Post-Brexit views of European Union doctors on their future in the NHS: a qualitative study

BMJ Leader ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Chick ◽  
Mark Exworthy
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Working Conditions ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Medical Qualification

Background/aimFollowing large-scale surveys suggesting that large proportions of European doctors are considering leaving the National Health Service (NHS) following the Brexit referendum, this was the first qualitative study assessing if, and how, Brexit has affected European Union (EU) doctors’ views of working in the NHS and their future intentions.MethodsData were collected from 17 semistructured, qualitative interviews with doctors working at two NHS England trusts, who either had citizenship or had received their primary medical qualification from a member state of the European Economic Area. Transcripts from the interviews were then subjected to thematic content analysis.ResultsDespite the majority of EU doctors believing that Brexit would not affect their jobs or rights in the UK, for many the referendum itself and its political handling had made them feel unwanted, undervalued and uncertain about their futures in the NHS. Most doctors intended to remain working in the UK; however, for several interviewees, this, along with fears regarding their future working conditions, had led to them considering leaving the NHS.ConclusionsSome European doctors are now considering leaving the NHS following the Brexit referendum, and their retention will be partly dependent on whether the government and the NHS can persuade them that they are both wanted and valued in the UK, and that their future working conditions will not be significantly affected.

scholarly journals The (Uncertain) Impact of Brexit on the United Kingdom's Membership in the European Economic Area

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrich G. Schroeter ◽  
Heinrich Nemeczek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
Implicit Assumption ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Business Law ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Until recently, the on-going legal discussions about ‘Brexit’, the United Kingdom’s upcoming withdrawal from the European Union (EU), have predominantly focused on the requirements and consequences of the withdrawal procedure set out in Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). A hitherto neglected, though arguably no less important question concerns the effect, if any, that a withdrawal from the EU will have on the UK’s membership in the European Economic Area (EEA): Given that the EEA extends many aspects of EU membership beyond the EU’s borders, resulting in a Common Market ‘light’, a future UK membership in the EEA could – at least from a European business law point of view – effectively result in ‘business as usual’, as a significant share of EU law would continue to apply to UK companies, albeit in form of EEA law.Against this background, it is interesting to note that legal analyses of Brexit generally assume that the UK’s EEA membership will be terminated ipso iure, should the UK decide to withdraw from the EU. According to this view, the UK subsequently could (re-)apply for EEA membership should its government so choose, with such an application having to be accepted by all remaining EEA Contracting Parties – an option commonly referred to as the ‘Norway option’ in reference to Norway’s status within the EEA. The present article challenges the underlying (and often merely implicit) assumption that the UK’s withdrawal from the EU will automatically result in its withdrawal from the EEA, given that the EEA Agreement is a separate international treaty subject to separate legal rules governing withdrawals and effects of possible changes in EU membership. It argues that a withdrawal from the EU will in fact not affect the UK’s continuing EEA membership, as long as the UK does not voluntarily choose to also withdraw from the EEA. It then analyses the post-Brexit situation under the EEA Agreement by addressing its practical application to a number of different areas, as inter alia the free movement of UK companies within the EEA, the future of the ‘European passport’ for UK credit institutions and investment firms, as well as the free (but possibly restrictable) movement of workers in the EEA.

scholarly journals EEA IN THE BREXIT’ SHADOW

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 92-99
Author(s):  
Lyudmila Babynina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
The European Union ◽  
British Government ◽  
National Elections ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
Close Cooperation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The article analyzes the Brexit’s impact on the functioning of the European Economic Area (EEA). Brexit renewed interest to EEA format, as one of the options for future relations between the United Kingdom and the EU. But so close cooperation under the control of the Union did not meet the interests of Britain, which chose the greatest distance from EU rules and regulations. For nonEU EEA countries (Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein) Brexit entailed a visible political and economic shake-up. First, the fact of the country’s exit from the EU and the tough position of the British government contributed to the growth of Eurosceptic rhetoric in the non-EU EEA countries. Secondly, in connection with the withdrawal of the UK from all structures of the European Union, these countries had a need to sign new trade and fisheries agreements. These processes were of the greatest impact for Norway, as the most significant player in the EEA, a non-EU member. Analyzing these processes, the author comes to the conclusion that Brexit did not have a significant impact on the functioning of the EEA, but increased interest in various external formats of integration. In addition, the domestic political discourse has become more acute regarding the possible revision of the format of relations with the EU, especially in Norway, which is largely due to national elections,

The EU Influence on Norwegian Domestic Legislation for the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 415-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elise Johansen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Environmental Legislation ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Marine Areas ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In the last several decades, the European Union (EU) has demonstrated its intention to play an important role in supporting Arctic cooperation and helping to meet the challenges now facing the region. Norway, one of the five Arctic coastal states, and the EU have cooperated closely in this regard, particularly through the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA Agreement). This article examines how Norway’s domestic legislation applicable to its Arctic marine areas has been influenced by the development of EU environmental legislation. Specifically, this paper provides a discussion and analysis of the relevant Norwegian laws and mechanisms used to regulate how EU environmental legislation has been incorporated into Norway’s domestic legislation through the EEA Agreement.

Policy Effects of Anti-Immigrant Party Representation on Aid to Vulnerable European Union/European Economic Area Citizens

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Tyrberg ◽  
Carl Dahlström
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Welfare Policy ◽  
Policy Impact ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
Policy Area ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Policy Effects ◽  
Economic Area

While anti-immigrant parties have been electorally successful in European parliaments, it is still unclear whether they have influenced policies. This article contributes by investigating the anti-immigrant party policy impact on a previously unexplored welfare policy area, that concerning the mobility of vulnerable European Union/European Economic Area citizens. In Sweden, the aid offered to these citizens varies a great deal in different municipalities. Furthermore, the largest anti-immigrant party (Sweden Democrats) has, unlike the mainstream political parties, preferences for a strict policy in line with so-called welfare chauvinism. Taking advantage of this subnational variation, our data give us a unique opportunity to investigate whether anti-immigrant party representation impacts welfare policy outcomes. The empirical findings show a negative correlation between Sweden Democrats’ representation and the aid offered and indicates that municipalities where Sweden Democrats holds a pivotal position offer less aid to vulnerable European Union/European Economic Area citizens. The hypothesis that these effects are conditional upon the ideology of the ruling coalition is, however, not supported.

COVID-19 personal protective behaviors during mass events: Lessons from observational measures in Wales, UK.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Gould ◽  
Lesley Lewis ◽  
Lowri Evans ◽  
Leanne Greening ◽  
Holly Howe-Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Protective Behaviors ◽  
Mass Gatherings ◽  
Observational Measures ◽  
Behavioral Observations ◽  
The Government ◽  
Additional Support ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Trained Observers ◽  
Personal Protective Behaviors

Within the context of reopening society in the summer of 2021, as the UK moved away from ’lockdown,’ the Government of Wales piloted the return on organised ‘mass gatherings’ of people at a number of test events. Behavioral observations were made at two of the test events to support this process. The research was particularly interested in four key factors: How (1) context within a venue, (2) environmental design, (3) staffing and social norms, and (4) time across an event, affected personal protective behaviors of social distancing, face covering use, and hand hygiene. Data collection was undertaken by trained observers across the above factors. Findings suggest that adherence of attendees was generally high, but with clear indications that levels were shaped in a systematic way by the environment, situational cues, and the passage of time during the events. Some instances of large-scale non-adherence to personal protective behaviors were documented. Overall, there were three main situations where behavioral adherence broke down, under conditions where: (1) staff were not present; (2) there was a lack of environmental signalling (including physical interventions or communications); and (3) later into the events when circumstances were less constrained and individuals appeared less cognitively vigilant. Behavioral observations at events can add precision and identify critical risk situations where/when extra effort is required. The findings suggest a liberal paternal approach whereby state authorities, health authorities and other key organisations can help nudge individuals towards COVID-safe behaviors. Finally, an individual’s intentions are not always matched by their actions, and so behavioral insights can help identify situations and contexts where people are most likely to require additional support to ensure COVID-19 personal protective behaviors are followed and hence protecting themselves and others.

The ‘Pillared-Privatisation’ of Pension Provision in the European Union: The Case of the United Kingdom

2002 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Ring ◽  
Roddy McKinnon
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
World Bank ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Means Testing ◽  
The Road ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
National Governments

Across the European Union, national governments are re-assessing the institutional mechanisms through which pension provision is delivered. This articles sets the debate within the wider context of the ‘pillared’ structural analysis often adopted by international institutions when discussing pensions reform. It then sets out a detailed discussion of developments in the UK, arguing that the UK is moving towards a model of reform akin to that promoted by the World Bank – referred to here as ‘pillared-privatisation’. The themes of this model indicate more means-testing, greater private provision, and a shift of the burden of risk from the government to individuals. An assessment is then made of the implications of UK developments for other EU countries. It is suggested that while there are strong reasons to think that other countries will not travel as far down the road of ‘pillared-privatisation’ as the UK, this should not be taken as a ‘given’.

scholarly journals DEFINITION OF NEW SPATIAL REGIONS IN SOUTH-EAST EUROPE

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 449-454
Author(s):  
Kamen Petrov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Regional Development ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
The European Union ◽  
East Europe ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
South East Europe ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Cross Border Cooperation

The exhibition presents the problems of cross-border cooperation and opportunities for partnership. Within the European Union, conditions are created for regional development on the national territory, as well as for border and cross-border cooperation. In this direction, the article outlines the processes of building a number of Euroregions, which are designed to promote regional development. This report will clarify some of the reasons for their construction, their role and what model of cooperation is available within the European Economic Area.

scholarly journals Risk of hospitalization and risk of death for healthcare workers with COVID-19 in nine European Union/European Economic Area countries, January 2020–January 2021

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Ferland ◽  
Joana Gomes Dias ◽  
Carlos Carvalho ◽  
Cornelia Adlhoch ◽  
Carl Suetens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Adjusted Risk ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractWe assessed the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare workers (HCWs) from data on 2.9 million cases reported from nine countries in the EU/EEA. Compared to non-HCWs, HCWs had a higher adjusted risk of hospitalization (IRR 3.0 [95% CI 2.2-4.0]), but not death (IRR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4-2.0).Article Summary LineHealthcare workers are hospitalized more frequently than non-healthcare workers when adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document