Via Yglesias, Kerry Howley has an interesting article on guest works in Singapore in Reason magazine:
And yet Manalac is very much a guest in this country. He says he’ll
remain for as long as they’ll have him, though he doesn’t presume to
have any right to stay. If he were fired or became unable to work, he’d have to leave within seven days. He is subject to regular medical examinations to ensure that he is HIV-negative. He can’t bring his children here. He can’t bring his wife here. Were his marriage to fail, it would be illegal for him to marry a Singaporean. Were he female, a pregnancy would mean repatriation or abortion. The Singaporean government has made itself very clear: Foreign workers are here to build a nest egg, not to build a nest...Manalac is permitted to work only in construction, and only for the employer who brought him here. If he is unhappy with his employer or feels he is being mistreated, he can return to the employment agency and request a new job, but the process is cumbersome and can be difficult to navigate.
None of this seems to bother him in the least. It’s just part of the deal, and the deal has worked out well for him. He says he harbors no resentment toward the government of Singapore: He is angry at his home government for depriving him of a job, not at Singapore for giving him one. He has never really had to wade into the bureaucracy; never had to fight to stay or to change employers. Those that have faced such problems have reason to feel more conflicted about the well-guarded doors Singapore opens for the region’s poor...
If there is one collective experience that should give the world pause about guest worker programs, it is the plight of Indonesian maids. Unlike male workers who are given housing, a day off once a week, and regulated hours, domestic workers often live with families with full control over the terms of their employment. They run a higher risk of abuse than other foreigners, and Asian tabloids are full of horrific headlines to that effect. There are stories of maids being burned with hot irons, scalded with boiling water, sexually abused by male employers and then physically abused by jealous wives.
It’s worth reading the whole article. It makes as good of an argument that can be made for such programs while at the same time being quite honest about the flaws in the program.
That said, I ultimately disagree. More after the break.
Anyhow, I do accept that on the balance, migrating into even a bad system is probably an economic step up for your average citizen of a less developed country. Similarly, while I was a bit surprised to learn that many of America’s old school European immigrants went back home, I’m okay with that. I’m fondly inclined towards immigrants that want to become Americans, but they’re not the only kind that are worthwhile.
However, this doesn’t translate into a strong argument for guest workers. As Matt Yglesias notes:
That said, given that the crux of the opposition to such programs for the United States is "it’s repugnant and un-American, violating everything this country stands for" to say in reply but look at how well it works in a small, regimented, highly inegalitarian Asian dictatorship doesn’t seem very persuasive.
The experience of a more similar society, Germany, is not something that many Americans look at and would desire to replicate.
My real fear with temporary worker programs is that they’ll weaken the ability to become American by either birth in country or blood. That’s what keeps illegal immigrants from becoming a big multi-generational problem. The next generation isn’t illegal. Family reunification can round out such progranms.
That said, I think there is legitimate concern regarding immigration from Mexico. It’s a special issue as there’s a big border and a big disparity in national wealth. While I do support trying to use aid and other measures to help Mexico developed, I’d be willing to consider some sort of seasonal worker program that would be a bit stricter (but not limiting citizenship of kids). However, I’d want that tied in with transnational labor rights and unions. Workers competing against one another in America need to have the same basic protections.
It's an interesting article, and I generally agree. I think that you want more people to feel free to come and work, if it helps your economy, but it does seem fraught with problems to not give them enfranchisement if they really do well by your society. I'm not really in favor of guest workers, personally, but there are definitely lots of people out there looking to immigrate; I don't see why there's not some more space for letting people in.
Posted by: Moti | December 25, 2007 at 07:39 PM