London's Migrant Division of Labour

Abstract

This article is located in the maelstrom of debate about immigration and employment in the contemporary economy. The article presents original analysis of data from the Labour Force Survey and a workplace case-study in the cleaning sector to highlight growing employer dependence on a very diverse pool of foreign-born labour. The article explains such dependency by drawing on interview material collected from employers, employers' associations, community organizations and policymakers. In sum, we argue that London's Migrant Division of Labour (MDL) is a product of the semi-autonomous actions taken by employers, workers and government in the particular context of London. Understanding the MDL thus needs to encompass employer demand, migrants' 'dual frame of reference' and limited access to benefits, as well as employers' preference for foreign-born workers over 'native' labour supply.The state is also argued to play a critical role in this employment, determining the nature and terms of immigration, the accessibility and levels of benefits, and employment regulation. London's MDL is shown to intersect with, and in some cases overturn, existing patterns of labour market segmentation on the basis of human capital (class), ethnicity and gender.

The Making of Immigrant Niches in an Affluent Welfare State

“…Decades of research from the United States and the United Kingdom (Piore 1979;Waldinger 1994;Waldinger and Lichter 2003;Wills et al 2009;Ruhs and Anderson 2010) as well as more recent studies from the Mediterranean area (Gertel and Sippel 2014;Corrado, de Castro, and Perrotta 2016) describe the emergence and growth of immigrant niches within a number of low-wage settings. Moreover, these studies all show that immigrant niche formation shares similar features with the processes analyzed in this article.…”

“…The employment situation of immigrants and the formation of immigrant niches have been important topics of study in the field of immigration research (e.g., Portes and Bach 1985;Portes and Jensen 1989;Model 1993;Waldinger 1994;Waldinger and Bozorgmehr 1996;Wills et al 2009;Ruhs and Anderson 2010). Collectively, this work has sought either to supplement or challenge more mainstream human capital theories about the labor market (Portes 2010).…”

“…With an increasingly wealthy, socially protected, and highly educated native-born population, Norway has seen the lower tiers of many traditional working-class industries increasingly dominated by immigrant workers (Friberg 2013). Although this process shares important features of immigrant niche formation occurring in other contexts like the United States (e.g., Model 1993;Waldinger 1994;Waldinger and Der-Martirosian 2001), the United Kingdom (e.g., Wills et al 2009;Ruhs and Anderson 2010), and the Mediterranean area (e.g., Gertel and Sippel 2014;Corrado, de Castro, and Perrotta 2016), we argue that these contextual specificities are important to understanding how immigrant niches have emerged in Norway.…”

“…Research has consistently showed that many newcomers tend to concentrate within particular occupations and industries, in what have been labeled immigrant niches (e.g., Waldinger 1994;Waldinger and Lichter 2003;Wills et al 2009;Ruhs and Anderson 2010). Moreover, such occupational, industrial, and geographical clustering tends to go beyond what could be explained using a standard human capital approach.…”

Analysing the ‘migrant work ethic’ – Comparing managers’ perceptions of local workers and Central and Eastern European migrants in the United Kingdom

“…By comparison, migrants from the A8 nations were seen as those who had moved as a result of a desire to work, and thus were both unlikely to have involvement with the welfare system, or to use JobCentres as a route into work. However, by concentrating on this narrative, this deflects attention away from the job quality and work conditions of these roles (Wills, 2009). …”