17 Sep 2014

The US Labour Immigration Scheme

All about being attractive? EU Perceptions and Stakeholders’ Perspectives Reviewed

Katharina Eisele

0
Download Publication

1558 Downloads

Labour immigration schemes that effectively attract qualified immigrant workers are a policy priority for many governments. But what are ‘attractive’ labour immigration schemes and policies? To whom are (or should) such policies (be) attractive? In Europe, the US is often portrayed as one of the most ‘attractive’ countries of immigration – if not the most ‘attractive’. This paper aims to analyse and provide a better understanding of the elements of the US immigration system that are supposedly attractive to foreign workers, by examining key features of the current and prospective US labour immigration rules. The paper finds that ‘attractiveness’ in this policy context is a highly malleable and flexible concept: What might be ‘attractive’ to one key stakeholder might not be to another.

This paper was prepared in the context of the NEUJOBs project and is simultaneously published on the NEUJOBS website (http://www.neujobs.eu).

Katharina Eisele is a Researcher in the Justice and Home Affairs research unit at the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels.

Related Publications

Browse through the list of related publications.

The EU grants temporary protection for people fleeing war in Ukraine

Time to rethink unequal solidarity in EU asylum policy

European Union Policies on Onward and Secondary Movements of Asylum-seekers and Refugees

A Critical Overview of the EU’s Migration Management Complex

Limitations on Human Mobility in Response to COVID-19

A preliminary mapping and assessment of national and EU policy measures, their sanctioning frameworks, implementation tools and enforcement practices

Between politics and inconvenient evidence

Assessing the Renewed EU Action Plan against migrant smuggling

Walling off Responsibility?

The Pushbacks at the EU’s External Borders with Belarus

The end of an era

The Polish Constitutional Court’s judgment on the primacy of EU law and its effects on mutual trust