Residence/work permit hasnt arrived

Freddyb · Post by **Freddyb** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 5:52 pm

I'm to supposed to fly to Hki on Monday and my permit hasnt arrived. All our stuff is on a boat on the Atlantic, Im sleeping on an airmattress and staring at the walls.....I applied ages ago for this permit....my third one...and my paperwork is sitting on some desk at UVI in Vantaa while some bureaucrat dreams of his or her moiki!

I cant leave the us until the visa is pasted in my passport.

**Sponsor:**

pandajaa · Post by **pandajaa** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:09 pm

Goodluck....
I hope you get it soon.

Hank W. · Post by **Hank W.** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:16 pm

So you climb to the tree from the top down?

Freddyb · Post by **Freddyb** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 10:50 pm

I think you are suggesting I ve gone at this move ass-backward, but based on prior experience and the fact that I have a Finnish open wife and a company sponsoring me (for the third time) that three months would be plenty of lead time in getting my papers. I have again underestimated the immovable force that is bureaucracy, both in the US and in FI

pandajaa · Post by **pandajaa** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 10:58 pm

a Finnish open wife?

I heard that the Finnish goverment know everything here...

Anyway, if all papers are right, it would be fine..

Hank W. · Post by **Hank W.** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 10:59 pm

Right on.

1. passport plus sticker in it *in your hand*
2. airline reservation

Never underestimate the bureaucrazies.

3 months is optimistic, 4-6 is realistic...

Freddyb · Post by **Freddyb** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:09 pm

Well, Im supposed to start work after Midsummer, Soila and the Pooch are going on monday without me...the consulate thinks it should be any day now....that everything is in order......it gets really expensive not working in NYC, so I hope this gets sorted soon.

I think open wife is the translation from the finnish for common-law wife.

pandajaa · Post by **pandajaa** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:51 pm

Is Soila a dog? poor pooch has to be lonely.....
Will you arrive before them?
if not will consulate take care of them? (because of slow processing )

Freddyb · Post by **Freddyb** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 1:30 am

no she's quite attractive actually.

daryl · Post by **daryl** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:55 pm

Freddyb wrote:I'm to supposed to fly to Hki on Monday and my permit hasnt arrived. All our stuff is on a boat on the Atlantic, Im sleeping on an airmattress and staring at the walls.....I applied ages ago for this permit....my third one...and my paperwork is sitting on some desk at UVI in Vantaa while some bureaucrat dreams of his or her moiki!

I cant leave the us until the visa is pasted in my passport.

I gather from this posting that you have lived and worked in Finland twice before, that the residence permit has taken much longer to issue than the Finnish authorities originally estimated and that your intention is to immigrate to Finland.

If you are in the mood for a fight with better than even prospects of winning, then you will board the plane on Monday as planned and file a new application after you arrive here. You may even be viewed as a family member of an EU citizen, but even without this convenience, the decision on the earlier application will have to be made first while you wait in Finland for the decision on the second application. I do not think it at all likely that the second application could be negative when the decision on the first application was already positive. Even UVI would not be stupid enough to provide a gift like that to Hannu Karpo.

A case of this kind would not be unique. There were one or two during the lifetime of the old Aliens Act and they were all decided to the satisfaction of the applicant.

daryl

Freddyb · Post by **Freddyb** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:13 am

Darryl,

Im supposed to start work right after Midsummer; do you think that re-applying now in country will prolong the process even more?

daryl · Post by **daryl** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:45 am

Freddyb wrote:Darryl,

Im supposed to start work right after Midsummer; do you think that re-applying now in country will prolong the process even more?

I am assuming that your spouse is an EU citizen and that your family life has continued for long enough to be reasonably well-established. Your case will then be governed by the relevant Community Law as implemented by sections 154, 159 and 164 of the Aliens Act.

This is essentially a very straightforward process and the right to work is, AFAIK, effective immediately and regardless of any pending request for registration as a family member of an EU citizen. Any attempt by a public official to interfere in your right to work would expose that official to the risk of an action for civil damages, so the policy would be (and always has been) to wait and see what becomes legally final in the case.

Reading between the lines of your earlier message, I suspect that you have not lived in Finland during the lifetime of the new Aliens Act (which took effect on 1 May 2004).

In all of this I am weighing up the problems, and especially the expense, that you face in not travelling against the problems that you are likely to face if you follow the formula that I have suggested. Even under the old Aliens Act I would have suggested travelling at the planned time. The new Act should have clarified this matter beyond reasonable dispute.

daryl

Hank W. · Post by **Hank W.** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:56 pm

Yeah, but Daryl, the employer has to see the permit:

Criminal Code:
Section 6a - Work permit offence (563/1998)
(1) An employer of a representative thereof who hires or employs a foreigner not in possession with the requisite work permit shall be sentenced for a work permit offence to a fine or to imprisonment for at most one year.

(2) A sentence for a work permit offence shall also be passed on a principal or a representative thereof who fails to make sure that the foreigners working for the foreign contractor, subcontractor or workforce rental agency hired by it have the requisite work permit.

The "Yeah I am entitled to one", "Yeah, I forgot my work permit at home",. "Yeah my work permit is in the mail." - is not "Yeah I have one to show you". The Criminal Code is not that flexible it'd be up for interpretation of possession. Either you have it to show or you don't have it. The employer has no need nor obligation to make educated guesses, he's not the one needing to find out anything except that the foreigner has the permit - in possession.

What you are suggesting is for Fred to jump on the bus without his travelcard. OK, so he ordered one and its in the mail. But - either you do the "beep" on the machine or the bus driver will toss you out. So regardless whether Fred is right, he'll still be walking.

daryl · Post by **daryl** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:38 am

Hank W. wrote:Yeah, but Daryl, the employer has to see the permit:

Criminal Code:
Section 6a - Work permit offence (563/1998)
(1) An employer of a representative thereof who hires or employs a foreigner not in possession with the requisite work permit shall be sentenced for a work permit offence to a fine or to imprisonment for at most one year.

(2) A sentence for a work permit offence shall also be passed on a principal or a representative thereof who fails to make sure that the foreigners working for the foreign contractor, subcontractor or workforce rental agency hired by it have the requisite work permit.

The "Yeah I am entitled to one", "Yeah, I forgot my work permit at home",. "Yeah my work permit is in the mail." - is not "Yeah I have one to show you". The Criminal Code is not that flexible it'd be up for interpretation of possession. Either you have it to show or you don't have it. The employer has no need nor obligation to make educated guesses, he's not the one needing to find out anything except that the foreigner has the permit - in possession.

What you are suggesting is for Fred to jump on the bus without his travelcard. OK, so he ordered one and its in the mail. But - either you do the "beep" on the machine or the bus driver will toss you out. So regardless whether Fred is right, he'll still be walking.

The "permit" is the acquis communautaire of the European Union. This immigrant is a family member of a European Union citizen exercising the right of mobility for purposes of employment, establishment or whatever within the Internal Market. Even the "registration requirement" does not take effect until three months after arrival, so there can be no corresponding documentation requirement over this period for family members either.

Hank, I think you are assuming that public officials have unspecified powers. While this is a suprisingly common assumption among Finns (probably dating back to the 19th century), it is not legally justifiable. Indeed in the history of independent Finland since the original Form of Government Act it never has been justifiable AFAIK.

If you think that a public offficial could interfere in this immigrant's employment, then please specify the justification. The circumstances of this case strongly suggest that there is no "work permit requirement" in the first place, so your reference to the Penal Code does not attach.

I am not saying that this case would be free of all legal uncertainty (mainly about whether this immigrant really is a family member of an EU citizen), but legal uncertainty does not by itself entitle or authorise an official to interfere in the performance of a private law agreement such as a contract of employment. And without such entitlement or authorisation the official concerned is exposed to an action for damages in the same way as anyone else.

The practical upshot of all this is that no executive authority will even attempt to intervene until legal certainty has been established. I have seen this dozens of times in practice. Our friend's only significant risk is that his employer, like you, will act as though officials have unspecified powers, even though they don't.

daryl

Hank W. · Post by **Hank W.** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:50 am

Erm... no. "Internal mobility" is for an EU citizen moving within the EU. An EU citizen moving from outside the EU, as in this case the USA is not "moving internally".

In the case of Freddy, he is a non-EU foreigner who is moving to (EU), where the EU country he is moving to immigration laws apply before the EU internal mobility applies.

Apart from which, your passport says you are you, not who you are married with. So the employesr still has nothing else to care for except the stamp in the passport.

You are quite free to try, but I think there is a relation with a speedo-clad bicyclist and a city bus here. The bus might be wrong, but you are squished.

If Freddy was living in the UK, then it'd be a different 9 yards, but anyways the "after Midsummer" is somewhere on the "not happening list" unless someone gets their act together and delivers the permit he asked for originally.

And if you get harrassed as many times as me with the police, you'd be more aware of the "unspecified powers" except I am not a foreigner so I cannot complain. I need to do a work for a living, and not spend days complaining to some entities. I just blow the whistle, open the boot and have a silly grin. Of course this means I need to be sober and can't have body parts in the boot, but heck, I'll get to work. "Demanding my rights" takes a day or half of billable work.

Nobody cares for the working man.

See now, I do appreciate what you do for the speedo-clad bicyclists. I just don't agree on sending the 12-year olds over the zebra just because they are right.

Finland Forum

Find information about moving to, living in and life in Finland