Termination of a residence permit (ARB 1/80): Does this need to be reported to the immigration authorities?

A letter of termination lies on the table, and with it a question that many Turkish people have. Skilled workers in Germany caught off guard: Must the loss of their jobs be a consequence of the pandemic? When should I register with the immigration authorities ? Those who have lived and worked in Germany for years with a residence permit under the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement (ARB 1/80) rarely find a clear answer in the authorities' information leaflets, because the regulations of the Residence Act and the European Association Agreement are not entirely consistent. This is a challenge for those affected and for HR departments dealing with Turkish citizens. When employing skilled workers , it is worthwhile to take a close look at the legal situation – because a wrong step or an omission can create unnecessary uncertainty.

What is ARB 1/80 – and why does it work differently than other immigration law?

Association Council Decision No. 1/80 (ARB 1/80) refers to the Association Agreement between the European Economic Community (now the United Kingdom) The EU -Turkey Agreement of 1963 grants Turkish nationals lawfully employed in a member state an independent, directly applicable right of residence – irrespective of German residence law. This independence is also the source of many misunderstandings: because the Residence Act is the standard by which authorities, information leaflets, and sometimes even generic legal advice tools are based, ARB 1/80 is often simply "assumed" in practice rather than examined independently.

What rights arise from proper employment?

Article 6(1) of Decision 1/80 of the Association Council provides for a three-stage system of permanent employment. After one year of lawful employment with the same employer, the person concerned is entitled to renew their work permit with that employer. After three years, subject to the priority of workers from EU Member States, they may apply for another offer for the same occupation with an employer of their choice. Finally, after four or five years of lawful employment, there is free access to any employment on a salaried or paid basis. These rights arise by operation of law, without any administrative discretion . The immigration office merely identifies them, it does not grant them.

What happens in cases of involuntary unemployment?

This addresses the core question for many clients who have received a termination notice: Does losing one's job also mean losing the legal position already attained? No – at least not automatically. Article 6, paragraph 2, sentence 2 of Decision 1/80 of the Association Council contains a catch-all provision: In cases of involuntary unemployment or prolonged illness, the previously acquired level of vested rights is retained without the need to restart the periods of employment. Dismissals for operational reasons are generally considered involuntary. However, the decisive factor is not notification to the The relevant authority is not the immigration office , but rather the timely and proper registration as a jobseeker with the competent employment agency – ideally even before the last day of work. This registration is the basis for ensuring that membership in the regular labor market continues within the meaning of Article 6 of Decision No. 1/80 of the Association Council, and it is independent of any contact with the immigration office. to comply with immigration regulations .

Does the immigration office need to be informed about the termination of the contract?

This is precisely where the paths of the Residence Act and the Association Agreement diverge. Section 82, paragraph 6 of the Residence Act obliges persons who possess a Residence permits according to Chapter 2, Section 3 or 4 of the Residence Act are those who The immigration authorities must be notified within two weeks that the employment for which the residence permit was granted has been terminated prematurely. However, this requirement is expressly limited to residence permits issued specifically for education or employment. In contrast, the residence permit used to document a right under Association Agreement 1/80 is regularly based on Section 4a Paragraph 5 of the Residence Act – a provision outside of the purpose-bound sections 3 and 4. It is purely declaratory: it confirms a right that already arises independently from the Association Agreement, rather than granting it for a specific purpose. According to the prevailing interpretation, the notification obligation under Section 82 Paragraph 6 of the Residence Act does not apply directly to such a declaratory residence permit issued under Association Agreement 1/80. An exception is being discussed for the still-pending first year, in which the legal position is more closely linked to the specific employment relationship; however, a uniform answer has not yet emerged in case law or legal literature.

What do employers and HR departments need to consider?

For HR departments that deal with Turkish When employing skilled workers , a second point is at least as important: Regardless of whether the employee is subject to registration requirements, the employer has a separate, significantly broader notification obligation under Section 4a Paragraph 5 of the German Residence Act (AufenthG). This obligates employers to notify the competent authority of the premature termination of employment for which a residence permit was granted within four weeks – generally regardless of the type of residence permit. In practice, this means: Even if the The specialist is not obligated to report the information if they themselves are not required to do so; the expert will find out The immigration authorities are usually notified of job loss by the employer anyway. HR departments should therefore coordinate this notification with the affected person to avoid any conflicting information – for example, if the employer reports the termination while the The professional assumes that they do not need to take any action yet.

Why is the first year of employment particularly sensitive?

From our experience accompanying numerous ARB-1/80 proceedings, we know that the handling between individual Immigration authorities vary noticeably. Some case workers, who have little experience with the specifics of association law, reflexively apply the general rules of the Residence Act and demand notification, even though the person concerned is not obligated to do so according to a correct interpretation. Other authorities, such as the The Berlin State Office for Immigration has greater experience in handling ARB-1/80 cases and therefore differentiates more carefully. Particularly in the first, still ongoing, year-long phase, we frequently encounter inquiries that go beyond the legal requirements – details that are not found in any general commentary, but are only known from the ongoing support of numerous comparable cases.

How should those affected and their employers proceed now?

Anyone relying solely on generic information sheets or standard templates in this situation is basing their decisions on regulations written for the classic residence permit under the Residence Act – not for the specifics of association law. Waiting passively, on the other hand, carries the risk of missing the deadline for registering with the employment agency and thus jeopardizing the legal position already achieved. We therefore recommend carefully documenting the involuntary nature of the job loss from the outset, registering as a jobseeker immediately and correctly, and only then clarifying whether and in what form contact with the employment agency is necessary. Contacting the immigration office is advisable. However, if an authority reacts with an unlawful condition or even with measures to terminate residency, in case of doubt, the option of seeking legal recourse remains. Legal proceedings are necessary to enforce one's legal position. Precisely because these issues are handled inconsistently in practice, an early legal assessment is worthwhile – before uncertainty turns into actual litigation.

Conclusion

ARB 1/80 does not establish an independent notification obligation towards the The immigration authorities , and also Section 82 Paragraph 6 of the Residence Act, are generally not applicable to the purely declaratory ARB 1/80 title. Instead, the decisive factor for maintaining the legal status is the timely notification to the employment agency pursuant to Article 6 Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 of ARB 1/80. Employers have their own, broader notification obligation under Section 4a Paragraph 5 of the Residence Act, independent of this. For Turkish Skilled workers who, in the long term, obtain a residence permit or later the If you are seeking naturalization , it is worthwhile to make the right decisions early on. We will accompany you. Skilled workers and employers are made aware of precisely these special features of association law, so that a dismissal does not become a risk under immigration law.