Page 108 - valuing-diversity-guidance-for-labour-market-integration-of-migrants

Valuing diversity: guidance for labour market integration of migrants

examples of online resources: a dedicated portal with information about
30
recognition procedures ( ) and the IQ network portal (see case studies) for
online career advice (with a flyer in English).
Recognition procedures may still be hampered by barriers to some
professions, as in rules which exclude non-nationals from access. Germany has
recently (2012) (European migration network, 2013) started to ease recognition
of foreign qualifications by abolishing German-exclusive access to a number of
occupation, though barriers to certain professions still exist (craftman’s
certificates).
Some countries have attempted to reduce complexity by centralising
recognition processes. Denmark has created a single agency (DAUI) for the
recognition of foreign certificates for both work and learning purposes. In spite of
its centralising role, DAUI has limited scope. Its decisions/recommendations over
equivalence of foreign qualifications are binding for public sector procedures,
unemployment benefit decisions and publicly regulated professions but
professional practice is regulated by sector-specific authorities.
31
The Netherlands have also created a centralised system (IDW ( )) for
recognition of foreign qualifications through the recognition centres for higher
education (Nuffic) and for VET (SBB). The system assesses evaluation requests
and provides complete information about relevant procedures in its website.
Other countries which have taken recent steps towards the simplification of
recognition procedures include Belgium, Estonia, Germany (established a
32
dedicated web portal) ( ), Sweden and the United Kingdom.
Recognition systems may be costly and time-consuming for both individuals
and enterprises, particularly SME’s; this might discourage firms from hiring
qualified foreign labour for highly skilled placements, increasing negative labour
market discrimination and mismatch. Firms also tend to have a limited insight into
recognition processes and, in the case of validation, tend to adopt their own APL
33
procedures, which may have limited connection to national standards ( ).
A 2012 European Commission proposal on APL validation procedures
acknowledged system fragmentation and variability in the degree of development
of national systems. The ensuing Council recommendation (Council of the

30
( ) http://www.anerkennung-in-deutschland.de/html/en/professional_recognition.php
[accessed 3.4.2014].
31
( ) http://www.idw.nl/ [accessed 3.4.2014].
32
( ) http://www.anerkennung-in-deutschland.de/html/en/ [accessed 3.4.2014].
33
( ) Main findings of the forthcoming Cedefop study on assessing competences in
enterprises.

98