The aim of the proposed rule is to tie work-based residence permits more closely to employment status by introducing a three- or six- month unemployment limit. Changes to the proposal included the inclusion of an allowance for non-competition clauses, the exclusion of start-up entrepreneurs from the rule, and the extension of the time limit in which companies need to inform authorities following the ending of an employment relationship.
While TEK supports these changes, many others brought up during the consultation round are still missing, and there still exist fundamental flaws in the understanding of unemployment for technology experts.
In 2022, 27% of the unemployment periods of non-EU technology experts lasted for over six months, only slightly higher than the 23% experienced by Finnish technology experts. Due to many stage hiring processes and high specialisation levels, long unemployment periods are a feature of the technology sector. Six months is therefore a time limit that will result in a serious loss of highly skilled talent, and people forced to leave the country through no fault of their own. To reflect this fact, twelve months should instead be the time limit.
In addition, other exceptions to the rule are still needed. These include at least those with ongoing job applications, those waiting for security clearances, and those with school age children in Finland. High-demand technology fields should also be added to the fields suffering from labour shortages, to aid them in the acquisition of skilled workers.
A proposal with fundamental flaws
No matter the changes, this proposal is still one that causes far more problems than it solves.
This proposal adds significant stress and uncertainty to life in Finland, with unemployment often unexpected, and rarely at the choice of the individual. In the process, Finland becomes a less welcome country, leading to experts choosing to make their home elsewhere. Those facing potential layoffs, the recently unemployed, graduating students, and potential business owners would also be influenced by this, not just those reaching three or six months of unemployment. This is insufficiently captured in the analysis of the economic effects of the proposed law.
Exploitation and worsened market conditions are also major potential impacts of this proposal. Those job seeking or discussing contract extensions face having a lowered negotiation power for their working conditions and compensation under the proposal. This has a knock-on impact on the whole labour force, and risks creating a two-tier system. It also limits the ability of international workers to take risks, for example in changing jobs, starting businesses, or just in giving feedback to their employer.
Finally, Finland needs growth and a strong workforce to combat an ageing population, and these factors require immigration. This proposal will have a serious impact on the attraction of Finland versus its rivals, especially for in demand experts who can choose where they will work. This will in turn limit investment, as companies turn to countries with a more robust and skilled workforce.
TEK therefore hopes that further development of the proposal by parliament will occur. We also urge the results of the Survey of International Experts, published in August, to be utilised. The voices of our international members deserve their place in the discussion of their future.
Data source: The 3- or 6-month rule drives away technology experts
