The UK is proof that free movement of labour doesn't work. When a foreign employee is taken on that puts pressure on the local infrastructure. Unless the employer is contributing enough in taxes to cover those costs (which might be hundreds of thousands of pounds to pay for new housing so the local population is not adversely affected, more capacity in public services and transport etc) then the new job is a net loss to the host nation. The employee and employer may benefit but overall the host nation does not, as the overall cost of living increases and the poorer members of society are most affected. That is why so many people across a wide section of society voted for Brexit - they're not stupid, they know they're worse off thanks to freedom of movement of labour in the EU.
The EU can either learn from this mistake and adapt or it will continue to fail and become more unpopular. The alternative is the UK can take the initiative by bypassing the EU and begin a new free trade agreement with interested partner nations, not necessarily restricted to Europe. You don't need free movement of people for free trade and capital movement. The EU knows this but is attempting to block the UK to justify it's own bureaucratic existence and maintain the heading for an EU superstate.
A sensibly run system would only permit an employer to take on a foreign worker if the local authority gave assurance there was sufficient free accommodation and capacity in public services to take them on.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
