Foreword: Immigration of Macedonian citizens to Germany
In recent years, Germany has become an attractive destination for labour migration for many citizens from North Macedonia. As a result of the so-called Western Balkans regulation, which makes it easier for citizens from the Western Balkan states to take up employment in Germany, the number of applications for work visas has increased. There is a high demand for labour, particularly for jobs in agriculture, construction and the service sector, which many Macedonian skilled and unskilled workers want to meet.
However, the legal hurdles for immigration are high. In addition to the approval of the Federal Employment Agency, applicants must ensure that they fulfil the salary limits and other requirements such as sufficient pension provision. These requirements are particularly strict for citizens over the age of 45, as Germany emphasises long-term social security. Cases such as that of the Macedonian citizen in this article show that insufficiently justified salary adjustments or unclear employment conditions can quickly lead to a visa application being rejected.
Immigration from North Macedonia is therefore often caught between the needs of the German labour market and the complex requirements of immigration law. This tension repeatedly leads to legal disputes, as the following court judgement illustrates.
Judgement of the Berlin Administrative Court of 16 June 2023, Ref.: 31 K 107/22 V
In a recently published judgement, the Administrative Court dismissed the case of a Macedonian citizen who had applied for a visa to work in Germany. The plaintiff had applied for a job as a "master gardener in vegetable growing", but the court ruled that essential requirements for a favourable decision had not been met.
Background to the case
The applicant, a Macedonian citizen born in 1975, applied for a visa to work as a gardener at the German embassy in Skopje in October 2021. An open-ended employment contract and a "declaration of employment relationship" from the potential employer were part of the application. The employment contract showed a gross salary of 2,145.60 euros, which was appropriate according to the applicable collective labour agreement for gardeners' assistants. The plaintiff's planned tasks included activities such as sowing, tending and harvesting work as well as operating agricultural machinery.
However, the visa application was rejected because the Federal Employment Agency and the responsible immigration authority of the city of Hamburg did not approve the application. The main reason was that the salary did not meet the legal requirements for workers over the age of 45. In addition, there was no proof of adequate pension provision.
Salary increase and renewed rejection
The plaintiff lodged a remonstration against this decision and submitted an amended employment contract in which the salary was increased to 3,900 euros. He also claimed that he now wanted to take on a position as a "master gardener in horticulture", which involved more responsibility and personnel management. Despite these changes, the embassy maintained its rejection. It expressed considerable doubts about the credibility of the new documents, particularly in view of the salary increase of over 80 per cent for the same activities.
Judgement of the administrative court
The administrative court ruled that the Macedonian citizen's complaint was inadmissible. The plaintiff had failed to inform the competent authority in advance of his amended application, which now envisaged employment as a "master gardener in horticulture". The court found that the activity originally applied for as a gardener differed significantly from the newly sought employment as a master gardener, which necessitated a new examination by the authorities.
The court also ruled that the plaintiff was not entitled to a visa. The last agreed gross salary of 3,900 euros was below the minimum salary threshold of 3,877.50 euros required for 2022 to ensure adequate pension provision. The applicant was unable to provide sufficient proof of additional pension provision.
Conclusion
The judgement underlines the strict requirements for foreign workers applying for a visa to work in Germany. Specific salary limits apply in particular to people over the age of 45 to ensure that an adequate pension is guaranteed. In this case, the significant increase in the plaintiff's salary was not sufficiently plausible and was considered a procedurally appropriate measure to fulfil the visa requirements.
The judgement also makes it clear that changes in the employment conditions or titles, such as in the present case from "gardener" to "master gardener", require a new examination by the authorities and cannot simply be taken into account in ongoing court proceedings.
