Santafe de Bogotá 19th of October 2004.

Dear Professor X and Institute Y:

I have taken a few days in order to write this reply to your last email, because the news you gave me were extremely hard to accept. With this letter I intend to be utterly honest with you and your team, and let you know my feelings and thoughts on the matter.

First of all, I must say the rejection was not only unexpected, but I consider that it lacks respects towards me and my current situation. It might just have been a misunderstanding, but I thought that the pressure you put on my prompt answer, not to mention the good interaction I had with you and your workgroup and the interest expressed by both parties meant that I had already been chosen for the position and you were just waiting for my final approval. Because of this, in order to give my final acceptance of your offer, not only had I to reject job offers but also I had to get in touch with my financial sponsors for the MSc in order to postpone my contractual commitments so I would be free to engage in my Ph.D studies in your institute.

The main source of my discontent and disappointment, however, comes from the reasons that were given to justify such disconcerting decision, namely a) the fact that in recent weeks visa regulation have got tougher, b) the difficulty in finding funding for a research project c) the urgent need of someone to start this week due to the imminent commencement of the term seem, to me, unfunded.

With respect to reason a), Immigration Intégration Emigration Suisse (IMES) of the Federal Office of Inmigration, Integration and Emigration of the Federal Department of Justice and Police, does not report any recent changes in work permit regulations, besides the “Popular vote of naturalisation”, which took place the 26th of September. The most recent change in the Federal Regulations seems to have taken place in 2002, with the New Foreign Nationals Act.

Considering that the general information regarding Work Permits type B states that:

“Permits may only be issued if the wage and employment conditions customary at the place and in the trade are being met (art. 9 OLE) and if no domestic worker who is willing to work under those conditions can be found. (art 7 OLE; priority of domestic workers). The domestic worker priority is not effective in terms of international transfers of executives and highly qualified specialists as well as of persons who obtained a residence permit in connection with the family reunion. Exceptions concerning the domestic worker priority can be made in case of training and further education purposes. First time work permits can only be exceptionally issued to non EU/EFTA citizens if they are highly qualified or if special reasons justify an exception.” (The underlining is mine)

Taking into account the fact that you clearly stated in our first interview that I was more qualified than the other candidate and that the work permit you offered me implied the pursuit of further education (meaning a Ph.D), I simply cannot understand how I do not comply with the visa regulation mentioned above.

On the other hand, in our first interview I was very clear with you regarding how difficult visa international regulations treated Colombian citizens, this warning was intended to make sure visa regulations were not going to be a hindrance for my ulterior inclusion in your institute; however, not only you encouraged me to go further into it by visiting you in XX, but also remained positive throughout the whole selection process, especially during our last meeting. It was extremely impolite to give me false hopes on this legal matter, because it seems that the selection process was carelessly taken further, without checking the actual regulations.

In addition to this, on the personal side, I have been raised in one of the best European (private) school of my country, so from a young age, I have been taught to be a world citizen. I have learned a number of languages in order to be able to blend myself in the international context and as I result, I was able to successfully pursue my Master of Science in Economics    in a renowned university, nowadays considered number 25 in the world  and 4th in Europe, just above the one swiss university  . Clearly my professional background is hard to match even within Switzerland, so it is really sad to me to hear that no matter my high personal and professional qualifications even if visa regulations seem to be against me it seems not to be worth engaging in such legal process to hire me: I am therefore bound to tell you that I feel shamelessly discriminated by the final decision, especially if we consider that

“One quarter of the entire volume of work in Switzerland is carried out by gainfully employed foreign nationals – this amounts to almost two thousand million hours a year”

Regarding reason b) it was clearly stated in our interview that the university and therefore the institute benefited from federal funding which allowed them to liberally engage in the most relevant research projects for the Institute. It therefore seems that either the job offer was made without a clear idea of what sort of research was I going to be engaged in (with a consequent incautious financial planning), or the information given to me was inexact and false, which seems to contradict the high personal standards of the Institute, standards that attracted me in the first place.

Finally, about reason c), I would like to emphasize the fact that among the reasons I was given to join the Institute, was the fact that not only was I going to be hired through a work permit, but also that the whole visa process would take a few months would allow me to take a much needed rest. The fact that the term was going to initiate soon was going to be solved by temporarily hiring the other applicant. It is therefore extremely inconsequent that the reasons that were initially given to me to attract me to the Institute are now used to deny me the opportunity.

Again, I can accept that this whole process might have been an enormous and unfortunate misunderstanding. I finally wish to add that despite the whole situation I am extremely grateful for the opportunity I was given and I hope this letter conveys my sadness and confusion regarding how my application was turned down, because for the first time in a long time I felt I was valued as professional regardless of my nationality, because at the Institute I felt at home and I was bewildered by your warmth, human and honest interaction, which lacks in the British Academia. I do agree with you that these are, indeed, your highest principles, principles I wanted to share and take to a higher level by working with you.

I wish you all the best in your future endeavours, and again thank you for your giving me such an astounding opportunity.

Yours,

                  Leda Swan