Labor Migration as a Source of Institutional Change: Danish and Australian Construction Sectors Compared

Abstract

In this article, the authors examine the role of labor immigration as a source of institutional change. They use a “most different systems” comparative case study analysis of the Danish and Australian construction sectors to examine the impact of increased labor migration on skill-sourcing practices in countries with distinct national skill formation and industrial relations institutions. Drawing on 73 interviews with industry stakeholders, the authors find that labor migration has produced liberalizing pressures in both Denmark and Australia, albeit in ways that differ from each other. The article contributes to comparative institutional scholarship by illustrating how labor migration can promote or support institutional change in a liberalizing direction by disincentivizing coordinated skill formation. Findings suggest that while national institutions mediate external pressures, such as labor migration, such pressures may affect the incentive structures that can either maintain or erode national institutions.

Proposing mobility visas as an alternative to employer sponsorship: Addressing inequalities in the treatment of temporary migrant workers

“…It is likely that mining firms no longer needed EMAs because their demand for labour was declining, as reflected in the diminishing rates of 457 sponsorship in the Western Australian mining and construction sectors after 2012. The design of the scheme was otherwise generally sound and analogous to successful industry-wide mechanisms for addressing skills needs in Denmark, Germany, and other European countries (Arnholtz and Wright 2023).…”

Short‐term fix or remedy for market failure? Immigration policy as a distinct source of skills

“…Similarly, Green et al (2016) attribute increased migration intakes as one of several factors contributing to the significant decline in training volume in the United Kingdom in recent decades. Arnholtz and Wright (2023) characterise these as the ‘liberalizing pressures’ that increased labour migration can create for training institutions.…”

“…This has involved various changes to the VET system to make it ‘market‐driven’, and an expansion of skilled immigration intakes particularly in response to employer lobbying (Oliver & Wright, 2016; Sheldon, 2005; Toner, 2018). These changes have reinforced and deepened the liberal orientation of skills policy in Australia (Arnholtz & Wright, 2023). However, these outcomes have been far from uniform, with considerable variation across industries and occupations.…”

“…The industry is characterised by cyclical demand, which can present challenges to sourcing skilled labour, but there are established systems such as apprenticeships for meeting this demand. However, as various studies note, construction employers have become less committed to investing in the workforce, as evident by a large proportion of workers in insecure work arrangements (Arnholtz & Wright, 2023; Fortwengel et al, 2021; Veen & McGrath‐Champ, 2021). The industry has at times been a large sponsor of temporary skilled migrant workers, but this fluctuated has in recent years.…”

“…Although immigration policy is critically important for supplying labour and skills to organisations, industries and nations, this is not widely acknowledged within academic research on skills, education and training (Arnholtz & Wright, 2023). Indeed, scholarship on skills is largely devoid of any mention of immigration policy and its contribution to skills production.…”