International Organization for Migration (IOM)

Improving Access to Labour market Information for migrants and employers
114
Evidence from PER.LA data
Interaction with public employment offices
We can look at further evidence from the PER.LA survey, which interviewed a
sample of about 16,000 immigrants residing in 18 Italian provinces. 50 The PER.
LA survey has clearly shown that Public Employment Offices represent, in all
geographical areas considered, an important source of information about the local
labour market, an essential place to deal with some labour-market related paperwork
(in particular, in order to join the Unemployed Register), and they often offer
good opportunities to enrol in training courses. Still, they seem to be “particularly
underperforming in their function of easing the match between labour demand and
supply” (Censis, 2010).
About 30 per cent of the interviewees in the PER.LA survey report that they have
entered a PEO at least once while only about 10 per cent answer that they do not
even know what a PEO is. As expected, the first share increases – while the second
falls – with the number of years spent in Italy by the respondents.
When asked about the main reasons for going to a PEO, 60 per cent of the respondents
answer that they wanted information about job opportunities in the area, almost 37
per cent wanted some advice on how to find a job, approximately 34 per cent needed
help with some paperwork, and 35 per cent wanted to enrol in the Unemployed
Register (Censis, 2010). 51 As far as the perceived quality of the services received by
the PEOs is concerned, about 62 per cent of the interviewees report having found
services explicitly directed to foreign workers (leaflets and materials in different
languages, presence of facilitators, and so on) in their office of residence. 52 The
average assessment of the PEOs by the immigrants – on a 1 (minimum satisfaction)
to 5 (maximum satisfaction) scale – is 2.7 (Censis, 2010).
Using both LFS data (years 2005–2007 and 2009) and PER.LA data, Dell´Aringa
and Pagani (2010) discuss and analyse the access of foreign workers to Public
Employment Offices. Their findings are perfectly consistent with the evidence
reported in this section from PER.LA data and with our analysis of LSF 2010
data.
50 The PER.LA survey (Survey on working paths of immigrant citizens; in Italian: “Indagine sui PERcorsi
LAVorativi dei cittadini immigrati”) was conducted in 18 Italian provinces (Roma, Milano, Napoli,
Torino, Palermo, Brescia, Trento, Vicenza, Padova, Parma, Bologna, Ancona, Firenze, Prato, Perugia,
Caserta, Rimini, Ragusa) in the period 2009–2010. It comprised a quantitative and a qualitative part.
For the quantitative part, a representative sample of about 16,000 immigrants was interviewed with
a structured questionnaire in all the provinces under analysis. The sampling methodology is the same
as in the ISMU survey. In the qualitative analysis, instead, the managers of the Public Employment
Offices in the 18 provinces were interviewed, together with four experts (privileged witnesses) for each
province (Cesareo, 2010).
51 The shares do not sum up to one because respondents could choose more than one answer.
52 See Bracalenti, Balestrieri, and Testore, I servizi per l’impiego e l’immigrazione: un confronto tra
diciotto realtà territoriali (ch 8) (2010) for a qualitative analysis of the services offered to foreign
workers by the Public Employment Offices.