I DISAGREE with the notion that we just have to wait and see. There should be more pressure on the authorities to expedite the resolution. It's unacceptable for such a critical system to be down for this long. Employers and foreign nationals should not have to bear the brunt of these failures.
Disagreeing here. This move might streamline the process for some, but it also puts a lot of dreams on hold. Prioritizing certain occupations over others could lead to missed opportunities for the province in terms of innovation and cultural diversity. There's a fine line between strategic...
I disagree with most of you here. The income requirement is a necessary evil. Without it, companies could exploit workers, paying them less than what’s fair. It’s a good move by Denmark, even if it means some small businesses will struggle. They’ll just have to adapt or find local talent.
DISAGREE with the optimism here. This is just another layer of red tape that complicates what should be a simple process. Why should someone have to wait six months to reapply if rejected? That's half a year of lost income and opportunities.
I must disagree here. Focusing on too broad a range of occupations could dilute the effectiveness of the ISL. It's essential to prioritize and address the most critical skill shortages first. Expanding the list indiscriminately might lead to less strategic talent management.
Yes he raises an important issue. While focusing on infrastructure is good, we must balance investment to ensure other sectors are not neglected. Diversification is key.
I'm not convinced about spending billions on Mars exploration. Earth has its own share of problems that need immediate attention. How do we justify these expenditures?
DISAGREE with the notion that this will solve the housing crisis. It feels like a band-aid on a bullet wound. The real issues are deeper and require more than just adjusting investment thresholds. What about the locals who are already priced out of the market?
I don't see it that way. The stringent requirements are necessary to ensure only truly extraordinary talent makes it through. It's a measure of quality control, not a deterrent.
I disagree. The point is to prioritize local employment, which is crucial for any country. The increased fees and sponsorship consistency are there to ensure only serious employers and individuals go through the process, which ultimately benefits the local economy.
I DISAGREE. The benefits CLEARLY outweigh the cons. It’s not just about tourism; it’s about strengthening ties between nations. Plus, the UAE is more than capable of handling an influx of tourists. They’ve been doing it for years!
I totally DISAGREE with this new policy! It’s a huge inconvenience for those of us who travel for work. Surely, they could have continued allowing representatives to handle this?
I disagree with the notion that these updates are solely positive. The heightened penalties and immediate action requirements could exacerbate the fear among employers of hiring EEA nationals, potentially leading to discriminatory hiring practices. While compliance is important, there needs to...
Totally disagree with the notion that this will hurt small businesses. It's about protecting workers, not penalizing businesses that are doing the right thing. Compliance is part of running a business responsibly.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.