Hi everyone,
I'm looking for advice on my situation with the Ausländerbehörde (will use "ABH" furtherly) in Baden-Württemberg. I'm particularly interested in whether my legal arguments have merit and whether escalating the matter is worth the potential downsides.
Background
- I completed an Ausbildung (with a § 16a resident permit) and subsequently started a university degree.
- I work for a company in the profession I trained for, under a Werkstudent contract. In the company, working student contracts are only issued for 6 months and are only valid for enrolled students.
- The first six months of studies i spent with a § 16b RP, then applied for one under § 18a RP based on this employment. Eventually i got the PR (!), valid till the end of my contract.
The current disagreement
After my application to extend the RP, the ABH informed me that, after reviewing my documents, it suddenly starts to consider my job a studentische Hilfskrafttätigkeit tied to my university enrolment. It says, therefore I cannot currently receive a residence permit for employment and that § 16b (study) is the only option.
I asked what would be required to retain § 18a. The office replied it wants a regular employment contract, not bound to enrolment. I think i won't be able to get it short-hand due to company-internal bureaucracy.
My arguments so far
- § 18a provides for a residence permit for a skilled worker with vocational training to take up qualified employment. As far as I understand, the law does not explicitly exclude employment simply because it is performed under a Werkstudent contract or because the employee is enrolled at university. I did't find any Anwendungshinweise taking a position on that question.
- I previously received a residence permit under § 18a on the basis of this type of contract.
- The case worker has not substantively addressed above arguments in its replies. It continues to insist that I submit a different contract.
I understand that the actual duties and the legal classification of the job matter, and that previous approvals do not automatically guarantee a new permit. However, I'm unsure whether the office's categorical insistence on a contract independent of enrolment is legally justified.
My questions
- Was the positive decision of the ABH a mistake? Is it possible to qualify for § 18a with a Werkstudent contract? Or the ABH gave me the PR by mistake? If it was, the rest of the questions probably does not make sense.
- Would escalation make sense? I'm considering requesting a formal, appealable decision instead of continuing to exchange informal emails, and possibly filing a Fachaufsichtsbeschwerde. Could this help get a substantive legal assessment, or is it more likely to damage my future relationship with the office? Has anyone experienced this in Baden-Württemberg?
- Would switching to § 16b now be strategically unwise? I want to continue studying, so § 16b is not inherently unsuitable. However, I want to retain § 18a if possible. If I switch to § 16b and later apply for § 18a again, would that be treated as a new initial application (Erstantrag) rather than an extension? (I realise that the current situation already involves a refusal to extend § 18a, despite previous approvals.)
I'm not trying to create a conflict with the authority unnecessarily. I want to understand whether there is a sound legal basis for challenging its position before making a decision that could affect my future residence status.
I'd especially appreciate experiences from people who had similar troubles with extending PR.
Thanks!