amideislas

It's pretty difficult to live in Germany illegally - you can't get a job if you aren't legal, and illegals can't get social benefits. But there is a labour shortage, so of course there are a lot of foreigners that go there seeking jobs. The vast majority are living within the system, not outside it.

Michael

Just to add, the EU is like the US in that anyone in the EU can move to another country and work without a visa just like moving between states. There are the significantly poorer countries in the EU which are mostly old Soviet East block countries and suspect many of them have moved to Germany or other western European countries taking the lower paying jobs. Romania appears to be the poorest with incomes about 1/6th of Germany in PPP$ and 1/10th in Euros.

EUROPA – EU member countries

When using the following link, I'd advise to use PPP$ (Purchasing Power Standard) instead of Euros since some countries such as Denmark have a very overvalued currency. If Euros are used, it will indicate that Denmark has about a 35% higher median equalized household income than Germany but Denmark is also about 35% more expensive.

Median Equalized Household Income

amideislas

As you point out, median income isn't the metric. Most people living in Germany enjoy a comparatively good standard of living, even if they make less in relative currency than their Danish or UK counterparts.

Anyway, the point remains the same.

Germany imposes fewer restrictions on employment, and therefore naturally enjoys more of it - so much so, that they need to import labour, and as you also point out, the EU provides a nice resource for that.

And it's not slave labour either. Employers have to compete for workers, and so they can't be offering slave wages. That won't attract anyone worth hiring. And those you do hire need to be treated well, because they can just as easily work for your competitor.

Michael

I agree it is not slave labor but it is usually the lower paid workers. When I lived in Switzerland, the Swiss imported about 20% of it's workforce from southern European countries and the vast majority were working at jobs that the Swiss did not want such as construction labor jobs, garbage pickup, and other mostly unskilled or semi skilled jobs.

I suspect in Germany, few of the imports work in the higher paid automotive manufacturing jobs just like they didn't during the 1960s and early 1970s when Germany imported million of southern Europeans and Yugoslavs.

amideislas

A significant number of Spanish IT people have moved to Germany, not only because there are jobs, but because the pay scales are much much higher in Germany, a country where many would presume offers only low wages and zero benefits, simply because there's no minimum wage or guaranteed employment benefits mandated by law (because, well, we've all been led to believe that if the government doesn't impose a law for it, then everybody will be working in sweatshops). Unfortunately, that view doesn't consider the other side of the story: Job creation.

On the surface, it may seem logical to impose restrictions such as minimum pay, minimum vacations, minimum benefits, or guaranteed employment on employers to protect workers from exploitation, but it's much too easy to dismiss the impact it has on job creation, and the ultimate impact on the population - unemployment, the black economy, and employee apathy, for example.

The more you restrict employment, the fewer jobs that will be created (or the more that will be lost). AND the more employees are 'protected' from losing their jobs, the less productive they become. In extreme cases, such as that which Spain endured for a few generations, people felt no particular obligation to perform, and many would deliberately slack off, hoping to get fired, as it would almost always result in a large payoff. Even today, there are some jobs that still require 2 or 3 employees to do a job that one person is usually adequate for (especially in government, one of Spain's largest employers). But that's changing. Rapidly. And it's quite uncomfortable for some.

By not imposing such restrictions on employment, naturally, Germany has more jobs to offer, yet even more curiously, the migration is conspicuously coming from those who've traditionally imposed greater restrictions on employment, where jobs are scarce and minimum wage is what one can expect to earn.

I think it's also worth pointing out one huge difference between the US and Europe in terms of job migration: Language.

Your chances of getting a job in any European country are many orders of magnitude greater if you are fluent in the local language. There are some exceptions, but they are exceptions, rather than the rule.

Pulaski

and Turks!
Germany is surrounded by 25 countries with an aggregate population over over 400 million who can all freely move to Germany and take up employment without any need for a visa or any other restricted permission to work. Illegals would hardly get a look-in.

scrubbedexpat091

So really can't be compared to the US where there is no real labor shortage overall, and lots of illegals, all depressing wages, so without a min. wage who knows how low wages would end up going.

There is no shortage of low end workers in the US and companies don't have to compete for workers to fill those jobs, competition only works in higher end jobs, when it comes to low end jobs, its a take it or leave it situation, the company doesn't have to compete they just call the next person on the list.

I think Wal-Mart proves it pretty well, low pay, poor working conditions yet have no issue filling the low end positions, they have no incentive to pay more or have better working conditions.

Surplus of workers means employers can pretty much dictate everything.

Hotscot

Far more so than the guaranteed vacation time of "average" people. Whatever she means by "average".

In fact from my reading, flexible working conditions in Europe enable a better work/life balance and tend to lead to a more satisfied, motivated workforce.

Bob

Oh to be so naive. It must be bliss.

amideislas

Checkout jockeys don't make much money here either. In fact, I seriously doubt checkout jockeys are earning much anywhere.

And no doubt the manager is packing a whopping $50K. Despicable.

So, since that seems unfair, perhaps we should impose a law about that. What do you think? Checkout jockeys and shelf stockers: $40K per year minimum wage? Aww hell, why not $50K? Put 'em right up there with the management. That would be fair, woodnit?

But then, I reckon most of them would lose their jobs. But there's always those cushy unemployment benefits. Oh, wait....

Pulaski

Except that Walmart pays more than minimum wage. IIRC they claim to pay all their employees more than minimum wage. A couple of years ago Walmart was lobbying for an increase in the Federal minimum wage because (i) it wouldn't affect their "bottom line", but (ii) it would give many of their customers more disposable income, which Walmart expected they would spend at Walmart.

Hotscot

That's right...much of that money comes back to WalMart. It's a clever business approach. The Ford model.

However their general benefits package is poor.

Bob

When you don't have a clue, it's best perhaps to just stop, than to keep going.

You seem to really have no clue about the employment situation in the US and it shows, so there's very little point to this.

Hotscot

That's very true.

She keeps making these puzzling illogical statements and then saying she's out of here only to reappear with more nonsense.

Harmless but very puzzling....

dakota44

Yet they still hand out applications and instructions for their employees to apply for food stamps, as do McDonalds and others. Paying more than minimum wage could be as low as 25 cents more, which is hardly generous.