Background:

In light of significant labour shortages, the Slovak Republic is currently considering the development of new labour mobility partnerships with non-EU/EEA countries. This ad hoc query is intended to support these discussions by gathering up-to-date information from EMN Member and Observer Countries. Observer Countries are invited to contribute insights covering both their cooperation with EU/EEA states and with other non-EU/EEA partners.

This query also updates and complements earlier work, including the EMN Ad Hoc Query on bilateral agreements and programmes/projects on legal migration between Member States and third countries, the EMN Inform on Skills Mobility Partnerships, and the EMN Study on Labour Migration in Times of Labour Shortages (to be published shortly). In addition, it specifically seeks information on the inclusion of protection provisions, as well as monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, within the identified labour mobility agreements.

Respondents:

25 EMN Member and Observer Countries (including BE) provided answers to this query.

Findings:

A preliminary analysis of the results indicates that:

• Countries with agreements: A number of Member and Observer Countries have concluded bilateral labour mobility or partnership agreements with non-EU/EEA states. These include AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EL, FI, FR, HR, IE, IT, LV, LT, LU, and PL. The agreements cover a wide range of regions, notably Africa, Asia, and Latin America. While some are fully operational, others remain signed but not yet implemented.
   
• Countries without agreements: Certain Member Countries reported having no labour mobility agreements with non-EU/EEA countries. These include EE (though discussions are ongoing with India), HU, NL, and SE. 
   
• Scope: Some agreements address general labour mobility (e.g. FI, FR, HR), while others are more sector- or skills-specific, particularly in health care, seasonal agriculture, tourism/hospitality, and skilled professions (e.g. AT with the Philippines, CY with Egypt, IE with Pakistan and Sudan for medical graduates).
   
• Protection provisions: Many agreements incorporate provisions such as equal treatment with nationals, standardised employment contracts, pre-departure orientation, and mechanisms for dispute resolution (e.g. BG, CY, DE, EL, HR, IT, LT). By contrast, youth and working holiday schemes (e.g. CZ, LV) often lack such detailed protections.
   
• Monitoring and evaluation: In several cases, implementation is supported through joint committees or bilateral working groups (e.g. DE, EL, FI, IT, LT). However, some countries reported limited or no formal monitoring mechanisms (e.g. BG, LV).
   
• Good practices identified by various Member and Observer Countries: These include pilot projects combining mobility with training and development (BE – Global Skills Partnership projects), legal frameworks guaranteeing equal rights (LT–Ukraine agreement), structured pre-departure and post-arrival support (CY, DE), and approaches aimed at ensuring ethical recruitment (DE, FI).

For further details, please consult the compilation of answers attached above.