Sir, – It was interesting to read Vekash Manzoor Khokhar's story in your New to the Parish series (Sorcha Pollak, April 11th). After almost three years in the direct provision system, Vekash, who was an intensive-care nurse in Karachi, was delighted to find work (five days a week, nine hours a day) as a volunteer.
In response to the Supreme Court ruling on the work ban on asylum seekers (May 2017), under a new directive introduced in February, asylum seekers are now allowed to apply for jobs through the Employment Permits Act.
The directive, however, seems to be designed to continue to frustrate asylum seekers finding work.
Restrictive measures of the system include one that insists that asylum seekers must secure a job that pays a starting salary of at least €30,000 per annum. Applicants are also prevented from applying for work in more than 60 different sectors.
Vekash points out that most nursing graduates begin on a salary far below €30,000 per annum. “How does the Government think a person who has been sitting in direct provision for three years, five years, eight years, will be able to walk straight into a highly skilled, well-paid job? . . . They gave us hope and happiness that something was going to change. Then they came back and said we have all these criteria so you won’t actually be able to work. You end up losing everything again.”
It is depressing to be reminded again that when it comes to how we treat asylum seekers in Ireland, we are happy to identify with the European countries who have the worst practices rather than the best.
I wonder whether this interim scheme on the right to work is in line with the Supreme Court’s decision on the right to work for asylum seekers, which found that the absolute prohibition on asylum seekers was unconstitutional. – Yours, etc,
DAVID LILBURN,
Limerick.