Securing Social Security for Migrant Workers:1 Orthodox Approaches or an Alternative (Regional/Political) Path for Southern Africa?
| Published date | 01 March 2010 |
| Pages | 24-45 |
| DOI | 10.3366/E0954889009000498 |
| Date | 01 March 2010 |
| Author | Terry Carney |
The South African Constitutional Court decision in
The explanation for the lack of practical impact, it will be suggested, lies in the understandable political entrenchment of a ‘national’ concept of citizenship rights, coupled with the magnitude of the forces involved in global movements of finance, trade and migratory labour. The first will be shown to explain why noncitizens are denied welfare when living and working in another country, and even expatriate citizens from wealthy countries like Australia are denied portability of previously accrued rights when not living in their home country; as well as explaining why the only domestic legislative response to Khosa was not an alteration to migrant welfare rights but parity of age pension ages for citizens. The second will be shown to explain why neither major receiving nor major sending countries for migratory labour have signed on to the ‘exemplary’ protections of the 1990 Convention on the Rights of All Migrants and their Families.
While also no panacea, it will be argued that the developing world may instead draw some comfort from the political potential for multilateral or bilateral treaties to secure limited protections for citizens of the member states of given regions, as illustrated by the European Union (EU) and Caribbean experience.
Recognition of rights to social security for workers who are not citizens of the country where they are employed is complicated by the comparative immobility of movement of labour compared to the relative freedom of movement of world trade, finance and investment (as promoted by agencies such as the WTO and facilitated by electronic movement of funds),
T. Andersen, ‘International Integration and the Welfare State’, in T. Andersen and P. Molander (eds)
International migration is driven by a variety of considerations, including personal, political, climatic and economic influences; it is most dramatically illustrated by the plight of refugees, whether due to political, ethnic and economic forces, or the result of necessity or natural disasters such as climate-change-induced inundation of low-lying Pacific islands or Asian sub-continental deltas. International migration can be divided into several categories: refugees, immigrant settlers, ‘as of right’ migrant workers within territories such as the EU, temporary migrants or ‘guest’ workers, and ‘illegal’ immigrants.
Compare A. Nussberger, ‘Comment: “The Challenge of Migration to the Welfare State”', in E. Benvenisti and G. Nolte (eds),
International labour mobility has always been present, and is currently driven both by worker aspirations to escape poverty and by neoliberal economic prescriptions favouring free markets permitting labour to be engaged wherever in the world it is cheapest to obtain. For economic enterprises that cannot or do not relocate in order to reduce labour costs, and for workers seeking better pay and conditions than their home country can provide, labour mobility is one answer. Temporary migrant/guest-worker schemes for instance have grown rapidly.
Reportedly increasing by 9 per cent a year within the OECD since 1997: D. Agunias,
NZ Visa Bureau,
But while temporary worker schemes have appeal in the EU and Africa, their appeal is not universal. Migration policy may trump these considerations. Thus, in common with countries such as the USA and Canada, Australia has historically favoured ‘nation-building’ rather than serving as a temporary destination for guest workers, despite several reports recommending a policy shift over the last two decades.
Parliamentary Library,
Thus in recent years Australia granted work rights annually to around 100,000 backpackers from countries deemed at low risk of overstaying twelve-month ‘working holiday maker’ visas:
Australia's ‘temporary business (long stay) “457”’ visa enabled around 50,000 overseas workers and their families to fill skilled occupations (such as managerial, professional or ‘skilled’ trades), sponsored by approved businesses (but not labour supply agents) for renewable periods of up to four years, subject to meeting identified skills needs and minimum salaries; and with rights to apply for permanent residence thereafter:
M. Crock, ‘Contract or compact: skilled migration and dictates of politics and ideology’, in M. Crock and K. Lyon (eds),
Remittances by migrants to their countries of origin are a very significant source of external funds for individuals in developing countries, estimated to exceed US$126 billion for 2004, ranking ahead of foreign aid transfers and just behind foreign direct investment.
D. Ratha, ‘Workers’ remittances: an important and stable source of external development finance', in S. Maimbo and D. Ratha (eds),
For example, remittances comprise 39 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in Tonga, 36 per cent in Tuvalu and 14 per cent in Samoa.
J. Gibson, G. Boe-Gibson, H. Rohorua and D. McKenzie,
C. Stahl, ‘Trade in Labour Services and Migrant Worker Protection with Special Reference to East Asia’, 37
Temporary workers who make such remittances are often disadvantaged in two ways. The remittance impoverishes their standard of living in the host country; while lack of access to, or portability of, social security adds to their insecurity while in the country and denies temporary workers the fruits of their social insurance (or taxation) contributions towards their future social security entitlements on return to their home country.
Unskilled migrants, especially women, are often also very vulnerable to exploitation in the form of degraded working conditions, occupational health and safety risks, failure to honour wage standards, gender discrimination and sexual abuse, and a general lack of access to rights enforcement machinery.
L. Mpedi, ‘Introduction’, in U. Becker and M. Olivier (eds),
To continue reading
Request your trial