Labor Market Determinants of Migration Flows in Europe

Abstract

Considerable research attention has focused on the labor market impacts of immigration, the operation and competitiveness of the European Union (EU) labor market, and the expenditures and advantages of labor circulation for sending and receiving economies. The aim of the present study is to examine and evaluate the negative social consequences arising from the mobility of workers, the social and economic drivers of migration, and the effect of immigration on natives’ labor market results such as wages and employment.

1. Introduction

In this paper, I am particularly interested in exploring the influence of migration on wages and employment, the operation of the labor markets, the wage and unemployment gulfs between sending and receiving economies, and the development and dynamics of circulation models across Europe. The mainstay of the paper is formed by an analysis of the macroeconomic policy outcomes of migration, the labor market consequences of the migrant employees, the macroeconomic effect of labor circulation, and the employment influence of migration. The theory that I shall seek to elaborate here puts considerable emphasis on the effect of migration on the wages of native-born laborers, the dynamics of unemployment and migration, and the impacts of immigration on employment and wages.

2. The Labor Market Effects of Immigration

A continuous outstanding degree of migration unavoidably has an influence on employment. Migration is not an important element determining wage improvements. Most workers at the median earnings position does not tend to compete with migrant employees. Recent migrants are challenging prior waves of migrants, not native workforce. Migration can advance growth in the receiving economy and diminish growth in the home economy. Lacking a minimum wage there is a declining influence on the wages of the most unprotected employees challenging unswervingly the new wave of migrants. Public scheme and enhancements in the labor supply are associated with determining an extended phase of non-inflationary growth. The economic benefits of recent migration have eclipsed the expenditures, whereas the boost in the number of migrant employees has had no relevant effect on the degree of unemployment (migration has affected negatively neither unemployment nor wages) [1]. The European Union (EU) member states have been consistently found to be unable to assimilate migrant groups swiftly and persistently into their labor markets. The significant wage gulfs between the member states have generated recent labor migration fluxes (the free circulation of employees is protected at European level). Demographic predictions frequently make international forecasts about the magnitude of the labor deficits that we can anticipate, linking them unswervingly to the demand for labor migration. Labor migration scheme is mainly the consequence of a set of unplanned employer judgments (the economic structure is continuously altering). Technological innovation and international competitiveness will drive numerous labor market tendencies. It is not obvious how different components of the labor market advance, nor to what degree more employees with which skills are needed. A satisfactory labor migration scheme demands an understanding of the significant nation’s economy and the manner in which its economic configuration will modify over time. The unplanned judgments of separate employers supply the foundation for “policymaking” [2].

The economic relevance of migration will develop for both sending and receiving economies. The merged impact of sputtering countries and lasting fiscal troubles indicate that unemployment and social discontent tend to last. Demographic deficits generated by constantly low fertility rates have stimulated numerous European economies to concentrate on migration scheme and future migration tendencies. Governments must establish legal arrangements for the admission, employment, and inclusion of migrant employees. Europe should invest relevantly in increasing the area’s human capital stocks, unlock its markets and set up a safe and secure setting for investment in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) area under discriminatory tariff regulations, and should bring about stimulants for companies to move some of their production means to the area. European governments must adjust for more handled migration to overwhelm demographic shortfalls and be more relentless in engaging the better skilled employees to meet the demand of sound economies. The substance of positive results in migration lies in handling a well-organized and flexibly supervised flux of legal immigrants. Europe’s high-income economies are confronting demographic downturn and will progressively strive for skilled migrant workers [3]. Corporations influence their labor requests [4] when wages are fixed. The wage reactivity to labor supply disturbances decreases with the skill degree of employees in economies with progressive tax systems. The downgrade of the wage-setting curve fluctuates with the bargaining capacity and the human capital features of employees. Companies develop diversities of a discriminated product under monopolistic contest. Unnoticed disturbances may influence wages and the unemployment rate at the same time. Labor request is endogenously generated as soon as wages are fixed. Natives and migrant workers are limited equivalents in the labor market. Unemployment advantages and allotments and the average family income of the unemployed influence the reservation wage [5].

Recruiting foreign employees is a process for guaranteeing a suitably functioning labor market. Economic growth relies on more than merely recruiting highly skilled employees. Labor migration within the EU is likely to be accumulated at the low level of the labor market. The discriminated types of labor circulation ask policymakers to concentrate more on whether immigrants aim to populate their destination country. The EU’s intention to enhance the degree of cross-border labor circulation demands it to insist on its agreed purposes, and analyze carefully the social consequences of augmented labor circulation for cities and areas [2]. Human capital assimilation through education [6] and mobility schemes is an essential component of the future goals of the EU and its member nations. Exchange rates and foreign trade scheme are no more tools of economic elasticity as a result of the euro area and European integration. Labor migration generates better utilization of economic supplies and boosts production. Inequalities because of maladaptation of native employees can be somewhat balanced through migration. Circulation leads to an optimal allotment of economic funds that brings about significant output and wellbeing [7], guaranteeing a fast adaptation of labor markets [8]. Augmented and optimized intra-EU labor circulation may be a strong tool in directing outstanding short and long-run challenges. In numerous EU economies, the decrease of gross domestic product (GDP) degree has affected national public finances. Demographic ageing influences the future functioning of labor markets. The EU has made a constant endeavor to alleviate employees’ circulation and to eradicate the remaining obstacles. Policy improvements in the area of labor circulation have pursued a rights-based policy. Freedom of mobility should target evenly all EU inhabitants in the long haul. The movement of EU citizens has moderately advanced over time, but is a process which involves only a small group of the community. The proportion of EU mobile employees is more significant in the euro zone. The admission of new member countries has generated outstanding advances in geographical circulation within the EU. The crisis has impacted the character of fluxes within the EU, and the function that destinations outside Europe have in migration. EU law differentiates between EU inhabitants and third-country nationals concerning the right to circulate [9].

The labor market results of migrant employees are generally less significant than those of the native workers. Cross-country dissimilarities in migration policies may be instrumental in clarifying variations in immigrant labor market results across EU economies. Non-EU immigrants have considerably worse economic results than the majority people in most EU nations. Migration schemes are the series of procedures handling the access to the country and admission to the labor market of non-national employees, affecting the magnitude and features of the migrant workers with regard to the positions needed in the economy, and influencing the migrant practice in the host labor market by supervising admission to the labor market of the various classes of non-national employees. Migration policy-making in the EU is principally eclipsed by national policy models (EU economies have been unwilling to abandon their national supremacy in the rule of labor migration and national scheme advances) [10].

Immigration is goaded by powerful social and economic pressures [11] that are destined to challenge state regulation. Formal labor market laws can function on migration judgments only by way of social and economic moderators. Access and residence laws frequently hinder the impact of immigrants’ rights laws on migration fluxes. The inhabitants of each member state can migrate and live everywhere in the EU with few limitations. A more significant stock of co-national migrants in a particular destination country indicates opportunities for more powerful or extensive social networks. The labor market constraints enforced by the EU member nations affected the size of intra-European migrant fluxes. Countries that unlocked their labor markets turned out to have rather more significant migrant fluxes than economies that did not. The judgments states made concerning the introduction and ensuing lifting of limitations carried outstanding expenditures. Investigating the status quo in Europe as a matter of multiple sending and receiving countries functioning simultaneously elucidates the intricacy of migration [12]. The effect of the significant and fast migration on wages and unemployment is an important labor market matter. The relevant, swift and intense influx of accession migrants is a legitimate test that potentially coincides with an exogenous supply shock. If residents shun competing with migrant workers by moving away, possible negative consequences in a specific labor market may be cancelled out. Request side components may have turned both migrant employees and applicants into machine operative occupations. Natives’ circulation propensity and migrants’ self-selection predisposition are less of an interest across jobs. Determining precisely who challenges whom is critical, as poor expertise group allotment arises in unsatisfactory identification. Migrant employees’ location options are mainly determined by clusters and not by specifically advantageous labor market circumstances. Low-skilled residents are rather region-bound [13].

European labor markets necessitate new incentives to prevent further economic downturn, developing risk hostility or negative positions toward immigration. The factor labor is a supplier of human capital, functioning as the principal means of a knowledge based community. Past European doldrums have regulated the way in which wages are determined. A shortage of skilled labor may be the obstacle to enlargement in developed economic areas. The swift boost in the request for skilled labor may not be met by EU residents only. Widespread obstacles hamper circulation and generate potentially negative consequences (employment frequently appears beneath the real degree of qualification). The range of intra-EU circulation in moderating demographic ageing is constrained. Newcomers are effective in cutting down inequalities generated by the incapacity of native production components to rapidly adapt. Workers generally appreciate stability: it allows them to constitute lasting links in their social arrangements. Were we to subtract the expenditures of the foreign-born labor force from the price of the supplementary production, we would generate an economic profit [8]. Destination economies profit considerably in the short term, experiencing an influx of human capital, which increases short-run growth and raises productivity. When an economy undergoes growth rates over the standard tendency, influxes of employees are highly useful in accommodating boosts in labor expenditures. Return migration can be generated by deterioration labor-market circumstances in destination economies, and advances once the economy improves again in economies where local unemployment was a principal cause for emigration. The influx of human capital significantly raises the growth capacity in the economy in the same manner that financial capital influxes do, and augments the viability of public finances in the long haul. Elucidating the impacts of the brain-drain process necessitates an interpretation of its character and a substantial investigation of its possible expenditures for source countries. Economies which contend that labor circulation generates a brain drain identify the effluence of their natives as a factor jeopardizing the possible growth of their nation, and believe that the brain-drain process indicates relevant deficits for public finances and unsatisfactory returns on investment [9].

3. The Performance and Competitiveness of the European Labor Market

Directing the workless households development may request more concentrated involvement and backing for the groups most affected. There is a persistent surplus of worklessness that cannot be eradicated through the “natural” operation of economic growth. The significant degrees of inward migration have been an important benefit for the United Kingdom (UK) economy. The accessibility of migrant employees, far from enhancing labor market instability, has been an origin of economic strength. Migration is to be a disruptive matter across the developed world. The magnitude to which inward migration generates a labor market impact will rely on the broader functioning of the economy. Governments tend to limit migration from outside the EU if the economy is undergoing some instability. A legitimate effect of labor market tightness is the capability for an inflationary wage-price spiral to appear. The economy has developed swift enough to harmonize a rather fast growth in the labor force. Inward migration can influence adversely the wages and employment expectations of native-born employees. Whereas the degree of inward migration has been significant, there has been no negative effect on labor market functioning [1]. Post-enlargement migrants are among the achievers of free labor circulation in the EU, and have profited in relation to more relevant salaries, enhanced career possibilities and a more significant standard of living. The freedom of circulation of employees in an expanded EU may be a stronger instrument to augment allotment of human capital. The free circulation of labor in an expanded EU is a success undertaking of EU incorporation and expansion, bringing about an outstanding resettlement of labor that has augmented the allotment of human capital in the EU. The sending economies have been alleviated of some presently excessive labor arising from expertise discrepancies in their labor markets, and should profit from “brain gain” deriving from “brain circulation” in an expanded EU. Remittances may counterbalance the deficit of human capital [14] possibly typifying the initial phases of post-enlargement migration. Intermediate agreements have influenced the route and the configuration of post-enlargement migration fluxes. The freedom of circulation in an expanded EU fortifies the social framework and betters coherence in the EU, leading to its economic viability [15].

The free circulation of employees may steadily decrease the wage gulf between Western and Eastern Europe. In the long haul, wage convergence may generate a downturn in cross-border labor circulation. Labor migration is moderated by the demand (employer) and supply (employees) facets of the labor market. Any long-run labor circulation scheme should examine the economic and social exchanges of the different policies for satisfying the request for labor. A labor circulation scheme indicates investing in the knowledge system, in innovation, and in social schemes. Cross-border distribution of social wellbeing allowances and provisions are mainly an EU issue. The labor market impacts the inclusion and emancipation of newcomers. A more relevant degree of enforcement may hinder cross-border labor circulation but it also assists in supervising migrant labor. Working in an interminable sequence of low-paying, short-term occupations does not give migrant workers a relevant foundation for social and economic incorporation and empowerment [2]. In numerous economies, involvement is strengthening and employees are extending their working lives, the labor market engagement of young cohorts is more significant than that of older ones, and the labor market is active and jobs are changing. There have been generally limitations introduced upstream by governments on the character of occupations for which labor migration is permitted. The labor market analysis or evaluation may be waived for jobs which are estimated to be insufficient. Stimulants can be advanced for both employers and migrant workers who promote “temporariness”. Low-skilled labor demands may advance that cannot be completed from internal sources of labor provision or from short-term labor migration. Low-skilled migration may generate additional trends of low-skilled multiple migration of family members and wedding partners. Numerous governments are incorporating administrative openness [16] in migration systems [17].

Migration can entail alterations in the unemployment rate [18] after the adaptation of capital stocks if the configuration of the employees modifies. The current foreign workers are affected by immigration, whereas the indigenous employees are likely to benefit. Labor market organizations have a significant function in clarifying the wage and employment impacts of immigration. The labor market absorption of immigrants might be influenced by organizations. Occupation turnover may be a decisive component in indicating how swiftly immigrants are assimilated into the labor market. The pre-existent immigrant employees are the principal losers from immigration. Labor market organizations which influence occupation turnover play an outstanding role in the allocation of the impacts of immigration across various factions in the labor market [5]. The flexibilities of the wage-setting curves vary substantially throughout expertise groups and experience factions. The aggregate effect of immigration on employment chances and wages is irrelevant. The real wage rate is a decreasing capacity of the unemployment rate and may depart from market-clearing stages. The wage-setting curve is more uniform for high-skilled employees: they are likely to attain more significant stages of company-specific human capital. The entire adaptation of the capital stock to an aggregate labor supply shock demands that the capital-output ratio maintains persistent. Rectifying for the training and experience degrees of non-natives by variables associated with their present labor market functioning entails an endogeneity issue. The effect of migration on aggregate wages relies mainly on the adaptation of the capital stock. The stages of the capital-output proportion and the labor force cannot constitute a long-term equilibrium link [19].

Migrant workers who are favorably incorporated in the labor market tend to remain in the destination economy for longer periods. Schemes to boost labor involvement, cut down unemployment, and supply satisfactory instruction may be complementary reactions to labor migration in directing labor and expertise deficits. The legal routes through which migrant workers enter the destination economy may qualify the migrant inclusion route in the receiving economy. Migrant employees entering through labor migration routes have consistently more significant employment rates than the internal employees. At EU level nearly all immigration classes undergo some deprivation of their expertise potential concerning the circumstances dominating the labor market of their destination economy. Traditional migrant employees should undergo some upward labor circulation as they enhance their comprehension of the language and achieve local labor market expertise [10]. The contest generated by the immigration can overturn the strict structure, relax union minimum wages, intensify circulation, and better the labor market. If the deficit of professional labor were to be eradicated, their wages would be reduced and the employment rates of the unqualified were higher. Professional migration can generate both more fairness and better wellbeing, whereas the migration of unprofessional labor determines unemployment and disparity. The augmented employment of inexperienced employees causes a relative deficit of professional labor. Constant growth, wellbeing, employment and social security are protected via an elastic market and the backing of circulation. The risks and expenditures of migration generally advance with the distance from the receiving economy. EU member nations with more relevant rates of domestic mobility [20] undergo smaller regional inequalities: augmented geographic circulation can assist in cutting down regional inequalities on labor markets within the EU [8].

Labor circulation is often negatively understood and characterized as an element endangering domestic inaction. An individual’s incentive to migrate is a mix of “push elements” in the home economy and “pull elements” in the host economy. Individual judgments originate in a motivation [21] in accordance with which knowledge of the possible expenditures related to migration is evaluated against knowledge of the possible advantages. A pull element in destination economies is often interconnected with a push element in source countries. Circulation across Europe is mostly associated with income disparities and labor-market chances, either in the configuration of pull or push elements. Intra-EU circulation is chiefly generated by economic and occupation related goals. The advantages of intra-EU circulation eclipse the expenditures. The profits that the EU could acquire from labor movement contain the effective allotment of human resources, generating a better performance of labor market and determining a rise in productivity and growth [9]. Removing obstacles to trade, to capital fluxes and to migration generates substantial gains. The advantages from unlocking the labor markets are more relevant than any expenditure both at the aggregate and the regional stage. Non-native employees migrate to regions where their expertise is requested and rewarded, upgrading the allocative effectiveness of the labor markets. The positive influence of remittances in the source economy [22] may augment with the income disparity between home and host regions. Unprofessional migrant labor may be a replacement to physical capital, and matches experienced native labor [23], bringing about an advantageous outcome. Professional migrant labor may not negatively impact experienced native employees, as they can be counterparts in the production system [24] assisting each other to upward circulation [25]. Residents undergo wellbeing gains as immigration in the regional labor market advances. The recognition of the effect of immigration on residents’ results is frequently challenged by causality matters. Immigrants are generally not randomly allocated across labor markets, determining their positions as a function of the features of the regional labor market of destination. Areas display various levels of economic absorption [26] and may vary relying on the degree of social and cultural inclusion of immigrants. The positive impact of incorporating more immigrants in the area may be eliminated by immigration cutting down the absorption of prior immigrants. Immigration affects the wellbeing of residents beyond its objective facet. The level of socio-economic absorption of immigrants is associated with natives’ welfare [27].

Migration workers have a notable function in the performance of the labor markets. Immigration of employees plays a particular role in the various economies and migrant workers are regarded dissimilarly in the distinct labor markets. The circulation of both non-EU migrant workers and natives leads to intra-EU migrations. Professional migrant employees take part in the adaptation of labor supply and request between the employment areas within the host economies and among the nations of the euro zone, advancing mobility schemes with the purpose of attaining a moderate suitability between their skill and their remuneration. The process of constant migrations displays an alteration in the character of the features of migrant employees and has to be associated with the increase in the migration of experienced employees [28]. Post-enlargement migrant workers are among the most significant winners of labor circulation in the EU. Having an occupation in another economy can have a decisive function in fostering human capital and preserving a position in the labor market. Migrant employees tend to be more affected in the labor market than natives of the host economy, being more disposed to accept jobs which may not coincide with their degree of expertise [29] or competences. Current registration policies and prerequisites constitute a real hurdle to effective circulation. Migrant workers are confronted with various recruitment and working circumstances and have distinct admission to social benefits than those enacted to host-economy natives. Labor circulation is a key instrument to moderate the effect of the crisis on the most-affected economies and to strengthen the flexibility of the euro area. Intra-EU movement is an under-employed source of wellbeing for EU inhabitants and for its economy. The EU requires to eradicate obstacles to circulation and to motivate workers to migrate where occupations are located [9].

4. The Costs and Benefits of Labor Mobility for Sending and Receiving Countries

The objective of a single market with free circulation of labor is to admit a better equivalent between labor supply and labor request. The main purpose for emigration is the conviction that employment possibilities are more significant and living standards more relevant in the host economy. Public services may be under intense constraints as a consequence of an “unexpected inflow” of migrant employees, functioning on strict setting up margins (extremely restricted pressure points tend to appear across the public services). Migration usually does not impact negatively either the employment possibilities or wages of native employees (the detrimental results are insignificant and can be moderated by suitable schemes). Aspects other than migration are extremely relevant in clarifying local labor market functioning. There has not been any outstanding raise in unemployment in spite of the lag in the economy and the persistent inflow of migrant employees. Where people migrate in the EU relies on where employment chances are to be identified. There is no connection between migration and unemployment in those areas where migrant employees tend to settle [1]. The wage effect of migration on the indigenous labor force is approximately neutral. Wages of non-native employees are negatively influenced by the augmenting labor supply. The flexibilities of the wage-setting curve vary greatly for the various components of the labor market. Capital stocks adapt to labor supply pressures. An augmenting labor supply through migration may not cut down the median wage degree in the economy. Immigration can both diminish and advance employment chances of residents and non-natives, relying on the elasticity of the labor market components which assimilate immigrants [19].

Labor migration routes are playing a notable role in constitution migrant admission to the labor market. Constraints in the entrance to the labor market can obstruct both upward and horizontal skilled circulation. The configuration by class of access of the migrant employees across EU destination economies [30] relevantly indicates the dissimilarities in internal migration scheme regimes. Admission to and results within the labor market fluctuate considerably by immigration category. The gulf between labor and other immigration classes diminishes for the traditional migrant employees. An important challenge for labor market inclusion is that the migrant workers are hired at occupational stages frequently below their educational expertise. Migration schemes should not only depend on the assumption that a higher education degree [31] is an adequate requirement to acquire the most qualifying occupations [10]. The labor conditions cannot be sufficiently satisfied by persistent immigration in circumstances of economic variations or short-run request bottlenecks. Migration may be an opportunity for economic initiative, Europe being more advantageously positioned as a contestant for reducing human capital. The reciprocity of high and low skilled employees supplies employment and income benefits of the low skilled. The global deficit of qualified employees and the significance of circulation for the attainment and allotment of human capital have advanced substantially. Skilled migrant workers are generally a relevant support in enhancing the wellbeing and allotment of the destination country. Economic immigration schemes are in demand for future economic improvement within the EU [8].

Migration brings about fiscal externalities in the receiving and the sending economy. Worries of immigration by the destination countries and migration constraints lead to an unequal allotment of migrant employees in the labor market and in demographics. Limitations do not hold off the fluxes of migrant workers but generate undeclared labor in the destination economies with perilous social consequences. Migration fluxes in the destination countries in the short-term have determined additional request for education, accommodation and health care. Economies that exercise migration constraints and impose a more locked labor market fail to participate in the long haul. Labor migration is advantageous for the migrant employees, and the source and destination economies, enhancing the effectiveness, productivity and welfare of all communities. On a multinational level, free migration fortifies EU worldwide competitiveness, and increases labor market chances [25]. Migrant employees are sensitive to modifications in labor market features, being influenced by labor market and structural components. For EU migrant workers who are frequently incorporated into companies’ internal markets, their judgments to emigrate are biased regarding employment. The situation of the host economy has an important function in the discrepancy of the various migratory reasons [32] within the euro zone. The diversity of the European countries confronting monetary integration determines an imbalance of domestic regimes, lacking an EU collective immigration scheme. Competition functions especially between the various flows of immigration and not between newcomers and natives in Europe. There is an arrangement impact premium in the drivers of movements within the EU region. Network and structural consequences have a significant function in the situation of immigration to the relevant economies of the EU [28].

5. Internet Survey Case Study: Social and Economic Determinants of Labor Migration in Six CEE Countries

The tendency to migrate is mainly impacted by the degree of income per head and the degree of unemployment in the migrant’s home economy (the wish to migrate decreases dramatically if a nation’s economy is functioning well). An association of emerging wealth in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and more limitative immigration schemes may have the influence of cutting down the provision of migrant labor. Migration has created the most critical social pressures in those spheres with the most relevant accumulations of worklessness. Migrant employees usually enhance the provision of expertise in the native workforce. [1] The EU has tried persistently to eliminate obstacles to the circulation of EU citizens, furthering and encouraging cross-border labor circulation. The dissimilarities are an important barrier to circulation among high-skilled employees. During the global economic crisis, migrant labor from CEE functioned principally as a buffer. Some member states intend to make it more difficult for EU employees to attain their national assistance policies, hampering labor migrants from demanding social welfare benefits to which they have added a negligible contribution. The EU should advance an EU-wide social scheme that handles unemployment more successfully, and may be able to help the member states in backing the incorporation of EU workers [2]. The current labor migration displays the consequences for local authorities of judgments taken at more significant policymaking levels. Labor migration from CEE can be characterized regarding its variety. Employees from CEE are likely to take minor and unstable positions: only migrants who create a reputation for themselves through skillful activities in the labor market continue. Labor migration may be supported by a decreasing degree of social supervision in the migrant’s own group. The key assumption of integration scheme is that migrant workers are accountable for their own absorption. The advancing internal circulation in the EU is distinguished in character: there are various models of labor migration typified either by impermanence or settlement, and having economic consequences and social reverberations for cities and areas. The policy agreements at local level seek to supervise the various models of current labor migration. Local governments striving with the results of contemporary labor migration necessitate more official configurations of integration scheme [33]. The slight moderation in the UK labor market is a legitimate and planned result of monetary policy judgments. Interest rates have been boosted to reduce the inflationary constraints generated by significant and baseless degrees of debt-driven consumption. Migration does not have a relevant negative effect on the UK labor market. Improving quality of life in CEE economies could moderate the flux of migrant workers to the UK (UK employers’ prerequisites for low-skilled labor can be satisfied by influxes from CEE). Migrants have alleviated labor market constraints in the UK and led to economic development in their home economies. Migrant employees have filled gulfs in the internal labor supply, and allowed the UK economy to continue on a sound growth route. Migration has supported the pressure of public and political distress concerning other causes of economic dissatisfaction. The main receivers of employment growth are from families where a grown-up is already in work. The recent occupations have either gone to grown-ups from “working families” or to new migrant workers. Migration could be complicating the matter of exclusion [1].

5.1. Methodology

A randomly selected sample of 3446 CEE adults (18 years and older) were administered an online survey between 8 and 24 June 2014. The response rate was 76% (2619 persons). The survey took an average of 15 min to fill out and focused on the social and economic determinants of labor migration. We employed this method for the survey as we thought it was the most direct and adequate one regarding our purposes. We received the responses in 1–4 working days. The answerers were not considerably different concerning age, gender, and education. They were asked to specify the most significant driver if they wanted to migrate for labor in another country: command of language, cost of living, demographic pressure, income opportunities, physical distance, or unemployment rate. We selected individuals from the following CEE countries: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia. We identified for each country respondents who previously worked in another country, respondents who are still working in another country, and respondents who have not worked in another country (Table 1).

Table 1. Labor migration in six central and eastern European countries.

Country	Bulgaria	Czech Republic	Hungary	Poland	Romania	Slovakia
Total number of respondents	446	324	312	644	505	388
Respondents who previously worked in another country	88	67	68	144	142	92
Respondents who are still working in another country	124	94	76	206	199	62
Respondents who have not worked in another country	234	163	168	294	164	234

Table 1. Labor migration in six central and eastern European countries.

Country	Bulgaria	Czech Republic	Hungary	Poland	Romania	Slovakia
Total number of respondents	446	324	312	644	505	388
Respondents who previously worked in another country	88	67	68	144	142	92
Respondents who are still working in another country	124	94	76	206	199	62
Respondents who have not worked in another country	234	163	168	294	164	234

5.2. Results Regarding Labor Migration in Six Central and Eastern European Countries

Only 6% of the respondents who previously worked in another country or who are still working in another country were high-skilled. Respondents who have not worked in another country would choose UK (22%), Germany (19%), Spain (18%), Italy (17%), Greece (9%), France (6%), and others (9%) (Table 2).

Table 2. Social and economic determinants of labor migration (%).

Country/Determinant	Bulgaria	Czech Republic	Hungary	Poland	Romania	Slovakia
command of language	2	4	4	6	2	2
cost of living	46	34	41	38	44	39
demographic pressure	4	2	4	3	2	3
income opportunities	27	32	29	28	27	27
physical distance	4	5	5	4	5	3
unemployment rate	17	23	17	21	20	26

Table 2. Social and economic determinants of labor migration (%).

Country/Determinant	Bulgaria	Czech Republic	Hungary	Poland	Romania	Slovakia
command of language	2	4	4	6	2	2
cost of living	46	34	41	38	44	39
demographic pressure	4	2	4	3	2	3
income opportunities	27	32	29	28	27	27
physical distance	4	5	5	4	5	3
unemployment rate	17	23	17	21	20	26

5.3. Results Concerning Social and Economic Determinants of Labor Migration

Cost of living is the most important driver of labor migration in all six CEE countries, followed by income opportunities, and unemployment rate. Command of language, demographic pressure, and physical distance seem to be quite irrelevant determinants.

The freedom of circulation of workers is a basic pillar of economic incorporation in the EU: free mobility allows EU inhabitants to look for employment in any of the EU countries. The member states that postponed liberalizing admission to their labor market for inhabitants from the new member states unevenly lost skilled and young migrants. Free labor circulation is one of the most delicate liberties in the EU, enhancing the allocative effectiveness of EU labor markets. Regarding high-skilled post-enlargement migration, the victors of expansion are low-skilled employees in the receiving economies. The staying high-skilled employees may profit from their augmented shortage [34] in the labor market. Economic migration can be required to better the allotment of labor and human capital. The resulting upgraded productivity may advantage all kinds of labor in sending and receiving nations. The size and expertise configuration of post-enlargement migration are relevant for the assessment of its consequences in sending and receiving countries. The worsened economic expectations in some of the receiving economies may have deterred possible migrants [15]. Labor markets are dependent on market forces and determining labor markets [35] depending on national frontiers hampers the market from performing expeditiously (having mobile employees permits the EU labor market to stabilize supply and demand over frontiers). Having a more effective equilibrium between supply and demand should generate lower unemployment. An authentic Single European Labor Market would assist in hampering restricted pockets of skill deficits [36], fundamentally cutting down the length and probability of skill discrepancies between European areas, and would be a strong instrument for engaging gifted and trained employees from outside Europe. Positive consequences are obvious when sending nations undergo short-term periods of high unemployment. In periods of economic crisis, labor circulation is a powerful source of comfort for crisis-stricken economies or areas. Sending nations experience substantial positive impacts of circulation in the short term, and the deficit of human capital is insignificant when mobility is brief and goaded by unemployment [9].

6. Conclusions

The current study set out to identify the labor market effect of migration, the impacts of immigration on the native economy, the procedures of European labor migration, and the influence of migration on employment. This study is grounded in the considerable body of scholarship examining modifications in European migration dynamics, influences of free circulation in sending and receiving labor markets, the effect of immigration on the wellbeing of natives, and the link between unemployment and labor circulation. My paper contributes to the literature by providing evidence on the features and destinations of migrant workers, the effect of the economic crisis on migration fluxes in Europe, the freedom of labor movement, and the correlations between migration schemes and migrant labor market results.