factors affecting low-skilled migrant workers’ decision in accessing voice mechanisms: a...
TRANSCRIPT
Factors affecting low-skilled migrant workers’ decision in accessing voice mechanisms: A comparativestudy between Thailand and Japan
1
By: Ruttiya Bhula-orUniversity of Tokyo
ILO 4th Conference on Regulating for Decent Work 8-10 July, 2015, Geneva, Switzerland
Motivation
2
The number of migrant workers has been increasing every year: from 154.2 million in 1990 to 231.5 million in 2013 (UN, 2013). A number of low-skilled workers are facing labour rights violation. To enable labour rights in practice, workers can express their concerns about possible misconduct at work through a voice mechanism (feedback/ complaint/ grievance mechanism).
ONLY a small number of migrant workers actually access that mechanism …Among those who are forced labourers only 8.9 per cent made grievance and more people wanted to do but did not do so ILO & ARCM(2013), Employment practices and working conditions in Thailand’s fishing sector
Collective channelVoice
mechanisms Individual channel
Eg. through labour unions
Eg. By the migrant himself
Previous Literature
3
A large body of previous literatures focus on:1) guidelines and recommendations by
International Organizations/ Government 2) case studies. 3) cases reported to migrants’ home countries
when they return ( e.g. Castro, 2010 in Philippines; ILO, 2013 in Srilanka; Farbenlum et al, 2013 in Indonesia).
Only the limited number of literatures on <migrant workers and the actual accessibility to the voice mechanism
at the receiving countries>
Research questions
4
To promote labour rights in practice by enabling migrant workers to meet the minimum national working standards.
1. What is the low-skilled migrants’ actual accessibility to the voice mechanism in developed and developing countries (using Thailand and Japan)?
2. What are factors affecting migrant workers’ decision to access voice mechanisms in response to labour rights’ violations and problems at work?
5
Scope of the study Thailand and Japan: Both countries are net immigrant
countries in East &South-East Asia and with similar religious background.
The interviews were conducted in Bangkok and Tokyo.
Focus on the service and manufacturing sectors
- Account a significant share of national incomes
- key economic sectors in the targeted area
- Avoid the sampling variation of the agricultural sector. In-bound low-skilled migrant workers (Occupational
categories): Eg domestic workers, manufacturing & service workers.
Accessibility to the voice mechanisms is an opportunity of workers that can reach to mechanisms to seek redress and/or remedies through any channel in full confidence, and with the understanding that no retaliatory action will be taken against migrant workers.
5
Methodology design
6
Many low-skilled migrant workers, especially in Thailand, are illiterate. Therefore, face-to-face interview approach is used.
A total of 150 structural interviews of low-skilled migrant workers in Thailand and Japan. Each interview took around 1-1.5 hour(s): (1) 75 Thai migrant workers in Japan (2) 75 Burmese and hill tribes in Thailand
The interviews included regular and irregular migrants
Access to workers was arranged through existing contacts: Friends, NGOs, community leaders, and government officials, through the snowballing technique and in the migrants’ traditional events/ communities.
Comparative analysis
Qualitative analysis
Quantitative analysis *
Background: Migrant workers in Thailand
7
- Thailand has become a regional migration hub in Southeast Asia, especially from neighbouring countries. The number of migrant stock in 2001 was 1.3 million , and 3.7 million in 2012 (UN, 2013).
- High share of irregular migrant workers. ie In 2013, the gap between the number of migrant stocks (UN estimate) and the regular migrant workers (Ministry of Labour) was 2.5 million workers.
- 89 per cent of migrant workers are estimated to be low-skilled migrant workers (Author’s estimation from the MOL statistics)
50.8%
20.2%
4.1
%
Top three of the number of migrant stock in Thailand (UN, 2013)
Background: Migrant workers in Japan
8
- The Japanese post-war economic miracle was during the 1960s to the 1980s driving a high average economic growth rate, driving a number of migrant workers to Japan.
- 1.4 million registered migrant workers in 2001 and 1.6 million in 2012.
- According to Iguchi ‘s (2012: 1055) estimate, 70% of the foreigners employed are low or semi-skilled workers.
31.4%
25.
2%
10.1%
Top three of the number of migrant stock in Japan
(UN, 2013)
Key comparison between Thailand and Japan
1 Opportunity Structure
10
2. Social and
political, and
economic structures
1. Institutional
climate 2) Grievance-handing procedure (until the final decision/ order)
3) Accessibility to Labour Offices and Physical Infrastructures
4) Rules and regulations in changing the employer1) Overall labour market environment and labour market flexibility
2) Network and support mechanisms
1) Migrant-related policies & Law enforcement
Concerns are classified into (1) Opportunity Structure and (2) Agency Structure
Key comparison between Thailand and Japan
11
2 Agency capability
2 Collective asset and capabilities
1 Individual asset and capabilities
1) Work permit & Employment contract
2) Education and skills
1) Organization and association in labour unions
Migrant workers’ views……. Accessibility to the voice mechanism
Thailand Japan0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
54.7%
17.3%
33.3%
61.3%
12.0%21.3%
I don't know
I know what to do, but I do not want to
88.0%
78.6%
12
If there is labour rights violation/ any problem at work (ie unpaid wages)……
13
• The nested structure is used to categorize choices and to help grouping the key factors, and supporting comparative analysis. The Sequential Logistic Model (SLM) is used. The same regressors are used in each level.
• Use the question: “If” there is labour rights violation/ any problem at work (ie unpaid wages) observing responses/ choices
Factors affecting Low-skilled Migrant Workers’ Decision in Accessing Voice Mechanisms
Act
Outcome
Do not know
Know
Do not act Actual accessibility
Possible factors affecting Low-skilled Migrant Workers’ Decision in Accessing Voice
Mechanisms
14
Individual characteristics (Agency of the targeted group) Age (+), Sex (Male +), Main source of income(+) ,
experience bad practices/ discrimination (+)
Education (+), skills (+), ability to speak local languages (+)
Legal status (regular/ irregular) <and employment contract>(+)
Institutional characteristics (Opportunity structure)
Legal/ institutional supports framework
Labour market factor
government support (+) / Place of work (Japan +)
Network (+)
Job options availability (legal and labour market)(+) /
work sector (Service +)
Factors affecting Migrant Workers’
Decision in Accessing Grievance
Mechanisms in Migrants’
Views
15
SLM step1 SLM step2Do not know=0 ; Know
=1Know, not act=0 Do not
know , not act=0B Exp(B) B Exp(B)
Intercept -5.648(2.913)***
0.004 -4.684(1.641)***
0.009
Place of work (Xsur) (work
in Japan)
3.656(1.346)***
38.715
Gov assistance (Xformals)1.676
(1.051)5.346
Network (Xnetwork)1.861
(0.853)**6.431 -1.902
(0.731)***.149
Job options availability (Xjobopt)
-1.524**(0.680)
.218 3.031(0.923)***
20.727
Work Sector (Xwsector)-2.879
(1.153)**.056
Age (Xage)-.007
(0.059)0.993
Sex (Xsex).708
(0.829)2.030 0.859
(0.752)2.361
Year of schooling (Xedu).249
(0.126)**1.283 0.363
(0.148)**1.438
Main source of income (XFam)
3.515(1.412)**
33.613
Work Sector (Xwsector)-2.879
(1.153)**.056
Work permit (Xworkps).810
(0.696)2.248
Ability to speak local language (Xspeakll)
-1.566(0.840)
.209
Working skills (Xwskill).613
(0.555)1.845
Experience bad practice (Xbddis)
-1.006(0.595)
.366
Nagelkerke R Square =
0.584; N=150Nagelkerke R Square =
0.429; N=82
Note: 1/ The variable concerning holding a proper work permit is neglected in the SLM step2. The simple crosstab indicates that all migrant workers who are taking actions are holding a proper work permit. The acceptable standard error in this study is set to be less than 2.
Factors affecting Low-skilled Migrant Workers’ Decision in Accessing Voice Mechanisms
Factors affecting MWs to know or
not
Year of schooling + [1.3]**
Survey in Japan+ [38.7]***Job options availability –
[0.8]**
Opportu-nity
structure
Agency structur
e
Network + [6.4]**
Main source of income + [33.6]**
Work in the manufacturing sector -
[0.94]**
Note: 1/ Factors [times]2/ *** significance at 1%; ** significance at 5%, * significance at 10%
Nagelkerke R Square = 0.429N=82
Nagelkerke R Square = 0.584N=150
Factors affecting MWs to act or not
Year of schooling +[1.4]**
Holding a proper work permit [precondition for
MWs]
Network -[0.9]***
Job options availability + [20.7]***
16
[times] Less than 1 = decrease Greater than 1= increase
Factors affecting Low-skilled Migrant Workers’ Decision in Accessing Voice Mechanisms
* Factors affecting the status of know/ do not know+ Survey in Japan Entering channels to the country: predeparture training.- High Job options availability (especially during
filing a complaint) do not know about grievance mechanisms
+ More network know what to do/ who to consult - Work in the manufacturing sector working characteristics
Opportunity Structure
* Factors affecting the status of taking actions+ Job options availability (especially during filing a complaint) Limitation on laws and survivals - More network Seek other alternatives
Note on insignificant factors: government mechanisms vital and necessary but still difficult to access 17
* Factors affecting the status of know/ do not know+ Year of schooling + Main source of income
Agent Structure
* Factors affecting the status of taking actions+ Year of schooling
Holding a proper work permit [precondition for MWs]
Note on insignificant factors: Languages ability needs someone to communicate their problems.
Factors affecting Low-skilled Migrant Workers’ Decision in Accessing Voice Mechanisms
18
Conclusions and Policy Implication
19
1) Regardless the level of economic development of receiving countries
- In migrant workers’ view: only a small share of low-skilled migrant workers know how to do and commit to respond to labour-related problems. [However, challenges of developing countries are law enforcements and large informal sectors.]
- In order to promote the accessibility of migrant workers not only those in developing countries but also developed countries
2) Reaffirm that government infrastructure is vital, but insufficient to ensure the actual accessibility to the voice mechanism.
3) To promote the actual accessibility to the voice mechanism Necessary and sufficient conditions
Conclusions and Policy Implication
20
Opportunity Structure Necessary conditions: Rights dissemination/ pre-
departure trainings/ promotion of the whole process in filing complaints and investigation (eg addressing language barriers, ensuring timely response)
Sufficient conditions: (1) Job options availability, TO ACT: in particular during the whole process of grievance handing. Those who perceive greater “job option availability” are 20.7 times likely to take action.
Change employers
period of time in searching for
jobs/ work sectors
Rules in changing employe
rs
Some recom-mendations
Develop referral
mechanisms and job
options for return MWsSelf development ( to widen job
opportunities and increase individual bargaining power)
Conclusions and Policy Implication
21
-> Sufficient conditions: (2) Network: TO KNOW
Those who have network are 6.4 times likely to know how to access to the voice mechanisms. BUT “How” the information goes is also important.
* Trade unions (including a form of advocacy network) play crucial roles in supporting migrant workers* ** Right information and supports ( eg witnesses/
evidences)**
Promotion of
accessibility to ICT/ Internet
Public- public
partnership
(G-NGOs/ TUs)
Some recom-mendations
Encourage
participation in
(general) unions*
( Must ensure inclusive
activities)
Accessibility to information at
needs
Group formation/ collective
capabilities
Support activities
to encourage
group formation (eg training)
Conclusions and Policy Implication
22
(2) Network (cont)
Case studies: In Japan, the union effectively helps providing
consultations, shelters as well as supports throughout the grievance-handling process. For example, A trainees could apply for workers’ compensation and
claimed for his unpaid wages (Godoy, 2010). An official of Labor Union helped negotiation between the
employer and the interns (Foster, 2013) Three trainees could collect the evidence and escape
from the factory by a Japanese union organizer (Harney and Slodkowski, 2014).
( ** on language barriers**) In Thailand, a labour union is hosting Migrant Resource
Centre (MRC) providing consultations, and supports throughout the grievance-handling process.
Conclusions and Policy Implication
23
(3) Working sector: TO KNOW
- The number of migrant workers working in the manufacturing sector is 94 per cent less likely to know how to access to the compliant mechanism that those working in the service sector- Especially when they do not have an employment contract.- BUT, the number of migrant workers are determined by a
countries’ quota and labour market needs in each country.- The possible policy implication is then focusing on
dissemination and outreach activities.
Promotion of accessibility
to ICT/ Internet
Information disseminati
on
Support activities to encourage
group formation/ outreach activities
Some recom-mendations
Conclusions and Policy Implication
24
Agency Structure Necessary conditions: TO ACT: Work permits (& employment contracts) ** Ensuring the practical accessibility to obtain a work permit (Timely, at reasonable cost, and comply to the national labour market-->Simplification, incentives, and coercion )******* Promotion of right understanding on the irregular migrants’
rights*****Sufficient conditions: TO KNOW and ACT: Year of schooling: Establishing
migrants’ schools/ learning centres (with the recognized skill/education) for basic skills/ elementary education in the countries of destination
Limitation of the study and future research
25
Potentially useful research areas that were not covered in this study are listed, but not limited to, as follows: 1. Larger population to cover comparative studies e.g:
- by national/ ethnic characteristics of migrant workers
- by sectoral differences - by size of enterprises - by Rural- urban area
2. Comparative study in the Western and the Eastern working conditions3. Baseline studies& evaluation tools to observe the degrees of changes from beneficiaries’ point of view
26
Thank you for your attention.
Ruttiya Bhula-or
Field of interest: Vulnerable workers, migrant workers, skills and employability, trade unions, collective bargaining,
empowerment
Email address: [email protected]