading law firms and aims to assist Ireland, the UK, and in Austria ‘daddy organisations with a pan-European month’ has been introduced. In presence in keeping up-to-date Romania, employees undergoing with changes to legislation and best IVF now receive an additional, paid, practice. three-day rest leave per year. We continue to see jurisdictions We do hope that you find the latest across Europe dealing with a variety edition of the update useful. We have of employment law issues, from included contact details for all those implementing changes in relation to who have contributed, so please feel discrete laws to managing political free to contact any of our contributors uncertainty, and introducing or if you have any questions or require preparing for more substantial further information. changes to underlying labour law frameworks. Neil Maclean, Shepherd and There are a number of similarities Wedderburn LLP, Head of across the jurisdictions involved Employment in the update. Regulation on the taxation of independent contractors has been introduced in both the UK This brochure contains a summary of general and Russia. Another common theme principles of law. It is not a substitute for specific legal advice, which should be sought is holiday entitlement including new in relation to any application of the subject acts in Denmark and Finland. Social matter of this brochure. 2 CONTENTS FINLAND PAGE 11 ICELAND NORWAY PAGE 16 PAGE 24 SWEDEN PAGE 32 ESTONIA PAGE 10 DENMARK LATVIA PAGE 9 PAGE 19 RUSSIA PAGE 28 UK PAGE 36 IRELAND PAGE 17 POLAND NETHERLANDS PAGE 25 PAGE 22 LITHUANIA BELGIUM PAGE 20 GERMANY PAGE 5 PAGE 13 UKRAINE AUSTRIA PAGE 35 PAGE 4 FRANCE CZECH PAGE 12 REPUBLIC PAGE 8 HUNGARY SWITZERLAND PAGE 15 PAGE 33 ROMANIA PAGE 27 SLOVENIA PAGE 30 SERBIA PAGE 29 SPAIN PAGE 31 BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA PAGE 6 NORTH TURKEY PORTUGAL MACEDONIA PAGE 34 PAGE 26 PAGE 23 CYPRUS GREECE PAGE 7 PAGE 14 ITALY PAGE 18 MONTENEGRO PAGE 21 AUSTRIA Personal holiday entitled to another personal holiday in the after the end of their period of paternity On 22 January 2019, the European current holiday year. The day worked is not leave. Court of Justice ruled that the Austrian considered a holiday and has no effect on During the Daddy Month the employer is legislation under which Good Friday is a their remaining holiday entitlement. not obliged to continue to pay the father. public holiday only for employees who are Recognition of maternity/ The father may, however, be entitled to state members of certain Christian churches, paternity leave benefits under certain circumstances. and consequently only these employees (if On 1 August 2019, an amendment to the required to work on that public holiday) are Maternity Protection Act came into force. entitled to additional payment, constitutes The amendment states that maternity and direct discrimination on the grounds of paternity leave of up to 24 months per child religion. will count towards their years of service for all employment claims where length of As a result of this ruling, the Austrian service is a factor. legislator created a personal holiday for all employees to prevent employers from being Previously, periods of maternity and required to grant a paid public holiday on paternity leave had only been taken into Good Friday to every employee. account for the first child up to a maximum of 10 months and, moreover, only for certain Once per holiday year, employees can entitlements, namely notice period, holiday unilaterally determine one day that will entitlement and continued remuneration in be considered their personal holiday. In the event of sick leave. contrast to a regular holiday, while the employer can ask the employee not to take This amendment applies to all employees a particular day off, the employee is free to whose child was born on or after 1 August deny such a request, even if their presence 2019. at work would be necessary for operational reasons. Daddy Month The Austrian Paternity Leave Act was also The introduction of the personal holiday recently amended. Fathers are now legally did not lead to any increase in the statutory entitled to one month off work following the vacation entitlement of 25 days per year birth of their child, if they are living in the (rising to 30 days for employees with same household as the mother. at least 25 years’ service). Instead, it is deducted from an employee’s existing Employees who take up their right to what holiday entitlement. is known colloquially as ‘Daddy Month’ enjoy special protection against dismissal. If, at the employer’s request, the employee The protection begins with the employee’s carries out work during their personal announcement or a later agreement, but holiday, then the employee is entitled to be at the earliest four months before the remunerated for the work they performed expected date of birth and ends four weeks in addition to their regular (holiday) pay for that day. The employee is not, however, Thomas Angermair Partner T +43 15 33 4795 24 E [email protected] 4 BELGIUM Social security contributions on the NSSO will use the Supreme Court’s New outplacement scheme share-related benefits granted judgment to strengthen its position and will for medical force majeure by a foreign parent company proceed with the levying of social security Until recently, workers who were dismissed Until recently, the National Social Security contributions on benefits granted by a could only claim outplacement support Office (NSSO) accepted that if a foreign parent company to a Belgian subsidiary’s (the provision of assistance to redundant parent company attributed benefits (shares, employees “as the counterpart for the work employees in finding new employment) if restricted stock units (RSUs) etc.) directly to performed”. they were either entitled to a notice period its Belgian subsidiary’s employees without The 2020 social elections of at least 30 weeks (general scheme) or the costs being charged to the latter, or are on their way if they were at least 45 years old with at the latter serving as a ‘point of contact’ to least one year’s service (special scheme). Every four years, Belgian companies must which the Belgian employees could turn (i.e. Recently, a third scheme has been added hold employee elections to select the if the Belgian employees could not claim for employees whose employment ends members of their Works Council and the the payment from their employer), then the due to medical force majeure, invoked by Committee for Prevention and Protection shares or RSUs could be granted without the employer. at Work. The former applies to companies having to pay social security contributions. with at least 50 employees and the latter to It can be invoked without the employer In September 2018, the NSSO caused companies with at least 100 employees. needing to serve notice upon or pay an a ‘minor earthquake’ by substantially indemnity in lieu of notice to the employee The next elections will take place in May broadening its interpretation of ‘salary’ if, after having followed a reintegration 2020. However, for employers, work started subject to social security contributions. As procedure, it has been established that in mid-December 2019, the beginning of a result, benefits in general, and shares the employee is permanently incapable a 150-day procedure that precedes the and RSUs in particular, attributed by a ‘third of performing their job and reintegration election date and during which action is party’ (e.g. a foreign parent company) to the appears impossible or has failed. expected from employers on a regular employees of a Belgian (group) company basis. will be subject to Belgian social security contributions, even if the grant took place With every social election the legislator without the Belgian company ‘intervening’ introduces a number of new features. The in any way. most important ones for the 2020 elections are: This NSSO interpretation followed a Brussels Labour Court of Appeal (CoA) ▪ the right to vote for temporary agency judgment in 2018 concerning commissions workers, subject to certain conditions; granted by a ‘third party’. The CoA stated that since these commissions were ▪ the election procedure will be further granted “as the counterpart for the work digitalised and made GDPR-compliant; performed”, they were subject to social and security contributions, despite the fact that the employee was not entitled to claim this ▪ employees no longer have to attend a remuneration directly from their employer. polling station as they can vote using a laptop or PC via a carrier connected to a In May 2019, the Supreme Court confirmed secure network. the CoA judgment. It is expected that Philippe De Wulf Partner T +32 2 426 14 14 E [email protected] 5 BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA Interpretation issues in the exception to the preliminary procedure is it reasonable to burden the courts with the Federation of Bosnia whereas financial claims were no longer this number of procedures? and Herzegovina exempt. At the same time, the statute of There were no significant changes to labour limitation period of three years for financial The amendments remain in force despite a regulations in Bosnia and Herzegovina in claims was not amended.
Recommended publications
  • Statement by Denmark on Behalf of Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark
    Statement by Denmark on behalf of Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark 75th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations Debate in the General Assembly Agenda item 74: Report of the International Court of Justice Delivered by: Counsellor Rasmus Jensen, Denmark New York 2 November 2020 Check against delivery E-mail: [email protected] http://fnnewyork.um.dk 1 M(r/s) Chair, I have the honour to speak on behalf of Finland, , Iceland, Norway, Sweden - and my own country - Denmark. The Nordic countries would like to thank the President of the International Court of Justice for his report on the Court’s work over the past year (A/75/4) and for his presentation today. The big amount of cases indicate the trust and confidence States place in the Court by referring disputes to it for resolution. The Nordic countries would in particular like to note the case filed by The Gambia against Myanmar regarding application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, where the Court indicated provisional measures on January 23rd. In addition to being important for the gravity of the issues The Gambia’s application seeks to address, the case is also an opportunity for the Court to develop its jurisprudence regarding obligations erga omnes and erga omnes partes. All States parties share an interest in compliance with the obligations under the Genocide Convention by all States parties. We applaud the Court and its personnel for continuing to discharge its judicial functions as described by the President in his report, despite the difficult circumstances following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Portugal's Economy Contracted Sharply in 2020 As the Spread of The
    2.16. PORTUGAL Portugal’s economy contracted sharply in 2020 as the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic took a heavy toll on all aspects of social and business activities, with a particularly strong impact on the country’s large hospitality sector. Portugal’s GDP is estimated to have fallen by 7.6% in 2020. Quarterly rates closely followed the evolution of the pandemic and the consequent introduction of restrictions. After a cumulative drop of around 17% in the first half of 2020, GDP rebounded by 13.3% in 2020-Q3. However, the resurgence of infections brought new restrictions towards the end of the year and GDP growth weakened to 0.4% in the last quarter. With the introduction of a more stringent lockdown in mid-January 2021, GDP is projected to fall again in the first quarter of 2021, before starting to recover as of the second quarter of the year, with a major rebound in the summer months. This entails expectations for a notable rebound in tourism in the summer, particularly in intra- EU travel, and a more gradual recovery thereafter. However, the tourism sector is projected to remain somewhat below its pre-crisis level until the end of the forecast period. In full-year terms, GDP is projected to grow by 4.1% in 2021 and 4.3% in 2022. A full return to pre-pandemic levels is expected towards the end of 2022 but risks remain significant due to the country’s large dependence on foreign tourism, which continues to face uncertainties related to the evolution of the pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • 8733/21 HVW/Io 1 LIFE.1 Delegations Will Find in Annex a Joint Declaration by Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Bulgar
    Council of the European Union Brussels, 12 May 2021 (OR. en) 8733/21 AGRI 218 ENV 305 PESTICIDE 16 PHYTOSAN 17 VETER 37 PECHE 146 MARE 14 ECOFIN 437 RECH 212 SUSTDEV 61 DEVGEN 95 FAO 16 WTO 133 NOTE From: General Secretariat of the Council To: Delegations Subject: Joint Declaration of the Ministers of Agriculture of the Visegrad Group (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) and Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania on the opportunities and challenges for farmers stemming from the Farm to Fork strategy - Information from the Polish delegation on behalf of the Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Hungarian, Polish, Romanian and Slovakian delegations Delegations will find in Annex a joint declaration by Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania on the above subject, concerning an item under "Any other business" at the Council (''Agriculture and Fisheries'') on 26-27 May 2021. 8733/21 HVW/io 1 LIFE.1 EN ANNEX Joint declaration of the Ministers of Agriculture of the Visegrad Group (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) and Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, on the opportunities and challenges of agricultural holdings in light of the Farm to Fork Strategy On 21 April 2021 the Polish Presidency of Visegrad Group organized a videoconference of Ministers of Agriculture of the Visegrad Group: (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) and Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Slovenia (GV4+4). The main topic of the discussion was the opportunities and challenges of agricultural holdings in the GV4 + 4 countries in light of the Farm to Fork Strategy. The Ministers also exchanged views on the Strategic Plans of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
    [Show full text]
  • Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and Country Reports
    Flash Report 01/2017 Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and country reports EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Unit B.2 – Working Conditions Flash Report 01/2017 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 ISBN ABC 12345678 DOI 987654321 © European Union, 2017 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Flash Report 01/2017 Country Labour Law Experts Austria Martin Risak Daniela Kroemer Belgium Wilfried Rauws Bulgaria Krassimira Sredkova Croatia Ivana Grgurev Cyprus Nicos Trimikliniotis Czech Republic Nataša Randlová Denmark Natalie Videbaek Munkholm Estonia Gaabriel Tavits Finland Matleena Engblom France Francis Kessler Germany Bernd Waas Greece Costas Papadimitriou Hungary Gyorgy Kiss Ireland Anthony Kerr Italy Edoardo Ales Latvia Kristine Dupate Lithuania Tomas Davulis Luxemburg Jean-Luc Putz Malta Lorna Mifsud Cachia Netherlands Barend Barentsen Poland Leszek Mitrus Portugal José João Abrantes Rita Canas da Silva Romania Raluca Dimitriu Slovakia Robert Schronk Slovenia Polonca Končar Spain Joaquín García-Murcia Iván Antonio Rodríguez Cardo Sweden Andreas Inghammar United Kingdom Catherine Barnard Iceland Inga Björg Hjaltadóttir Liechtenstein Wolfgang Portmann Norway Helga Aune Lill Egeland Flash Report 01/2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on Contemporary Georgia – Vision from Czech Republic
    Reflections on Contemporary Georgia – Vision from Czech Republic Written by Bakar Berekashvili Note: This article is simultaneously published for the newspaper The Georgian Times on 15 October 2007 „There is no guarantee that the civil society is always benign. But we must take the risk. The civil society corresponds to the historical possibilities of man and history as a drama of good and evil. This is the dignity of man: the choice of good and evil.“ Merab Mamardashvili Brief Discourse on Georgia’s Desire to become European Democratic Country Georgia’s political and social aspirations are an open secret. These aspirations are based on country’s strong desire to build democracy and civil society in Georgia, to integrate into the European space of democratic and civic values and thus to confirm again for modern world that Georgia is a democratic European state. But definitely the task is not so simple, it is very challenging and still full with various obstacles. Georgia still has to pass a long way of democratization in order to achieve its democratic goals and finally to be formed not transitional democracy but real democracy in our own country. In Czech Republic, where I live now, it took approximately 10 years to become democratic country. Since 1989 when communism died in this country, Czech Republic started rapid consolidation of democratic values that was doubtlessly led by Václav Havel. Currently, Czech Republic returned to its hostorical roots and enjoys to be democratic European country. However, here I mean no way that there are no problems in Czech Republic and that here we have absolute democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • IMMIGRATION LAW BASICS How Does the United States Immigration System Work?
    IMMIGRATION LAW BASICS How does the United States immigration system work? Multiple agencies are responsible for the execution of immigration laws. o The Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) was abolished in 2003. o Department of Homeland Security . USCIS . CBP . ICE . Attorney General’s role o Department of Justice . EOIR . Attorney General’s role o Department of State . Consulates . Secretary of State’s role o Department of Labor . Employment‐related immigration Our laws, while historically pro‐immigration, have become increasingly restrictive and punitive with respect to noncitizens – even those with lawful status. ‐ Pro‐immigration history of our country o First 100 Years: 1776‐1875 ‐ Open door policy. o Act to Encourage Immigration of 1864 ‐ Made employment contracts binding in an effort to recruit foreign labor to work in factories during the Civil War. As some states sought to restrict immigration, the Supreme Court declared state laws regulating immigration unconstitutional. ‐ Some early immigration restrictions included: o Act of March 3, 1875: excluded convicts and prostitutes o Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882: excluded persons from China (repealed in 1943) o Immigration Act of 1891: Established the Bureau of Immigration. Provided for medical and general inspection, and excluded people based on contagious diseases, crimes involving moral turpitude and status as a pauper or polygamist ‐ More big changes to the laws in the early to mid 20th century: o 1903 Amendments: excluded epileptics, insane persons, professional beggars, and anarchists. o Immigration Act of 1907: excluded feeble minded persons, unaccompanied children, people with TB, mental or physical defect that might affect their ability to earn a living.
    [Show full text]
  • Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice, 17 Hastings Int'l & Comp
    Hastings International and Comparative Law Review Volume 17 Article 3 Number 2 Winter 1994 1-1-1994 Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self- Determination at the International Court of Justice Gerry J. Simpson Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_international_comparative_law_review Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Gerry J. Simpson, Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice, 17 Hastings Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 323 (1994). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_international_comparative_law_review/vol17/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Judging the East Timor Dispute: Self-Determination at the International Court of Justice By Gerry J. Simpson* Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................ 324 1E. Some Preliminary Remarks about the Case ............. 327 III. International Politics and the International Court: A Functional Dilemma .................................... 329 IV. Substantive Questions of Law .......................... 332 A. The Existence of a Right to Self-Determination...... 333 B. Beneficiaries of the Right to Self-Determination ..... 334 1. Indonesia's TerritorialIntegrity and the Principle of Uti Posseditis................................. 339 2. Enclaves in InternationalLaw .................. 342 3. Historical Ties .................................. 342 C. The Duties of Third Parties Toward Peoples Claiming a Right to Self-Determination ............. 343 V. Conclusion .............................................. 347 * Lecturer in International Law and Human Rights Law, Law Faculty, Univcrity of Melbourne, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • FEUTURE EU 28 Country Report Lithuania
    March 2017 FEUTURE EU 28 Country Report Lithuania Liucija Verveckiene and Justinas Lingevicius, European Integration Studies Centre FEUTURE EU 28 Country Report: Lithuania 1. History of EU-Turkey Relations1 1.1. Turkish EU membership – no topic before Lithuania joined the EU Before evaluating Lithuania’s position on EU-Turkey relations historically, it is important to note two historical facts. Firstly, Lithuania accessed the EU in 2004. There was little debate on Turkey’s EU membership before Lithuania’s accession for all the attention was paid to Lithuania’s fulfillment of the Copenhagen criteria and other integration issues. Secondly, Turkey was already a NATO member when Lithuania accessed the Alliance in 2004. Therefore, Lithuania considered Turkey as a strong partner in the security and defence area. 1.2. Building mutual partnership When we look at the public attitudes towards EU-Turkey relations after 2004, more positive than negative discourse is evident. Firstly, this could be explained by the fact that Turkey has supported Lithuania’s NATO membership and politicians have underlined a strategic partnership between the two countries. Thus, the security narrative played an important role and the Lithuanian government has also acknowledged Turkey’s geo-strategical position with regard to the whole continent. Secondly, economic relations between the EU and Turkey and the value of an already implemented free trade regime was acknowledged. Thirdly, via diplomatic channels a Turkish message has been transferred right after 2004: it is important for Turkey to be supported by Lithuania and all the attempts of support for the Turkish-EU dialogue are highly valued by the 2 Turkish people.
    [Show full text]
  • Tol, Xeer, and Somalinimo: Recognizing Somali And
    Tol , Xeer , and Somalinimo : Recognizing Somali and Mushunguli Refugees as Agents in the Integration Process A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Vinodh Kutty IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY David M. Lipset July 2010 © Vinodh Kutty 2010 Acknowledgements A doctoral dissertation is never completed without the help of many individuals. And to all of them, I owe a deep debt of gratitude. Funding for this project was provided by two block grants from the Department of Anthropology at the University of Minnesota and by two Children and Families Fellowship grants from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. These grants allowed me to travel to the United Kingdom and Kenya to conduct research and observe the trajectory of the refugee resettlement process from refugee camp to processing for immigration and then to resettlement to host country. The members of my dissertation committee, David Lipset, my advisor, Timothy Dunnigan, Frank Miller, and Bruce Downing all provided invaluable support and assistance. Indeed, I sometimes felt that my advisor, David Lipset, would not have been able to write this dissertation without my assistance! Timothy Dunnigan challenged me to honor the Somali community I worked with and for that I am grateful because that made the dissertation so much better. Frank Miller asked very thoughtful questions and always encouraged me and Bruce Downing provided me with detailed feedback to ensure that my writing was clear, succinct and organized. I also have others to thank. To my colleagues at the Office of Multicultural Services at Hennepin County, I want to say “Thank You Very Much!” They all provided me with the inspiration to look at the refugee resettlement process more critically and dared me to suggest ways to improve it.
    [Show full text]
  • Montenegro's Tribal Legacy
    WARNING! The views expressed in FMSO publications and reports are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. Montenegro's Tribal Legacy by Major Steven C. Calhoun, US Army Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS. This article appeared in Military Review July-August 2000 The mentality of our people is still very patriarchal. Here the knife, revenge and a tribal (plemenski) system exist as nowhere else.1 The whole country is interconnected and almost everyone knows everyone else. Montenegro is nothing but a large family—all of this augurs nothing good. —Mihajlo Dedejic2 When the military receives an order to deploy into a particular area, planners focus on the terrain so the military can use the ground to its advantage. Montenegro provides an abundance of terrain to study, and it is apparent from the rugged karst topography how this tiny republic received its moniker—the Black Mountain. The territory of Montenegro borders Croatia, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Serbia and Albania and is about the size of Connecticut. Together with the much larger republic of Serbia, Montenegro makes up the current Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). But the jagged terrain of Montenegro is only part of the military equation. Montenegro has a complex, multilayered society in which tribe and clan can still influence attitudes and loyalties. Misunderstanding tribal dynamics can lead a mission to failure. Russian misunderstanding of tribal and clan influence led to unsuccessful interventions in Afghanistan and Chechnya.3 In Afghanistan, the rural population's tribal organization facilitated their initial resistance to the Soviets.
    [Show full text]
  • Primer on Criminal-Immigration and Enforcement Provisions of USCA
    U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021: A Brief Primer on the Criminal-Immigration and Enforcement Provisions1 I. Introduction This primer covers the key criminal-immigration and enforcement provisions of the USCA. The US Citizenship Act of 2021 (USCA, also referred to as the “Biden bill”) is an immigration bill introduced in the House on February 18, 20212 that would create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented people living in the United States who entered on or before January 1, 2021. TPS holders, farmworkers, and people who have DACA or who were eligible for status under the Dream Act would be eligible to become lawful permanent residents immediately. Other undocumented people could apply for a new form of lawful status called “Lawful Provisional Immigrant” (LPI) status. After five years as LPIs, they could then apply to become lawful permanent residents. The bill would also recapture unused visas dating from 1992; make spouses, children, and parents of lawful permanent residents “immediate relatives” (who are immediately eligible for visas and who do not count toward the cap); make anyone waiting more than 10 years immediately eligible for a visa; and increase the per-country limit from 7% to 20% to decrease backlogs. The USCA imposes new criminal bars to eligibility for the legalization program, on top of the already existing inadmissibility bars in current immigration law. It also encourages the construction of a “smart wall” and adds an additional ground for prosecution and penalties under 8 U.S.C. § 1324. The USCA also includes some positive criminal-immigration reforms, including redefining the term “conviction” for immigration purposes, increasing the number of petty offense exceptions 1 Publication of the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG), 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Years After Bucharest Why NATO Should Double-Down on Georgian
    C - 0; M - 95; Y - 100; K - 2; PANTONE 485 CP C - 0; M - 98; Y - 91; K - 30; PANTONE 7621 CP C - 0; M - 97; Y - 87; K - 60; PANTONE 7624 CP POLICY BRIEF EUROPE IN THE WORLD PROGRAMME 3 JULY 2018 10 years after Bucharest Why NATO should Amanda Paul Senior Policy Analyst, EPC double-down on Ana Andguladze Georgian membership Policy Researcher, ISPED 2018 is a momentous year for Georgia: it marks the interest to strengthen ties with Tbilisi. As a reliable 100th anniversary of the first Democratic Republic of partner that shares common interests and values, the Georgia. It is also the 10th anniversary of the war with country offers the West a strategic foothold in the South Russia (August 2008) and of the Bucharest Summit, Caucasus. The Alliance must reaffirm its membership when Tbilisi was promised a seat at NATO’s table. commitment and reiterate that no third country has a veto on its enlargement. It should further deepen A decade on, NATO-Georgia cooperation has practical cooperation and bolster Georgia’s ability substantially deepened. The country now meets to defend itself. Reaffirming NATO’s support would NATO standards in many areas: it has modernised its reassure Georgian society, boost reform efforts and move armed forces and interoperability between Georgian the country ever closer to the Alliance. troops and the armies of NATO countries has increased. Georgia has contributed more to international NATO missions than many existing members and also meets the Alliance’s defence spending target. Tbilisi has also undertaken reforms to strengthen democracy, eradicate Georgia has contributed more to corruption and ensure civilian control of the military.
    [Show full text]