Freedom. For over sixty years, a group of states has fought to secure greater freedom of movement for Europe's workers: their ‘fourth freedom’. The Treaty of Rome (ToR) trumpeted the ‘Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Community by the end of the transitional period at the latest’ (ToR, 1957: Art. 48). Countless treaties, directives and court decisions have ploughed a path to make it easier for workers to find employment away from home. The focus of this effort has been on reducing the regulatory and administrative barriers that are held to inhibit the free movement of workers.

This effort at removing barriers is unique, important and popular. Although migrant workers continue to struggle with different languages and cultures, they face fewer formal barriers to mobility. Public opinion surveys have consistently showed that Europeans consider the free movement of people, goods and services within the European Union (EU) as the most positive result of European integration (see, for example, Eurobarometer, 2007: 94, and 2010). While there has been some critical discussion within Europe about the political cost of this fourth freedom (witness Brexit and the growing xenophobia across Europe), most policymakers and analysts continue to embrace the right to free migration in Europe, as do I.

If we can agree about the desirability of freer labour mobility, it is more difficult to agree about why, how, and even if, we should integrate Europe's sundry national labour markets. Indeed, we have never asked ourselves some of the most pressing questions related to labour market integration:

• • Does ‘labour mobility’ require a ‘common market for labour’?

• • What do we hope to achieve in creating a common labour market?

• • What (or who?) is a common labour market meant to serve?

I hope to spark a discussion about the benefits and costs of economic integration, especially labour market integration. I do this because I believe it is a mistake to create one common market for labour in Europe. A continent-size market for labour is simply not suitable for workers, who would prefer to find secure and well-paid jobs closer to home. If our objective is freedom (as I think it should be!), we can and should encourage labour mobility, while still providing stable, secure and well-paid jobs for workers where they live.