Legal Aspects of Cross-Border Rehabilitation to Work

Abstract

This paper describes the legal situation of European migrant workers who are in need of rehabilitation. For the sick or disabled migrant worker, living in one country and having his/her workplace in another, rehabilitation often raises complicated issues which have to be solved by an equally complex framework of legal rules. In this article, Sweden-Norway is used as a cross-border example to illustrate the problems faced by an insured person and by the social security administration during rehabilitation. The legal problems are basically attributable to differences between social security systems within the EU.

Rehabilitation cases are complicated by the fact that the support an individual needs is often not a single benefit. Instead rehabilitation involves a variety of different benefits regulated by different legal instruments. EC Reg. 1408/71 aims to co-ordinate and safeguard the social security rights of migrant workers. However, legal rehabilitation tools, such as sickness and health care benefits, are co-ordinated according to different criteria and special rules covering rehabilitation are not found in the regulation. This leads to a situation where a migrant worker can have the right to cash benefits from one country and health care benefits from another. The result is sometimes confusing, both for the individual and for the administration. The article explores and analyses this confusing situation, paying special attention to the question of legal certainty for the migrant worker.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Birkhed

(2002), Den försäkrades rättsliga ställningi rehabiliteringsprocessen, Report to the Ministry of Social Affairs, Stockholm.

Christensen

Malmstedt

(2000), ‘Lex Loci Laboris versus Lex Loci Domicilii – an Inquiry into the Normative Foundations of European Social Security Law’, European Journal of Social Security, 2(1), 69–111.

COM (2003) 6 final, The future of the European Employment Strategy.

COM (2004) 239(01) Strengthening the implementation of the European Employment Strategy, Proposal for a Council Decision; On guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States, Recommendation for a Council Recommendation.

Cornelissen

(1993) ‘Harmonisierung und Koordinierung des Europäischen Sozialrechts’ in Eichenhofer

(ed.), Reform des Europäischen Koordinierenden Sozialrechts, Carl Heymanns Verlag.

Cornelissen

(1997), ‘25 years of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71. Its achievements and its limits’ in Swedish National Social Insurance Board/European Commission (ed.) 25 years of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71 on Social Security for Migrant Workers – a conference report, Stockholm.

EC (2001), MISSOC: Mutual Information System on Social Protection. Social protection in the EU Member States and the European Economic Area. Situation on 1 January 2001, European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

European Commission (2002), Definitions of Disability in Europe – a comparative analysis. A study prepared by Brunel University, European Commission Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs Unit E 4, Brussels (September).

European Commission (2003), Jobs, Jobs, Jobs. Creating more employment in Europe, Report of the Employment Taskforce chaired by Wim Kok, Brussels (November).

10.

European Commission (2004), Joint Report on Social Inclusion, Employment and Social Affairs – Social Security and Social Integration, Brussels.

11.

Eichenhofer

(1997), ‘Exportability of Benefits in Cash under Art 10 of the Regulation Nr. 1408/71 – a German perspective’, paper presented at seminar on ‘Olika riskfaktorer och exportabilitet i belysning av förordningen (EEG) 1408/71’, 5 December.

12.

Eichenhofer

(2004), Sozialrecht, 5, Auflage, Mohr Siebeck.

13.

Erhag

(2002), ‘Fri rörlighet och finansiering av social trygghet’, Santérus.

14.

Frändberg

Å.

(2000/1), Om rättssäkerhet, JT nr 2.

15.

Glavå

(2001), Arbetsrätt, Studentlitteratur.

16.

Gustavsson

(2002), Rättens polyvalens, Lund Studies in Sociology of Law.

17.

Hartley

(2003), The Foundations of European Community Law, 5th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

18.

Hvinden

(2003), ‘The Uncertain Convergence of Disability Policies in Western Europe, Social Policy and Administration, 37(6), 609–624.

19.

Hydén

(1988), ‘Reflexiv rätt och reglering’, ii Refleksiv rett.

20.

Igl

(1997), ‘Co-ordination and new forms of social protection, in Swedish National Social Insurance Board/European Commission (ed.) 25 years of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71 on Social Security for Migrant Workers – a conference report, Stockholm.

21.

Jorens

Schulte

(eds.) (1999), ‘Coordination of social security schemes in connection with the accession of central and east European countries to the European Union’, available at http://www.special-network.org

22.

Ketscher

(2002), Socialret, Thomson GadJura 2 udgave.

23.

Kjönstad

Syse

(2001), Velferdsrett I. Gyldendal.

24.

Kjönstad

(1997), Folketrygdloven, Karnov kommenterte lover.

25.

MISSOC (2004), European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, Unit E4.

26.

OECD (2003), Transforming Disability into Ability: Policies to promote work and income security for disabled people, Paris.

27.

Peczenik

(1995), Vad är rätt?, Norstedts.

28.

Pennings

(2001), Introduction to European Social Security Law, 3rd edition, The Hague: Kluwer.

29.

Pieters

(1993), Introduction into the Basic Principles of Social Security, The Hague: Kluwer.

30.

Pieters

(1999), Social Security at Work, Leuven: Acco.

31.

Reinhard

Kruse

von Maydell (eds.) (1998) Invaliditätssicherung im Rechtsvergleich, Nomos.

32.

RFV/Europeiska kommissionen (1997), in Swedish National Social Insurance Board/European Commission (ed.) 25 years of Regulation (EEC) No. 1408/71 on Social Security for Migrant Workers – a conference report, Stockholm.

33.

Sakslin

(2000), ‘The Concept of Residence and Social Security: Reflections on Finnish, Swedish and community legislation’. European Journal of Migration and Law, 2, 157–183.

34.

Stendahl

(2003), ‘Communicating Justice: Providing Legitimacy’, Iustus.

35.

Thornton

Lunt

(1997), Employment Policies for Disabled People in Eighteen Countries: A Review, York: Social Policy Research Unit, University of York.

36.

Schulte

(1999), ‘Zur Kur nach Abano Therme, zum Zanharzt nach Antwerpen?’, Europäische Marktfreiheiten und Nationales Krankenversicherungsrecht, ZFSH/SGB 5 and 6.

37.

Westerhäll

(2000), ‘Normgivningens etik – exemplet rehabilitering, i Normativa perspektiv’, festskrift till Anna Christensen, Juristförlaget i Lund.

38.

Westerhäll

(2004), Den starka statens fall, Norstedts.