Immigrants' children: how do they fare in western labour markets? On 25 October 2007, the British Academy published the first major cross-national study of ethnic minority disadvantage in the labour market. Unequal Chances focuses on the experiences of the 'second generation', that is of the children of immigrants, in a range of affluent western countries (western Europe, north America, Australia, Israel). The editors of the volume, Dr Sin Yi Cheung and Professor Anthony Heath FBA, highlight the conclusions of the study and the implications for policy-makers. This is followed by links to further material. |  |
Immigrants arrive in this country with little or no money. They don't speak much of the local language (if at all). Yet they work hard, they get by. They learn the local language; they send their children to the local schools.... Is this what we expect of the immigrants arriving in western affluent societies? But what happens to their children who are born and raised locally; the so-called second generation? Do we expect these local-born immigrant children to fare as well as the children from the majority population in getting ahead in life? Do these second-generation ethnic minorities compete on equal terms in the labour market with equally-qualified members of the white majority population? Have Western countries extended their liberal principles of meritocracy and equality of opportunity to ethnic minorities? Or are there processes of social closure generating patterns of ethnic stratification? Generational improvement? Broadly speaking, views on whether there is any generational improvement are divided. Optimists have suggested that, following experience of European migrants to the USA, Canada and Australia, the migrant generation would experience disadvantage but succeeding generations would come to compete on equal terms with the established majority population. Pessimists suggest that this experience may not apply to the 'new' migrations from less developed countries because of discrimination against 'visible' minorities or because of cultural and social legacies. Immigrants' disadvantage in the labour market There are many reasons why the first generation might fare badly in the labour market. Firstly, their foreign qualifications may not be recognised. Secondly, their lack of language fluency may hinder their opportunities to get desirable jobs. Thirdly, their lack of experience in the destination labour market may prevent them from getting the kind of work they would have wanted or were qualified for. However, these reasons will not apply with the same force to the second generation, among whom we should see reduced disadvantage. Cross-national-study of ethnic minorities' disadvantage in the labour market In a cross-national study of ethnic minority disadvantage in the labour market, published in Unequal Chances, a team of sociologists in thirteen countries examine ethnic minorities' disadvantage in the labour market with respect to employment and occupational attainment. Focussing on the second and later generations, this study covers the main Western countries that have substantial second-generation populations such as Australia, Canada, USA and many western European countries. The use of standardised analyses and the most authoritative datasets make precise comparisons possible. Countries in the study The study focuses on the developed countries where there have been large numbers of immigrants in the second half of the twentieth century. The thirteen countries can be broadly divided into three groups. The first group includes the classic immigrant countries such as Australia, Canada and the USA. Secondly, there is a group of developed countries in Western Europe: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and Great Britain. Finally, this study also includes South Africa, Israel and Northern Ireland which are also 'settler' societies built on migration although they have some distinctive features. Estimating 'ethnic penalties' In order to obtain a clear picture, it is necessary to compare the disadvantages experienced by ethnic minorities in comparison with equally-qualified members of the majority population of the same age. It is therefore important to distinguish the gross disadvantages that ethnic minorities typically experience in the labour market from the net disadvantages, or 'ethnic penalties', after controlling for educational qualifications and experience in the labour market. Although discrimination is likely to be a major factor accounting for ethnic penalties, other social processes might also be implicated. Patterns of ethnic stratification The gross difference between groups shows the overall extent of ethnic stratification in each society and the nature of the vertical mosaic. There is a clear pattern of ethnic stratification in each country which continues, although often with reduced magnitude, in the second generation. In each country, the hierarchy is broadly similar, with groups from North-West European origins being at the top, followed by those from other European countries. Immigrants from non-European origins rank towards the bottom, with indigenous peoples such as Aboriginals being the most disadvantaged of all. The rank order and the size of the disadvantages are broadly similar for women as for men. The role of education? It is perhaps not surprising to find ethnic minorities from less developed countries faring less well in the labour market due to their lack of educational qualifications. Education is widely accepted to be the most effective means for ethnic advancement in the labour market. If, however, they are still disadvantaged even after education is taken into account, then we have good reasons to believe that ethnic minorities are not competing on equal terms with the white majority population and are experiencing ethnic penalties. When unemployment and occupational attainment are considered, most groups of non-European ancestry experience substantial ethnic penalties even in the second and later generations. In a few countries, notably Australia and Canada, the second generation of European ancestry do not experience any ethnic penalties while groups of non-European ancestry do experience moderate ethnic penalties but only for employment. Those fortunate enough to have jobs get jobs commensurate with their qualifications. This is also true in the case of Britain, Sweden and the USA. In contrast, in many western European countries such as Austria, Belgium, France, Germany and the Netherlands, ethnic penalties are quite substantial for non-European minorities both with respect to securing employment as well as in gaining access to salaried jobs. Ethnic minorities in Belgium and France are particularly disadvantaged. How do we account for the cross-national differences? There are a number of possible explanations for the greater ethnic penalties experienced in Western Europe than in North America or Australia. First of all, the state of the labour market, for example, the level of unemployment and the flexibility of the local labour market, may be responsible. Secondly, prejudice against ethnic minorities and exclusionary or xenophobic attitudes may also in part explain these cross-national differences. Finally 'inclusivity', such as the ease of obtaining citizenship, and 'selectivity', such as immigration legislation that restricts entry to highly qualified migrations, may also explain the different fortunes of ethnic minority groups in western countries. With respect to unemployment, a combination of discrimination and the state of the labour market is probably the best explanation of the cross-national differences. There is greater cross-national variation in ethnic penalties in access to salaried jobs than there is with respect to employment. This seems to be most strongly linked to the degree of selectivity in the first generation. The largest ethnic penalties, found in Austria, Belgium and Germany, seem to be a legacy of guest worker programmes in these countries. Significance and implication for policies on immigration Legacies from the past are not easily overcome, as the experience of African Americans in the USA or Catholics in Northern Ireland suggests. It is unlikely that these disadvantages will disappear of their own accord, and government action will almost certainly be needed. Moreover, as riots in France and elsewhere have shown, failure to tackle the perceived injustice of being denied equal opportunity in a country that preaches meritocracy is a potentially explosive mix. In Northern Ireland, however, the 'troubles' of the 1970s led to rather successful affirmative action policies that do appear to be associated with a gradual reduction in Catholic disadvantage. This points to one possible course of action that governments could and perhaps should take. 7 November 2007
Further material Unequal Chances: Ethnic Minorities in Western Labour Markets, edited by Anthony F Heath & Sin Yi Cheung, with Shawna N Smith (Proceedings of the British Academy, 137)
published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press
732 pages; ISBN 978-0-19-726386-0
OUP catalogue entry
The British Academy held a conference on 'Ethnic Minority Disadvantage in the Labour Market: Cross-National Perspectives' on 14 November 2003, in association with the University of Oxford and Oxford Brookes University. In 2005, the British Academy Review published an article by Sin Yi Cheung & Anthony Heath, 'Ethnic Minority Disadvantages in the Labour Market in Cross-National Perspectives' (PDF), which described the collaborative study underpinning the conference.
Dr Sin Yi Cheung received a British Academy Larger Research Grant for her work on occupational and income inequalities in Britain and Hong Kong. | 