Skip to content

Week 5: Legal rights and workplace protections for migrant workers

It's not a question of 'what can be done?', but one of 'what are we willing to do?'

Week 5: Legal rights and workplace protections for migrant workers
Adriano Giulio Giovanelli. All rights reserved
Published:

It is often stated that ‘charity begins at home’. This popular truism builds upon a powerful image of the world which divides humanity into insiders and outsiders. Insiders are typically defined on the basis of shared race, ethnicity, or religion. Outsiders are typically defined on the basis of markers of difference, such as having a different skin colour, a different language, a different faith, or even different clothes or food. Hostility towards outsiders is a recurring feature of human history, with the most extreme examples involving entire groups of people being targeted for extermination.

Divisions between insiders and outsiders have major implications for migration. Tremendous amounts of wealth and energy are now devoted to preventing ‘undesirable’ outsiders from crossing international borders. Securing legal permission to move from one country to another has never been harder for people with the ‘wrong’ passport, with elaborate application procedures and challenging financial requirements being placed upon people seeking to move for work, to study, or to even visit as tourists. Migrants who are unable to secure legal permission to travel are, in turn, faced with all kinds of barriers which are designed to make movement as difficult and dangerous as possible. Efforts to prevent movement rarely reduce the number of people on the move to any degree. They instead increase the dangers and vulnerabilities associated with movement.

These efforts to prevent movement are not inspired by humanitarian sentiments. They are instead primarily motivated by cultural and economic anxieties. However, we also have many cases where the language of preventing trafficking or slavery has been invoked to present an humanitarian wrapping for policies decided on other grounds. When Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring his intention to ‘build a wall’ in 2017, he publicly justified his decision in terms of preventing ‘illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism’. Building a wall is clearly not a policy that arises out of a concern for migrants, but this is nonetheless where many anti-trafficking and anti-slavery policies end up: more and more border protection. This is not helpful. Efforts to prevent movement are often part of the problem, rather than the solution.