Benefits and challenges of labour migration

The countries in question can be classified according to their status as sending or receiving country in correspondence to their level of social and economic development. Workers move between them, cascading from poorer to richer countries. In each of the countries, they mainly take jobs in labour-intensive sectors with low skill requirements and low pay. These are most of all construction, agriculture, hotel and catering as well as domestic services. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Migrants defines a migrant worker as a â€Å"person who is to be engaged, is engaged or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a state of which he or she is not a resident†. But there is considerable conceptual difficulty in defining a migrant. Migration of labourer takes different forms. In one end, the place of working and residence of the labourer may be different, and the distance covered by daily commuting. At the other end, the worker’s may move permanently from their places of birth or usual place of residence, maintaining little or no contact with their places of origin. Between these two ends, people move away for differing periods of time. Based on how long they are away from their place of origin, the migrants are distinguished as ‘permanent’, ‘semi-permanent’ and ‘temporary’. Labour migration belongs to temporary migration, which is likely to stay away from their places of origin for more than a few months in a year. The temporary migrants are also known as ‘short duration’ migrants, ‘seasonal’ migrants or ‘circulatory’ migrants. The decision to migrate for economic reasons can have both positive and negative consequences. Migrants may secure a better income, have access to better social services, and be able to provide a better education for their children or benefit from the enrichment of becoming a member of a transnational community at ease in different cultures. However, migration may also cause family disruption when family members have to stay behind, and may involve sacrificing a familiar lifestyle and becoming a â€Å"stranger† in a new country. The complexity of the present day migration stream has intensified with distinctions between migrant workers, trainees, tourists, refugees and displaced persons becoming increasingly blurred. The term â€Å"migrants† appears to be broader than the term ‘migrant workers’ and is increasingly used in international discussions of human rights. The traditional explanation of migration as a movement from poor to rich nations is too simplified. There are both economic and non-economic factors affecting these flows. International migration has contributed to growth and prosperity in both host and source countries. Migrant worker remittances represent the second largest international monetary trade flow, exceeded only by petroleum. Migrants also provide a valuable source of semi-skilled and unskilled labour to many industrialising countries and provide a source of highly skilled labour to advanced countries, thereby assisting the latter in maintaining economic competitiveness. Labour migration policies differ from other migration policies directed at migration flows that may also have an impact on labour markets, for example refugee and family reunification, in the sense that they do not have humanitarian objectives but apply economic criteria with a view to responding to labour market needs. Governments at all points on the migration spectrum increasingly recognize the potential of regulatory mechanisms to maximize the positive impact of labour migration. Many sending and receiving countries are developing their regulatory capacities to manage labour mobility by considering the interests of respective governments, societies, and the migrant. Positive tensions for receiving countries: raise total output and incomes in the rich, host countries; increase efficiency in the use of the world’s resources all around, in rich and poor countries; increase the supply of entrepreneurship and stimulate the creation of small business; increase savings, investment, and human capital formation in the rich countries; accelerate the pace of innovation; increase the flow of remittances to poor countries; alleviate the economic problems associated with the aging population in rich countries. Globalization is a major driving force of international labour migration. Globalization has made migration much easier through better communications, dissemination of information through mass media and improved transport. Countries are at different stages of demographic transition, with developing countries typically having younger populations than developed countries. One of the most frequently cited costs of migration is so-called ‘brain drain’ — the loss of educated workers with valuable skills, which can impose large losses on governments that bear the costs of education and training. Brain drain is potentially a concern for all economies, both developing and developed, with some developed economies experiencing significant rates of skilled emigration. The greatest global concern in the area of international labour migration is the unprecedented rise in irregular forms of migration that has occurred in recent years. The numbers of unauthorized migrant workers are increasing in virtually every part of the world. A large proportion of labour migration occurs illegally, aided and abetted by a clandestine and often criminal industry. Increasingly, governments of both sending and receiving countries are developing regulatory mechanisms to manage labour migration. These include selective recruitment policies by countries needing labour, and strong marketing and overseas employment strategies by countries supplying labour. Migrant workers benefit host countries in a number of ways. The overall economic impact of all migrant workers to the UK for example suggests that they make a positive net contribution of around  £2.5 billion to the public accounts. There are huge implications for sending countries as a result of out-migration, the most crucial of which are the loss of expertise and skills. This brain drain is particularly acute in developing countries, especially where the move abroad is permanent. Public services, such as health, education and social services, are losing large numbers of skilled workers to migration. Structural changes and decreasing investment in the public sector has increased the pressure on public sector workers to migrate, as shown by trends in the health and education sectors. Although many economic migrants work in relatively low-paid jobs they regularly send money home to their families and relatives. However, it is difficult to estimate the scale of these remittances to sending countries because of the often informal manner in which they are returned, but there is little doubt that they contribute to the national income of the countries involved, and act as a stimulus to longer-term economic growth. Migrant workers who return home bring experience and knowledge from working in another country. This benefits the home country as a whole by adding to its pool of talented workers, particularly where the skills are relevant to the needs of the home economy and the migrant workers are willing to use them upon return. It also benefits the individual worker who will have developed through contact with people possessing a range of human, intellectual and professional skills. Access to educational and language courses in the host country should open up opportunities for career promotion at home and assist the personal development of each worker. Bibliography International Organisation for Migration. 2005. World Migration 2005. Costs and Benefits of International Migration. Kothari, U. (2002). Migration and chronic poverty. Chronic Poverty Research Centre. Institute for Development Policy and Management. University of Manchester. Working Paper No. 16. Linard, Andre. (1998). Migration and globalization: The new slaves. Brussels: ICFTU, July. Stalker, Peter. (2000). Workers without frontiers: The impact of globalization on international migration. International Labour Office, Geneva. World Economic and Social Survey. (2004). International migration trends Chapter11. World Health Organisation. Health and Human Rights Publications Series. Issue No.4 (December 2003). International Migration, Health and Human Rights. Benefits and challenges of labour migration The countries in question can be classified according to their status as sending or receiving country in correspondence to their level of social and economic development. Workers move between them, cascading from poorer to richer countries. In each of the countries, they mainly take jobs in labour-intensive sectors with low skill requirements and low pay. These are most of all construction, agriculture, hotel and catering as well as domestic services. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Migrants defines a migrant worker as a â€Å"person who is to be engaged, is engaged or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a state of which he or she is not a resident†. But there is considerable conceptual difficulty in defining a migrant. Migration of labourer takes different forms. In one end, the place of working and residence of the labourer may be different, and the distance covered by daily commuting. At the other end, the worker’s may move permanently from their places of birth or usual place of residence, maintaining little or no contact with their places of origin. Between these two ends, people move away for differing periods of time. Based on how long they are away from their place of origin, the migrants are distinguished as ‘permanent’, ‘semi-permanent’ and ‘temporary’. Labour migration belongs to temporary migration, which is likely to stay away from their places of origin for more than a few months in a year. The temporary migrants are also known as ‘short duration’ migrants, ‘seasonal’ migrants or ‘circulatory’ migrants. The decision to migrate for economic reasons can have both positive and negative consequences. Migrants may secure a better income, have access to better social services, and be able to provide a better education for their children or benefit from the enrichment of becoming a member of a transnational community at ease in different cultures. However, migration may also cause family disruption when family members have to stay behind, and may involve sacrificing a familiar lifestyle and becoming a â€Å"stranger† in a new country. The complexity of the present day migration stream has intensified with distinctions between migrant workers, trainees, tourists, refugees and displaced persons becoming increasingly blurred. The term â€Å"migrants† appears to be broader than the term ‘migrant workers’ and is increasingly used in international discussions of human rights. The traditional explanation of migration as a movement from poor to rich nations is too simplified. There are both economic and non-economic factors affecting these flows. International migration has contributed to growth and prosperity in both host and source countries. Migrant worker remittances represent the second largest international monetary trade flow, exceeded only by petroleum. Migrants also provide a valuable source of semi-skilled and unskilled labour to many industrialising countries and provide a source of highly skilled labour to advanced countries, thereby assisting the latter in maintaining economic competitiveness. Labour migration policies differ from other migration policies directed at migration flows that may also have an impact on labour markets, for example refugee and family reunification, in the sense that they do not have humanitarian objectives but apply economic criteria with a view to responding to labour market needs. Governments at all points on the migration spectrum increasingly recognize the potential of regulatory mechanisms to maximize the positive impact of labour migration. Many sending and receiving countries are developing their regulatory capacities to manage labour mobility by considering the interests of respective governments, societies, and the migrant. Positive tensions for receiving countries: raise total output and incomes in the rich, host countries; increase efficiency in the use of the world’s resources all around, in rich and poor countries; increase the supply of entrepreneurship and stimulate the creation of small business; increase savings, investment, and human capital formation in the rich countries; accelerate the pace of innovation; increase the flow of remittances to poor countries; alleviate the economic problems associated with the aging population in rich countries. Globalization is a major driving force of international labour migration. Globalization has made migration much easier through better communications, dissemination of information through mass media and improved transport. Countries are at different stages of demographic transition, with developing countries typically having younger populations than developed countries. One of the most frequently cited costs of migration is so-called ‘brain drain’ — the loss of educated workers with valuable skills, which can impose large losses on governments that bear the costs of education and training. Brain drain is potentially a concern for all economies, both developing and developed, with some developed economies experiencing significant rates of skilled emigration. The greatest global concern in the area of international labour migration is the unprecedented rise in irregular forms of migration that has occurred in recent years. The numbers of unauthorized migrant workers are increasing in virtually every part of the world. A large proportion of labour migration occurs illegally, aided and abetted by a clandestine and often criminal industry. Increasingly, governments of both sending and receiving countries are developing regulatory mechanisms to manage labour migration. These include selective recruitment policies by countries needing labour, and strong marketing and overseas employment strategies by countries supplying labour. Migrant workers benefit host countries in a number of ways. The overall economic impact of all migrant workers to the UK for example suggests that they make a positive net contribution of around  £2.5 billion to the public accounts. There are huge implications for sending countries as a result of out-migration, the most crucial of which are the loss of expertise and skills. This brain drain is particularly acute in developing countries, especially where the move abroad is permanent. Public services, such as health, education and social services, are losing large numbers of skilled workers to migration. Structural changes and decreasing investment in the public sector has increased the pressure on public sector workers to migrate, as shown by trends in the health and education sectors. Although many economic migrants work in relatively low-paid jobs they regularly send money home to their families and relatives. However, it is difficult to estimate the scale of these remittances to sending countries because of the often informal manner in which they are returned, but there is little doubt that they contribute to the national income of the countries involved, and act as a stimulus to longer-term economic growth. Migrant workers who return home bring experience and knowledge from working in another country. This benefits the home country as a whole by adding to its pool of talented workers, particularly where the skills are relevant to the needs of the home economy and the migrant workers are willing to use them upon return. It also benefits the individual worker who will have developed through contact with people possessing a range of human, intellectual and professional skills. Access to educational and language courses in the host country should open up opportunities for career promotion at home and assist the personal development of each worker. Bibliography International Organisation for Migration. 2005. World Migration 2005. Costs and Benefits of International Migration. Kothari, U. (2002). Migration and chronic poverty. Chronic Poverty Research Centre. Institute for Development Policy and Management. University of Manchester. Working Paper No. 16. Linard, Andre. (1998). Migration and globalization: The new slaves. Brussels: ICFTU, July. Stalker, Peter. (2000). Workers without frontiers: The impact of globalization on international migration. International Labour Office, Geneva. World Economic and Social Survey. (2004). International migration trends Chapter11. World Health Organisation. Health and Human Rights Publications Series. Issue No.4 (December 2003). International Migration, Health and Human Rights.

HOW CAN WE EXPLAIN WHY WOMEN UNDERTAKE MOST PAID AND UNPAID CARING Essay

HOW CAN WE EXPLAIN WHY WOMEN UNDERTAKE MOST PAID AND UNPAID CARING WORK - Essay Example Women are always contemplated to be the ones doing maximum household chores & taking care of the family’s emotional & physical needs, since it is considered a women’s responsibility. The western society claims to follow the equal rights theory, conversely the practiced inequality is the proof of male dominance throughout society speaks against it. Feminism & patriarchy have always been in existence throughout the ages, pondered & acknowledged as a natural dissent. Women being assessed as auxiliary were proven by the feminist groups in the 1960’s.The ongoing campaigns by feminist groups were able to secure some legal & political rights for women in U.K. in the early 90s. However the recent times witnessed the move from suffering women to their social & economic status in the society claiming that modern women are still under suffering patriarchy. It is clear that the gender division in labour has reformed over the last forty or so years. Albeit the move to modernism; the patriarchy theory has travelled along. The division of labour with men, being the bread-winner of the family & dominating the work area as well as home & women regarded best for domestic work, it being a feminine activity. Even when males & females share a work sphere, the wage levels are mostly kept biased not just in under developed countries but in western districts as well. Women, being mothers have always been characterised as soft hearted & caring naturally. Therefore, the male dominance in society is widely accepted & supported by many with ease. Its is not a hidden fact that women nowadays are coming forward & proving to be great competition with men in every industry or field, hence this theory about women being unable to bear workload is proven wrong. Women are more active in the care related fields as compared to men; the statistics of a survey in 32 local authority areas in Scotland prove this right. As many as 74% women, 72%

American Presidents Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

American Presidents - Essay Example There is no doubt that the contrast between the two is stark, and that Bill Clinton was a far superior leader and far more worthy of the respect, admiration and gratitude of Americans. The reputation of the United States is the first area in which the difference between Bush and Clinton is stark. Under Clinton, the United States respected multilateral agreements, sought consensus among the international community on matters of great import, projected the power of the United States in a non-arrogant manner, and respected human rights. For example, Clinton pursued and successfully achieved treaties that grew and strengthened international trade, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). He also helped negotiate the Kyoto Protocol against global warming. In addition, he utilized U.S. military power when necessary and within the context of NATO, as was the case in Kosovo. Because of his active solicitation of and respect for the opinions and influence of other nations, the United States enjoyed a high degree of respect and admiration throughout the world. On the contrary, Bush has led ... backpedaled on security assurances that had been made to North Korea, effectively provoking that country to resume nuclear weapons development and causing them to return to caustic anti-American propaganda and posturing. In addition, he pulled out of the Kyoto accord on global warming, effectively leaving much of the rest of the world high and dry when it comes to efforts to fight against the growing environmental calamity. Most importantly, he thumbed his nose at the world when deciding to unilaterally invade Iraq on a false pretext, and then arrogantly recast the Iraq war as the front line in the "war on terror" when it became apparent that his WMD pretext for the invasion was bogus. In short, the Bush presidency has personified the "ugly American" stereotype of the loose cannon cowboy blindly shooting first and asking questions later. As such, America's reputation in the world has never been lower. A second issue that illustrates a wide gulf between the administrations of George W. Bush and Bill Clinton is that of the economy and the federal budget. Under Clinton, America's economy sustained the longest and strongest economic expansion in history, adding jobs at an unprecedented clip, growing people's investment portfolios astronomically, and prompting an improvement in the quality of life of Americans at all levels of the socio-economic spectrum. Clinton got elected largely based on a groundswell of popular discontent with the state of the economy under his predecessor, George H.W. Bush. He did not disappoint, as few would argue that the economy did not grow at an amazing clip that benefited nearly all Americans. By contrast, George W. Bush has led America into a period of economic stagnation, essentially returning the country to the state it was in when Clinton