Changing conditions in the US labor market

In this paper, we assess the extent to which the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 affected US labor market conditions facing Mexican migrant workers. Using data gathered from migrants in ten Mexican communities, as well as out-migrants from those communities located in the USA, we examined whether and how IRCA affected US wages, hours worked, and the terms of employment. Estimated period effects did not indicate a clear break in most of these variables following IRCA's passage in 1986, except for hours worked and monthly income. Our analyses did reveal a fairly consistent pattern of deterioration in the labor market conditions facing undocumented migrants, however. Compared to illegal migrants working in the USA before IRCA, those migrating afterward worked fewer hours and were less likely to have taxes withheld from their pay. We also found evidence that undocumented migrants were pushed from the agrarian to the urban economy by the increase in labor supply occasioned by the SAW program.     

The U.S. 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act and undocumented migration to the United States

One of the major goals of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) is to reduce the number of undocumented immigrants coming to and residing in the United States. This goal is pursued by allocating increased resources to Border Patrol enforcement, imposing penalties on employers for hiring undocumented workers, and offering to legalize the undocumented population that has resided in the country for a substantial period of time. This paper evaluates the impact of IRCA on the flow of undocumented migrants across the U.S.-Mexican border by analyzing a monthly time series of Border Patrol apprehensions from January 1977 to September 1988 within the context of a multivariate statistical model. The model provides a good fit to the data (R² = 0.94), and our results indicate that INS resources, Mexican population growth, comparative economic conditions on both sides of the border, and seasonal factors related to the agricultural planting and harvesting cycle are all determinants of border apprehensions and, by implication, of the flow of undocumented migrants to the United States. IRCA's impacts on the number of ‘apprehensions averted’ operate mainly through changes in INS effort, the SAWs agricultural legalization program, and other IRCA-related factors. Our analysis concludes that the effects of IRCA, though perhaps smaller than sometimes alleged, were associated with a cumulative net reduction in linewatch apprehensions of nearly 700,000 in the 23-month period following enactment of the law. The associated reduction over the same period in the number of illegal border crossings may be as high as 2 million.     

Stemming the tide? Assessing the deterrent effects of the immigration reform and control act

This study uses a new source of data to assess the degree to which the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) deterred undocumented migration from Mexico to the United States. Data were collected from migrants interviewed in seven Mexican communities during the winters of 1987 through 1989, as well as from out-migrants from those communities who subsequently located in the United States. We conduct time-series experiments that examine changes in migrants' behavior before and after passage of the IRCA in 1986. We estimate trends in the probability of taking a first illegal trip, the probability of repeat migration, the probability of apprehension by the Border Patrol, the probability of using a border smuggler, and the costs of illegal border crossing. In none of these analyses could we detect any evidence that IRCA has significantly deterred undocumented migration from Mexico.     

Social networks and their impact on the earnings of Mexican Migrants

We examine the impact of different types of social networks on the wages earned by unauthorized and legal Mexican migrants during their last U.S. trip. Familial ties raise unauthorized and legal migrants' hourly wages by an average of 2.6% and 8%, respectively, and friendship ties increase their wages by 5.4% and 3.6%, correspondingly. Furthermore, family ties seem to comparatively favor legal migrants in terms of earnings, raising their wages by approximately 0.9% more than for similar unauthorized migrants. These results underscore the potentially important role of social networks in raising Mexican migrants'earnings, particularly among unauthorized migrants. By increasing the returns to migration, social networks may provide a stimulus to continued emigration.     

Mexican Migration to the United States Pacific Northwest

The migration of Mexicans to the Pacific Northwest region(PNW) of the United States has received little attention in scholarly literature. This is unfortunate, as Mexican migration has significantly affected this region, both economically and culturally. Using data supplied by the Mexican Migration Project, we compare the characteristics of Mexican migrantsto the Pacific Northwest with characteristics of Mexicans who migrate to other parts of the U.S. The data reveal significant differences between the two groups: Mexican migrants to the PNW earn lower U.S. wages, are less likely to migrate illegally, and more commonly work in agriculture. They also are more transitory in nature, making more frequent, shorter trips to the U.S. Most interesting is that PNW migrants send significantly more money back home compared to Mexican migrants in other parts of the U.S., even after controlling for the aforementioned differences in individual characteristics.     

Immigration and free trade with Mexico: protecting American workers against double jeopardy

Free trade may well increase immigration from Mexico to the United States before ultimately slowing it down. Rapid population growth, unemployment or underemployment of half the labor force, and vast ethnic and kinship links to the United States have given Mexican migration a stubborn momentum. Increased prosperity from free trade will give many would-be migrants the means to resettle in the U. S. Foreign competition will displace Mexican workers in small farms, state-owned enterprises, and less competitive industries, forcing some to migrate. The noneconomic incentives and expectations driving migration will also remain strong. Mexicans may see free trade as making the border a mere formality or as conferring an entitlement to live in the United States. On the U. S. side, free trade may well deepen the government's traditional complacency about border controls. Over the long-term, however, a successful free trade agreement could reduce immigration by improving Mexico's democracy and the quality of life, diminishing the prospects of mass asylum movements from Mexico, creating a better climate for effective family planning, and luring marginal, immigration-magnet industries from the U. S. to Mexico. In the United States, less- skilled American workers in some industries and regions can expect job displacement and other disruptions from free trade. Particularly vulnerable will be workers in perishable crop agriculture, border retail trade, construction, apparel, and light manufacturing such as furniture, auto parts and glass. Continued heavy immigration of Mexican and other foreign workers into those industries and communities will further impede the adjustment of resident workers by competing for jobs and consuming public resources needed for retraining and job search. To ease the adjustment of displaced workers, the U. S. must make Mexico's cooperation in restraining immigration a condition for free trade. Mexico's cooperation should include enforcement of its own laws against clandestine border crossing; action against alien smugglers, document forgers and transiting illegal aliens from Central America; and curbs on the reentry of aliens deported from the United States. U.S. initiatives that would cushion vulnerable American workers against the added disruption of immigration would be: better identification and screening of applicants for public assistance; tightened enforcement of safety and labor standards in immigrant-impacted firms and provision of legal workers to such firms; protection of public assistance resources through better screening and identification of applicants; and curbs on imports of temporary foreign workers for firms that will now have access to Mexican labor in Mexico. Finally, the United States must consistently press Mexico for higher safety, environmental and labor standards at the workplace to improve the job satisfaction and quality of life of working Mexicans who might otherwise migrate, as well as to narrow Mexico's labor cost advantages over the United States.     

How Job Characteristics Affect International Migration: The Role of Informality in Mexico

Despite the importance given to employment opportunities as a primary motive for migration, previous studies have paid insufficient attention to the kinds of jobs that are more likely to retain workers in their countries of origin. We use information from a panel survey of Mexican adults to examine how job characteristics affect the risk of international migration. The sampling strategy and overall size of the survey allow us to analyze the effect of employment characteristics on migration from urban areas, which have much greater labor market diversity, and to separate our analysis by gender. We also distinguish migrants according to whether they migrate for work or for other reasons. We find informality to be a significant predictor of international migration. Even after controlling for individual factors including workers’ wages, as well as various household- and community-level predictors, we find that workers employed in the informal sector have significantly higher odds of migrating than their counterparts in the formal sector. The pervasive nature of informality in many developing countries from which a high proportion of international migrants originate may therefore create a constant supply of workers who are predisposed to migrate. Our findings thus have important implications for a proper understanding of the effects of economic development on migration.     

Foreign and undocumented workers in California agriculture

In November 1986, the United States Congress passed the most sweeping reform of federal immigration laws in more than two decades. The major objective of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 is to curtail the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States. But the Act contains controversial provisions to assure agricultural producers who rely most heavily on illegal immigrants to harvest perishable crops that they will not suffer unfairly from changes in U.S. immigration laws. These special provisions for agriculture rest on two assumptions that heretofore have received little attention from researchers: (1) that agriculture now relies heavily on undocumented workers to harvest perishable crops, and (2) that growers hire undocumented labor because legal farmworkers are not available to work at wages growers can afford to pay. This paper presents preliminary findings from a study of the role of undocumented workers in California agriculture. The findings cast some doubt on the assumptions that undocumented workers are employed mostly in harvesting perishable crops and that growers hire illegal aliens because legal workers are not available. The analysis focuses on California because one-half of all undocumented immigrants in the United States are believed to live in this state.     

Undocumented Mexican immigrants and the earnings of other workers in the United States

This article examines the effects of undocumented Mexican immigrants on the earnings of other workers in geographical labor markets in the Southwest. The number of undocumented Mexicans included in the 1980 census in southwestern SMSAs is estimated. We then estimate the parameters of three specifications of a generalized Leontief production function with various demographic groups as substitutable factors. The statistically significant effects of undocumented Mexicans on the earnings of other groups are positive, but of slight magnitude. Legal immigrants' effects on native white earnings, however, are small and negative. The results are consistent with the possibility that undocumented Mexican immigrants' jobs complement those of other workers. The implications for public policy concerns about the effects of illegal Mexican immigration are discussed.     

Shifts in the employment outcomes among Mexican migrants to the United States, 1976–2009

Although studies have examined the impact of U.S. immigration policy shifts in the 1980s and 1990s on the employment outcomes of migrants, scholars have paid less attention to how the federal government's shifting approach to worksite enforcement has transformed the conditions in which Mexican migrants work. Consistent with previous research, we find a worsening of conditions for both unauthorized and legal Mexican migrants in the years following the passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) and that unauthorized status is associated with more unfavorable workplace conditions relative to legal immigrants. However, in the first decade of the 21st century, we also find that unauthorized immigrants’ employment outcomes more closely resemble those of legal immigrants now than in the past, suggesting a dramatic shift in the ways that employers treat unauthorized immigrants on the job. This convergence between authorized and unauthorized migrants is consistent with federal policies and practices related to workplace enforcement.     

A consideration of the effect of immigration reform on the number of undocumented residents in the United States

The volume of immigration to the United States exceeds the amount of immigration to any other nation, but quantification must rely on measurement of population stocks. Comparison of foreign-born population figures for two or more survey dates reveal net immigration but fail to partition the foreign-born population by legal status. This analysis presents national survey data on the foreign-born population in November 1989 for comparison with an independently derived estimate of the legally resident foreign-born population at the same date. The demonstration of a measurable undocumented population residing in the United States is very helpful in evaluating the success of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Despite the legalization of 1.7 million aliens who provided evidence of undocumented residence since before 1982, and economic sanctions against employers found to hire undocumented workers, an undocumented population persists in the United States that appears to be largely composed of aliens from Latin American countries. Precise measurement of the size of this population is complicated by the uncertainties surrounding the population of approximately one million Special Agricultural Workers admitted under IRCA. The work and residence history of these aliens as well as their future labor sector experiences and residence patterns are not known. Despite efforts to stop undocumented immigration to the United States, undocumented migration, especially across the southern border, appears to have occurred at consistent levels throughout the past fifteen years.This paper reports the general results of research undertaken by Census Bureau staff. The views expressed are attributable to the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Census Bureau.     

New Estimates of Undocumented Mexican Migration and the Probability of Apprehension*

Using a new source of data, we estimate the probability of apprehension among Mexican migrants attempting to cross into the United States without documents. Over the period 1965-1989 we found an average apprehension probability of .35, confirming earlier estimates. We then applied annual probabilities to estimate the gross volume of undocumented Mexican migration and adjusted these figures to derive estimates of the net undocumented inflow.     

Unintended consequences of Immigration Reform: Discrimination and hispanic employment

The record-keeping requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act(IRCA), and fines for illegal employment, may induce employers to discriminate against foreign-appearing workers. The General Accounting Office (GAO) reported widespread IRCA-related discrimination but did not link reported discriminatory practices to discriminatory employment behavior. We analyze the GAO’s random survey and, controlling for selectivity effects, demonstrate that employers who report discriminatory practices actually employ fewer Hispanics. Although the measured reduction of Hispanic employment due to IRCA is fairly small, this finding parallels research alerting us to adverse consequences of a law that so far has achieved few of its intended effects.     

Undocumented workers in the labor market: an analysis of the earnings of legal and illegal Mexican immigrants in the United States

This paper studies the differences in earnings between Mexican legal and illegal immigrants in the United States. The analysis includes a cross-sectional examination of the wage differences between legal and undocumented workers as well as a longitudinal analysis examining the impact of legalization on the earnings of previously-undocumented workers. It is shown that the average hourly wage rate of male Mexican legal immigrants in the United States was 41.8% higher than that of undocumented workers while female legal immigrants earned 40.8% more. Though illegal immigrants have lower education and English proficiency, and a shorter period of residence in the United States, than legal immigrants, it is shown that differences in the observed characteristics of legal and illegal immigrants explain only 48% of the log-wage gap between male legal and illegal workers and 43% of the gap for women. An analysis of undocumented immigrants legalized after the 1986 U.S. immigration policy reform shows significant wage growth in the four years following legalization. These gains are due mostly to the change in legal status itself, not to changes in the characteristics of immigrants over time. Received: 7 July 1997/Accepted: 16 March 1998     

Informal search,bad search?: the effects of job search method on wages among rural migrants in urban China

The use of informal job search method is prevalent in many countries. There is, however, no consensus in the literature on whether it actually matters for wages, and if it does, what are the underlying mechanisms. We empirically examine these issues specifically for rural migrants in urban China, a country where one of the largest domestic migration in human history has occurred over the past decades. We find that there exists a significant wage penalty for those migrant workers who have conducted their search through informal channels, despite their popularity. Our further analysis suggests two potential reasons for the wage penalty: (1) the informal job search sends a negative signal (of workers’ inability to successfully find a job in a competitive market) to potential employers, resulting in lower wages, and (2) there exists a trade-off between wages and search efficiency for quicker entry into local labor market. We also find some evidence that the informal job search may lead to low-skilled jobs with lower wages. We do not find strong evidence supporting alternative explanations.     

The Consequences of Migration to the United States for Short-Term Changes in the Health of Mexican Immigrants

Although many studies have attempted to examine the consequences of Mexico-U.S. migration for Mexican immigrants’ health, few have had adequate data to generate the appropriate comparisons. In this article, we use data from two waves of the Mexican Family Life Survey (MxFLS) to compare the health of current migrants from Mexico with those of earlier migrants and nonmigrants. Because the longitudinal data permit us to examine short-term changes in health status subsequent to the baseline survey for current migrants and for Mexican residents, as well as to control for the potential health selectivity of migrants, the results provide a clearer picture of the consequences of immigration for Mexican migrant health than have previous studies. Our findings demonstrate that current migrants are more likely to experience recent changes in health status—both improvements and declines—than either earlier migrants or nonmigrants. The net effect, however, is a decline in health for current migrants: compared with never migrants, the health of current migrants is much more likely to have declined in the year or two since migration and not significantly more likely to have improved. Thus, it appears that the migration process itself and/or the experiences of the immediate post-migration period detrimentally affect Mexican immigrants’ health.     

Explaining the Immigrant Health Advantage: Self-selection and Protection in Health-Related Factors Among Five Major National-Origin Immigrant Groups in the United States

Despite being newcomers, immigrants often exhibit better health relative to native-born populations in industrialized societies. We extend prior efforts to identify whether self-selection and/or protection explain this advantage. We examine migrant height and smoking levels just prior to immigration to test for self-selection; and we analyze smoking behavior since immigration, controlling for self-selection, to assess protection. We study individuals aged 20–49 from five major national origins: India, China, the Philippines, Mexico, and the Dominican Republic. To assess self-selection, we compare migrants, interviewed in the National Health and Interview Surveys (NHIS), with nonmigrant peers in sending nations, interviewed in the World Health Surveys. To test for protection, we contrast migrants’ changes in smoking since immigration with two counterfactuals: (1) rates that immigrants would have exhibited had they adopted the behavior of U.S.-born non-Hispanic whites in the NHIS (full “assimilation”); and (2) rates that migrants would have had if they had adopted the rates of nonmigrants in sending countries (no-migration scenario). We find statistically significant and substantial self-selection, particularly among men from both higher-skilled (Indians and Filipinos in height, Chinese in smoking) and lower-skilled (Mexican) undocumented pools. We also find significant and substantial protection in smoking among immigrant groups with stronger relative social capital (Mexicans and Dominicans).     

Migration Selection, Protection, and Acculturation in Health: A Binational Perspective on Older Adults

In this article, we test for four potential explanations of the Hispanic Health Paradox (HHP): the “salmon bias,” emigration selection, and sociocultural protection originating in either destination or sending country. To reduce biases related to attrition by return migration typical of most U.S.-based surveys, we combine data from the Mexican Health and Aging Study in Mexico and the U.S. National Health Interview Survey to compare self-reported diabetes, hypertension, current smoking, obesity, and self-rated health among Mexican-born men ages 50 and older according to their previous U.S. migration experience, and U.S.-born Mexican Americans and non-Hispanic whites. We also use height, a measure of health during childhood, to bolster some of our tests. We find an immigrant advantage relative to non-Hispanic whites in hypertension and, to a lesser extent, obesity. We find evidence consistent with emigration selection and the salmon bias in height, hypertension, and self-rated health among immigrants with less than 15 years of experience in the United States; we do not find conclusive evidence consistent with sociocultural protection mechanisms. Finally, we illustrate that although ignoring return migrants when testing for the HHP and its mechanisms, as well as for the association between U.S. experience and health, exaggerates these associations, they are not fully driven by return migration-related attrition.     

Immigration and informalization of the economy: Enrichment or atomization of community

The informal economy consists of those enterprises or individual workers which escape government regulation of wages, hours, labor safety and health, taxation, zoning or immigration. Estimates of the size of the informal economy loosely cluster around 6% to 12% of the GNP. Indicators of informalization are the proliferation of micro-enterprises, and heavy increases in self-employment and unpaid family workers. These indicators are strongest in major U.S. urban counties with large foreignborn populations. Providing the large labor reserve amenable to informalization has been the heavy admission of low-expectation, non-English speaking foreign workers since the late 1960s, and the subsequent inheritance by many of their U.S.- born children of similar labor market disadvantages. Abetting this transition have been deliberate government cutbacks since 1980 on enforcement of labor, immigration, safety and health standards. This article reviews the major ideological perspectives on informalization, which range from open admiration and encouragement of it as a force for economic competitiveness, to apprehension and condemnation as a form of state-condoned exploitation and an obstacle to sound development, greater income equality, community cohesion and rational economic planning.     

Moving Beyond Salmon Bias: Mexican Return Migration and Health Selection

Despite having lower levels of education and limited access to health care services, Mexican immigrants report better health outcomes than U.S.-born individuals. Research suggests that the Mexican health advantage may be partially attributable to selective return migration among less healthy migrants—often referred to as “salmon bias.” Our study takes advantage of a rare opportunity to observe the health status of Mexican-origin males as they cross the Mexican border. To assess whether unhealthy migrants are disproportionately represented among those who return, we use data from two California-based studies: the California Health Interview Survey; and the Migrante Study, a survey that samples Mexican migrants entering and leaving the United States through Tijuana. We pool these data sources to look for evidence of health-related return migration. Results provide mixed support for salmon bias. Although migrants who report health limitations and frequent stress are more likely to return, we find little evidence that chronic conditions and self-reported health are associated with higher probabilities of return. Results also provide some indication that limited health care access increases the likelihood of return among the least healthy. This study provides new theoretical considerations of return migration and further elucidates the relationship between health and migration decisions.