The basis of regulation of free movement for partial migrants in the EU : correlation between the concepts of Union citizenship and bona-fide residence

So far legal analysis of the phenomenon of partial migration in the European Union has been scattered across studies of isolated groups of rights. The aim of this research is to provide a systematic conceptualisation of this area by establishing the role of the concepts of Union citizenship and bona fide residence in a Member State in shaping and protection of socio-economic rights of partial migrants consequent on their right to free movement. On the basis of examination of the experience of other complex political entities, this study aspires to contribute to the theory of European Union citizenship by bringing the issue of rights of economically active persons whose migration pattern deviates from the mainstream free movement of workers and the self-employed within the discourse of Union citizenship. The scope of the rights of partial migrants is delimited by approaching the conflict between the aforementioned categories as an instantiation of the opposition between the national welfare state and the supra-national entity of the European Union. In this connection, this research is focused on such rights as the right to free movement and residence, and the rights in the welfare-related domains of social security, taxation, and housing which are identified by the Commission as particularly complicated, and on the most topical forms of partial migration in relation to which a great number of challenging conceptual problems have been identified. In this thesis a variety of methods is used. Firstly, we use the method of analysis developed within the coherence theory. Secondly, two methods of analysis identified by J Shaw are employed. The first one draws upon the formally identified sources of citizenship rules and rights in the Treaty along with other closely related sources of law in the form of secondary legislation and Court of Justice case law. The second method applies explanatory tools from the contextual citizenship agenda of the Treaty. Finally, the research is based on the comparative law method. The shaping and protection of socio-economic rights of partial migrants in a complex entity such as the European Union is defined by the balance between their status as Union citizens, on the one hand, and their status as bona fide residents, non-bona-fide residents, and non-resident workers and the self-employed tied to the welfare systems of the Member States. The role of the Treaty provisions on Union citizenship as a constitutional basis in protection or partial migrants' rights is still incipient. However, the meaningfulness of the concept of Union citizenship for partial migrants is ultimately defined by the process of approximation of their socio-economic membership in the respective communities of their Member States of residence and work as well as membership in the greater community of the European Union to the ideal of full membership for partial migrants. The coherence of the construct of Union citizenship is tested within this continuum (with reference to specific areas identified in this study) according to the scope of rights enjoyed by partial migrants under Community law

The correlation between the status of Union citizenship, the rights attached to it and nationality in Rottmann

The correlation between the status of Union citizenship, the rights attached to it and nationality in Rottman

Overview of the Special Issue

The aim of this Special Issue is to present a critical analysis of the reform of coordination of social security in the light of the 2016 - 2019 revision of EU regulation on coordination of social security. The articles scrutinise all areas of the Commission’s proposal for the regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004. The introduction provides an overview of the negotiation of the Commission’s proposal and outlines the aim and the structure of the Special Issue.</p

Family-friendly reform of employment law in the UK: an overstretched flexibility

This paper provides a critical assessment of the family-friendly reform of employment law in the UK. It begins with the analysis of the EU policies on work-life balance as the important context of the reform in the UK. The second part of the paper provides and outline of the family-friendly provisions introduced by the Labour and Coalition Governments between 1997 and 2015 and investigates the rationale behind the reform. The paper questions the consistency of the approach to the familyfriendly reform of employment law adopted by the Labour and Coalition governments. It argues that the economic rationale has underpinned the flexibility aspect of family-friendly agenda in both EU and UK policies. In its final part, the paper analyses the flaws in the regulation of family-friendly entitlements and argues that, without proper incentives and guarantees, the reform is unlikely to provide working parents and carers with a real choice and flexibility

Dual nationality and the hurdles facing Britons who want to keep EU citizenship after Brexit

Dual nationality and the hurdles facing Britons who want to keep EU citizenship after Brexi

Book review: Balancing Student Mobility Rights and National Higher Education Autonomy in the European Union

This monograph is an impressive study on free movement of students in the European Union. Despite the abundant volume of scholarly works on this subject matter, Alexander Hoogenboom’s book is a welcome addition to the debate which offers a new approach to familiar problems associated with cross-border student mobility. The author challenged himself with the task of finding a solution for the fundamental problem of reconciliation of individual rights of Union citizens to free movement and residence, including the right to pursue studies in another Member State, with economic, social and political implications (whether real or perceived) of student mobility for the Member States

EU coordination of social security from the point of view of EU integration theory.

This article comprises a study of the negotiation of the Commission’s proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 in the context of EU integration theories. This analysis is used to argue that the current integration stage in the coordination of social security is a complex phenomenon which displays elements of intergovernmentalism, neo-functionalism and post-functionalism. The negotiation process highlights the disagreements between the key players which may have important consequences for the future of EU regulation in the area of coordination of social security. The article concludes that the signs of intergovernmentalism are prevalent, as evident in the attention the Commission has given to the concerns of the Member States, the negotiating position of the Council, and the vote of the European Parliament which failed to approve the proposal at the first reading. This prevalence has led to a pause in the reform of the coordination regulations and may eventually lead to compromises that will weaken the progress of integration in the future. At the same time, the article argues that the theory of post-functionalism is important in explaining the phenomenon of Brexit with regard to the UK’s position in the negotiation of the Commission’s proposal and its future relevance for UK and EU citizens affected by the UK’s departure from the EU. The article concludes that disintegration along the lines of post-functionalism should not prevent the reintegration of the UK into the EU coordination of social security schemes, but may reinforce the prevalence of intergovernmentalism.</p

Working Time Remedies Beyond Brexit: Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and Another v Agnew and Others

On 4 October 2023, the ‘long-anticipated’ judgment in PCC v Agnew was handed down by the Supreme Court. This case concerned claims for holiday pay made by police officers and other civilian staff employed by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI). The Supreme Court had to decide two main issues. The first was whether police officers could take advantage of the more generous remedy provisions in respect of holiday pay claims in the Employment Rights Order 1996 (ERO) (which largely corresponds to the UK Employment Rights Act 1996) as opposed to the Working Time Regulations. The second issue was the correct interpretation of the ERO provisions. As well as the important practical implications of the case, there are also interesting jurisprudential issues that arise. The case deals with the interpretation of European Union (EU) derived rights in the labour context. This is a sensitive area, given that access to EU interpretive mechanisms usually equates to a more progressive reading of rights, and this fans the flame of UK government scepticism to both the EU and working time rights. This article discusses the particular approach to statutory interpretation taken by the Supreme Court and the implications of this approach for the progressive interpretation of EU-derived employment rights going forward.</p