The chance of regularizing concerns all forms of employment and comes from polical forces and society increasing sensibilization as regards to the need to guarantee the chance to regularization since the bad functioning of migrants flows administration has settled in Italian territory a great number of irregular foreigner workers.
At first the only working sector concerned with the chance of regularization was house-helpers’, subsequently, good sense and labour market business made it necessary to extend regularization to other forms of employment. On the other hand, in case the chance of regularization hasn’t widened, the risk run was that all irregular worker tried to regularize themselves by using house-helpres pardon through false papers.
Tha chance of having permits was broadened to all other forms of employment by a law decree in order to guarantee an concrete emersion of irregular work and a real continuation of existing working relations.
Employer
The chance of regularizing is anyway left to employers own initiative. Only employers have the power to choose whether regularizing their employees or not.
Employer who choose NOT TO REGULARIZE their employees (it doesn’t matter whether the persom employed works as a house helper or otherwise) can be prosecuted for all law violations committed when setting up and keeping an irregular working relation with a non EU worker.
Regularization is allowed only in case of existing employments. Regularization is not possible in case a person is not working or has the chance of being hired in a family or firm.
Employers asking for regularization and giving their emersion statement in CANNOT BE PUNISHED for all violations to residence permits, working relations and taxations; by doing so employers protect themselves against controls and grave responsabilities (civil, administrative, fiscal ones and against enduring violations).
Employers submitting regularization application IS DISCHARGED, only by having submitted the application, of all past violations.
The three months in advance question
Irregular work emersion statement, which employers need to fill in, refers to working relations having started for at least three months. A specification came out in order to render this point clearer, a strict construction, appointed by a Internal Minister memo signed Sept. 9.
As a matter of fact the three month instruction is written in such terms that regularization of people not being employed within the three months period may also be possible. Law decree talks about working relations established ” …during the three months previous to…” the law came into act.
From a literal meaning point of view a working relation started off during those three months but not steady could be able to apply for pardon. I.e. a job starting the week before the law came into act answers the instructions because it goes on with what the decree says “during the previous three month”.
Ubofficial statements made everybody think that the pursuance of the law could be extensively accepted, later Interior Minister gave precise piece of information saying that “the strict construction of the law should be considered valid”.
According to this, each working relation needs to be going on and started off three month the day the memo came into act (June 10) both house-helpers and other employees working relations.
Trying to sum the concept up briefly: works being in act and started off three month before June 10 will bethe only ones allowed to apply for pardon.
Who can apply for pardon
– Foreigner workers without residence permit.
– Those ones who previously had a permit, the renewal of which was denied after expirement.
Those ones who previously had a permit, which expired at least 60 days before without demanded
renewal.
– Those ones holding a visa that doesn’t allow steady working (turism, health care, domicile of choice) or allows only a restrictive period of employment.
No other Internal Minister instructions concerning different sots of residence permits are given, at th epresent time we cannot therefore give information out concerning other types of permits and whether they’ll be allowed or not to pardon.
I.e., it is supposed that a foreigner person holding an asylum seeker permit (and being obviously employed during the three month), as well as all those non EU citizens demaning asylum and having the permit denied, should be allowed to apply for pardon.
There are many doubts on permits only allowing restrictive periods of employment such as students visas. Also show business workers should be entitled to apply for the turning of the visa in case an employer proves that they are hired in a normal working situation.
Doubts whether foreigners holding a visa because working detached in a branch of an agency or entering Italy on a contract work can apply for or not still remain. This case refers to people entitled to stay in Italy during a limited period of time undertaking on contract. It is suppossed that those detached workers should be able to apply for regularization when detaching foreign workers to Italy disguises forms of labour intermediation, this means that workers considered in every respect of the law actual employees of the Italian firm should be entitled to ask for regularization. These are to be taken as irregular working relations established with an Italian firm and disguised as detached workers.
Previous pardons provided for a similar application of the oppurtunity to regularization. In past years the changes of regularization were enlarged to al working relations considered both completely and partly irregular, also allowing to regularization all those subjects holding valid visas when availing themselves of their real steady Italian working condition and letting them apply for regulazation apart from the fact that they already hold a permit.
Even distinctions between completely concealed labour and partially concealed one shouldn’t be grounds for letting only clandestines regularize themselves and denying regularization to all those irregularly employed ahile holding a visa that allows staying in Italy. Pardon’s goal is, in fact, to make all irregular concealed working situations emerge not keeping them alive in large fields of labour market.
Who’s not entitled to apply for regularization
Large ranks of people are left out and we hope that, while enacticting law by decree, some changes are to be done in order to widen the application of regularization range.
In fact, all foreigners who’s received order of exclusion addressed for reasons different from denial of visa renewal are to be left out, therefore we are entitled to suppose that foreigners holding expired papers, having seen renewal denied and having as a result an order of exclusion reported should be able to run for regularization.
On the other hand all order of exclusion addressees having illegally entered Italy or illegally staying (i.e. without renewing tourism visas, which anyway is never renewed) are to be left out.
All see the clear injustice that lays under the distinction among “more fortunate foreigners and less ones”, this is to say among those ones caught without papers and those who were never caught.
All the ones being charged of anything connected to criminal code art. 380 and 381 or being sentenced (even if the judgement is not final) are to be left out. Only exceptions are: being discharged on groundlessness of charge basis, being exempted of liability or, after a certain amount of time, being rehabilitated.
For example, art. 380 and 381 enclose a number of violations and the seriousness of these goes from theft on. In case of being charged of the theft of can in a supermarket, quite modest a crime, the person reported is left out regularization.
Strong criticism is being laid open, in fact many petty crimes (the so called poverty crimes) leave any chance to regularization out. I.e. the theft of a bicycle, of electric energy, etc.
There is a number of crimes suppositions in which regularization can be applied for because these are not violations connected to Criminal Code art. 380 or 381, such as squatting in an empty house, counterfeit goods, drunkenness, juvenile mendicity, denying to give identification, forgery of authentic residence visa (by changing picture or/and name).
While dealing in puchasing false papers (much more common a case) denies regularization because that is crime connected to art. 380-381.
Noone considered dangerous to State or public safety and no precautonary measures detainers can possibly apply for regularization.
Exclusions
Former 1998 pardon instructions, in the beginning, said that in all cases someone was ordered exclusion that person couldn’t apply for regularization. An Internal Minister memo later changed the instructions: you could ask the Prefetto who issued the order to repeal the exclusion order while applying for regularization. Asking for repeal doesn’t mean that Prefetto is obliged to do it, it means that a case by case discretionary exam is required. In 1998 all administrative orders of exclusion were repeal (even if a long awating periods of time occurred).
We hope that this abovesaid chance is to be acknowledged ahead of regularization application forms time limit, that is to say Oct. 10 – house helpers, Nov. 11 other employees.
Anyway, since asking for repeal of exclusion orders has always been admissible to our legal system and Prefetto has always been enabled to accept it or not, I’d suggest that anyone holding an exclusion order should APPLY FOR REGULARIZATION together with a PROPER PETITION ASKING FOR REPEAL OF EXCLUSION ORDER ADDRESSED TO PREFETTO WHO’S ORDERED EXCLUSION AND ALSO ACQUAINTED TO WORKING PLACE AREA POLICE HEADQUARTERS, who will consider the request.
Normal administrative exclusion orders will have more chances of being repealled compared to more serious cases of exclusion orders not only reported ones but also compared to the ones carried out by taking the person to the borders and having as consequence an illegal entry in Italy.
As said before, there’s a great hope that during the time of pardon the chance of seeing exclusion orsders repealled is to be acknowledged but at the current date there’s no certainty.
Stating that what is actually going on is a rather rare measure, workers holding the abovesaid exclusion order could try regularization out before apllication time expires, keeping in mind that they have to face the tough choice of running the risk of seeing the order executed but the hope of being regularized once and for all is firm.
Schengen Area
Not only exclusion orders enacted by Italian authorities are effective but also, as it should be known, orders “reporting the exclusion from admission within the State territory” included inside SCHENGEN information system and enacted by any other adhering State.
We do have great hopes that administrative exclusion orders enacted by Italian authorities can be repealled, anyway chances become rarer in case a foreign authority (even on Italian authorities demand and report) is to cancel reports from Schengen Informatiom System (S.I.S.). Former 1998 pardon shows that regularization in Italy becomes very hard when a person holds an exclusion order reported by a foreign state on account of the difficulties in having the order cancelled from S.I.S..
Be careful not only to exclusion orders enacted in Italy but also to sending away orders, exclusion orders or any report to S.I.S. made by other European countries.
How many statement can an employer do?
A family will be able to employ only one huose keeper. There are no number limits in hiring health care assistants. In fact a seriously ill person could easily need 24 hours care.
Employers will be able to regularize all their subordinated foreign employees at the moment irregularly hired in all the other working relations.
What’s meant by work in progress
This is the end of traditional holiday period. Almost all firms close during August Bank Holiday and that’s the reason why it is quite normal that a worker goes back home for a short time period and then comes back to Italy. It often is the case of people comining from Eastern countries from which a visa is not needed when arriving as tourists, such as Romania. In this situation it is not possible to say that the working relation was over, since it still goes on legally speaking. It cannot in any case be considered over because of an illness or if an agreement among employee and employer is taken.
When giving in application forms a complete copy of the person’s passport is to be attached, in fact Police Headquarters will verify the stamps on the passport in order to check whether the employee-employer relation is to be considered valid and started at least three months before or not. It can be easily understood that if a person has only one entry stamp printed on the passport and dated beyond June 10, inspections are to be made and that the person will be asked to explain the reason of that.
Many people will be facing those problems. Even though, according to what Internal Minister said so far, regularizing procedures won’t need the well known “evidence” of having been in Italy since June 1.
No evicence seems to be explicitly asked, anyway there shouldn’t be elements proving the opposite.
I.e., an employer states that he hired a person at least three months ago, inspections find out that that person used to work in another place the previous month, it is clear that the statement is to be considered false.
When stating the false in order to elude immigration laws a two to nine months imprisonment penalty may occur.
Remember that THE PRESENT CHART IS TO BE WEEKLY UPDATED ACCORDING TO MINISTERIAL MEMORANDUMS AND INSTRUCTIONS.