Realigning Social and Global Justice in Temporary Labor Migration

Temporary labor migration programs (TLMPs) are on the rise, especially in low-skilled labor sectors, which involve jobs that are thought to be difficult, dirty and dangerous, and that citizens of affluent states are unable or unwilling to take on at current wage levels. The rising trend in TLMPs can be explained by a unique alignment of the interests of receiving countries, source countries and the labor migrants themselves. For affluent states it is a quick and cheap fix to correct sector-specific labor shortages (Ruhs and Anderson 2010, 4). Part of what makes TLMPs economically worthwhile for host states is that employers offer relatively low wages to poor(er) foreigners who are willing, or desperate, to work harder for less pay. Moreover, the temporary work visas they offer restrict the migrant workers' access to some welfare benefits and other rights that citizens enjoy (Ruhs 2013; Bauböck and Ruhs 2022). From the migrants' perspective, poor(er) workers from all over the world can access work opportunities, improve their socio-economic status back home, and contribute to poverty eradication in their countries of origin. From a global development perspective, TLMPs are thought to be one of the most effective policy instruments promoting the global redistribution of resources in a radically unequal world where affluent countries are doing too little to fulfill their duties of global justice. On a consequentialist account of welfare this seems like a win–win–win scenario. The challenging question for normative theory, however, is whether time-limited work visas coupled with any kind of social, economic or political rights restrictions are permissible offers by liberal democratic states. Since Michael Walzer's (Walzer 1983) seminal critique of the 1960s and 70s guestworker programs, much of the philosophical debate has focused on the domestic political landscape in countries of immigration, scrutinizing the compatibility of TLMPs with liberal democratic values. Proponents of social justice object to TLMPs on different grounds. First, TLMPs are thought to have deleterious effects on the prospects of the local working class, facing wage suppression and social dumping, that is, the deregulation of social protections to ensure competitive advantage. Local workers, it is argued, therefore have a distributive justice-based reason to object to these programs (Macedo 2007). Second, it is argued that although each migrant worker is only present for a limited time, nevertheless the continuous presence of a class of disenfranchised workers has broader societal effects, which undermine social and political equality (Walzer 1983; Lenard and Straehle 2012; Nuti 2018). Proponents of equal rights for migrant workers focus on their vulnerability to exploitation by employers and recruitment agencies, and to political domination. While some argue that tackling exploitation is a matter of reforming TLMPs (Ruhs 2013; Miller 2016; Lister 2014), better monitoring and effective enforcement, others think that exploitation is inherent in temporariness, and hence the only way the state can guard against it is by abolishing TLMPs, granting migrant workers equal rights and putting them on the path to citizenship (Lenard 2012; Lenard and Straehle 2012; Stilz 2022). In contrast, proponents of special rights argue that insofar as labor law and the welfare regime are biased toward the interests of sedentary (not mobile) populations, they treat migrant workers unfairly. Migrant workers have mobility-related special interests that require special rights as safeguards (Ottonelli and Torresi 2019, 2022). Proponents of global (economic) justice support TLMPs on the grounds that these programs represent one of the most effective means of reducing global poverty and inequality, viewing rights restrictions to be a necessary moral compromise (Milanovic 2016; Rodrik 2017). Critics of TLMPs, by contrast, who nonetheless endorse a minimalist perspective on global justice, argue that states are permitted to prioritize the interests of their least advantaged over those of temporary labor migrants when conflicts arise (Stilz 2022). Minimalism about global justice, rather than global egalitarianism, is assumed here in order to rest the case for TLMPs on a broadly shared premise. It holds that while fellow citizens are owed egalitarian duties of justice, foreigners residing beyond the state's borders are owed a less demanding duty of sufficiency. Once foreigners meet the threshold of sufficiency, states are permitted to restrict immigration and give priority to the interests of their own citizens. While all of these contributions offer crucial normative insights into the problem of justice in TLMPs, the debate suffers from a fragmentation of normative positions that prioritize either social justice, global justice or the moral perspective of temporary labor migrants. This paper is based on the premise that reasoning about justice requires carefully adjudicating the claims of all concerned and offers normative solutions that no one could reasonably reject. It argues that all three normative desiderata, namely social distributive justice, equal rights and global justice are morally important. However, resolving the tension between them requires their reinterpretation in light of each other's demands. What is needed, then is a fine-grained analysis of the precise moral entitlements of labor migrants as a matter of equal concern with their life prospects, while at the same time, taking seriously the joint demands of social and global justice.1 A further problem this paper aims to address is that normative arguments for or against TLMPs take certain economic or political constraints as given, when they are themselves unjust and in need of basic structural reform in light of the very same demands of social and global justice that necessitate reforming TLMPs. The first section scrutinizes the claim from social distributive justice and how moral theory should address the potential negative effects of TLMPs on local workers. It argues that in dealing with these effects, a fair scheme of TLMP should not be envisioned against unjust domestic basic against a basic distributive justice. The section scrutinizes the equal rights and argues for a focus on equal concern by A fine-grained analysis of rights to which be to and which rights should be in order for to be as The section how the interests of citizens foreigners should be taking states to be moral global justice. the state's duty to social justice and equal concern with the state's global duty to global the interests of local and migrant workers can be a fair scheme of temporary labor migration that to further at the same to the first TLMPs are unjust they the demands of social justice by the domestic least this the social justice In argue that it is a to the justice of TLMPs in from the justice of the basic than whether TLMPs themselves the domestic should in what basic of and how the basic the effects of labor migration On this the of basic structural what justice requires is a to the of where labor migration are with other of the TLMPs should be in light of a broader of economic the receiving migration is thought to be economically to the receiving while in that are the of the receiving A concern in the political debate is that low-skilled immigration the prospects of in the receiving local workers are thought to the of the is that the of cheap workers for wages and labor in the local to as social dumping, is that when of migrant workers are from the rights and protections owed to local employers a competitive it the of social protections by local workers. The question for normative theory is whether these can be carefully as to TLMPs on grounds of social justice, and what precise the claim should the moral of the of the local working class in the of labor immigration as a claim of domestic distributive justice. on theory of justice as normative argues that the state has to least advantaged from economic to socio-economic are permissible only insofar as they the least advantaged of (Macedo on the premise that labor immigration the prospects of local workers, that labor immigration has effects, domestic workers have a distributive and grounds to policy On this social justice requires that the of workers against the deleterious effects of the of and migrants while the of and foreigners (Macedo A immigration regime that for immigration and restrictions for low-skilled immigration has the immigration in liberal democratic countries and This immigration as the and the has political and in as as immigration be on the moral grounds of domestic social argues that it On policy duty of social justice is to the domestic from prospects should their immigration policy and restrict the of low-skilled and workers. those are that not the of the local working class, and therefore should give priority to and (Macedo The in the of a low-skilled workers. The to is that should migrants and who can the least advantaged (Macedo with that TLMPs the interests of the local workers, then they have a social distributive justice-based reason to what the local workers have reason to that the of the problem is the policy and immigration restrictions as the contrast, argue that the of justice to be immigration and therefore the of the local argue that it is a to the justice of TLMPs in from the of the basic that their of whether TLMPs the domestic should whether the basic the domestic immigration policy should be from the of of justice with other economic that the and of are to at this A from the is that the effects of labor immigration on the prospects of local workers are a problem that should to reason about the effects of immigration with the social and economic of receiving countries in The of the societal effects the of the immigration the of recruitment the of economic and the broader societal in the receiving labor shortages by and economic recruitment of migrant workers to domestic labor of these shortages are while others from low working and structural in the It is, jobs that be by and those that be at current wages and The of migrants' is that the local (Ruhs and Anderson Ruhs temporary migrant workers the jobs and wages of local workers on the they and whether those for or local effects the of the for local workers, and the rights and benefits to migrants (Ruhs 2013; and the unequal with TLMPs that labor immigration are interests while those of domestic workers (Ruhs the normative of TLMPs should be in a broader of labor and account of the of TLMPs In this broader it is to for whether receiving are to address labor shortages as working wages and social (Ruhs and Anderson Ruhs and whether labor immigration in the of local workers or labor for local A that is social justice for labor shortages and TLMPs to only a social justice claim for certain restrictions as those based on than a that to interests for the prospects of local workers. argue that the justice of immigration programs in from the justice of the basic is of social justice are to moral for the basic as a as way in which the political and social into one of social and the way they basic rights and duties and the of that from social over concern on the social of the least advantaged and the way the basic working social justice and the prospects of and local workers requires of the which domestic and the of work in a social of social justice in the labor immigration debate should from the to the basic of justice. The problem not in immigration policy in how it with other and a basic and how they the prospects of the local workers. rather than on whether TLMPs the domestic should first and the basic social justice should by the way the basic labor in the of social and with how the basic the and benefits from labor immigration the different social In a that immigration policy should be as a of economic states of their labor to migrant workers to economic be in light of their broader distributive their on the of the least A focus on the labor effects of immigration, from other of the basic is therefore a account for and the of as as of to For basic structural justice to it is crucial to what the of workers in a social and economic and to what the different of the economic can be to their labor immigration policy to is of the at However, this should not be in be in a broader economic the fair of labor and the that labor migration should a for TLMPs, the social justice of local workers be However, these should be toward the basic to the in which other with immigration policy and local workers. justice demands the reform of TLMPs in with other of the basic that the of that the from labor migration and especially the least of labor migration can be to rather than undermine social justice. this requires a economic and of the economic of TLMPs, with their social rights and social and economic all working in to social justice. A of critique of TLMPs on the and that the migrant workers themselves. Critics that TLMPs are unjust they their very of a class of and workers. TLMPs be morally when from the of of migrant argue that TLMPs can be The that the of TLMPs for the and interests of migrant workers, those that require different safeguards from the and that the receiving state basic structural justice, especially in those that the of temporary workers. Proponents of TLMPs a between certain rights and the that TLMPs can to the of migrant workers, only path of poverty be temporary 2016; Rodrik 2017). to the rights a between of workers with limited or workers with a rights (Ruhs and Ruhs by contrast, of moral The first to the broader societal effects of a labor which political and social equality the host (Walzer 1983; Lenard and Straehle 2012; Nuti 2018). The on the interests and of migrant workers, rights them to of exploitation and (Lenard 2012; Lenard and Straehle 2012; Stilz A what liberal states to migrant workers in equal special or Critics of TLMPs that the moral in a liberal is equality of and that any from this In contrast, and Torresi argue that a regime of equal one that the same of labor to all workers, can in be to migrant workers. This is labor and welfare law are by a they are the of a local worker who is and based in the host labor for working to workers' life and While this makes for based workers, it little to the interests of workers and to their While migrant workers some interests with local as and fair they have a of special from their The that of migrant workers requires not equal special rights that address their mobility-related and life with and Torresi that in a fair of the interests and life of worker or equal moral concern and equal however, at require unequal and the of is whether temporary migrant workers are owed equal rights as local workers or special requires a analysis of the in question and the normative that It is to three of workers' and on the should be the same for is to the to which workers can to in order to against the of working and Torresi social be in a way that between workers based on In migrant workers should either the benefits to their they are from be from contributions welfare programs are in of distributive justice, scheme of It is therefore to some of and a of social from temporary migrant workers they to this of social rights however, into this for the a of the labor to workers' While this the of based workers it can migrant workers and are (Ottonelli and Torresi 2022). The challenging normative question is whether migrant workers should be from this labor or On the one the could be as a of from the to ensure equal concern for workers with special mobility-related On the other a a to the labor and a of the welfare In can be they they be in that equal concern for migrants' special and their be and to workers, and these are carefully special rights for migrant workers can be morally however, argue that a fair scheme of TLMP with special concern for migrant workers' in equal concern by the host state is at with the of these The and present of TLMPs is with unjust of migrant workers' and a social and political in which states of any of equal concern (Stilz 2022). labor and migrant workers' rights are employers or while and or workers of as or of or the of working recruitment and that migrants in working the of social and and further these Lister Ruhs of these moral However, it is crucial to between the state's to and moral that from other in the basic and those that are inherent to the very of TLMPs and their of Lister argues that while these are they not or at least not any than any other of political The of TLMPs are not inherent to the scheme are to which can be better and Ruhs 2013; Miller For one of the most of the is that the and of and in have to and from of and Lister argues that the of this problem not in the of the in the citizenship In other the problem of is in the political a of the basic that requires broader social and political reform of with to the political in which the citizenship regime is to be The case that a fair TLMP one that can temporary workers, requires basic social and political to be in in the host however, programs be of TLMPs where reform a way to address migrant workers' are and recruitment migrant workers' visas are to they are unable to or and that this could be workers to a where exploitation is different a regime employers to for labor and improve it workers' with in or Ruhs of is where and and workers in recruitment the for with and the which holds that employers should all recruitment and of these labor represent a fair and democratic for that workers' while that the economic benefits of migration are and between Critics that a of TLMPs beyond the of and their inherent From this perspective, the only way to the societal with these programs is to them (Walzer 1983; Lenard and Straehle 2012; Stilz 2022). From a normative political The as the political holds that time-limited work visas migrant workers to political in which they have no (Lenard and Straehle Temporary labor migrants are from in the that their and are to political temporary workers be a to This concern is especially in where temporary visas are a certain of continuous migrant workers should be to to a status (Lenard and Straehle 2012; 2013; Lister contrast, temporary workers, those who only for a political and rights in their countries, where their broader life and social are 2016; Stilz and Torresi 2022). it can be argued that temporary migrants not their political these rights are each to a of their object temporary workers some of their political rights at home, they need a in the economic and social that their work and have a in on labor and the of social and It is therefore that they have access to for and that their and Torresi argue that granting citizenship and with it rights in not be the most effective or means of doing they for as migrant worker and between labor and migrant that better represent migrants' interests in has that local workers in a global requires a and borders to ensure that workers' interests are in and global (Ottonelli and Torresi A critique of temporariness, the political by Stilz that TLMPs to migrant workers' rights democratic are not to the temporary workers residing their of of and temporary workers from political especially to on the state's (Stilz migrant workers not be to their rights On this exploitation can only be by abolishing TLMPs and migrants on visas (Stilz 2022). While concern that temporary status effective not that immigration are the only the most one in light of global poverty in the is and be could be and much like or labor monitoring by the as as between labor and migrant and could and for migrant migrant workers should have access to in they to them of their rights and to and whether the basic of the host migrant workers with equal on the normative of the as as the of the concern requires a fine-grained of rights in that can all workers, workers and their mobility-related special In some this requires equal rights and for all in other better A path to citizenship be to some workers' life while TLMPs are permissible offers to that are for migrant workers to and and in the receiving A question that to in the of this and further is whether states are morally permitted to prioritize the interests of their own citizens what and to what to account for the global of TLMPs in moral Critics of TLMPs argue that TLMPs can be in of social justice and equal they are not by justice. From a minimalist perspective on global justice, states are permitted to prioritize the interests of their least advantaged citizens. Proponents of global justice support TLMPs on the grounds that these programs represent one of the most effective means of reducing global poverty and 2016; Rodrik 2017). that the to the of the in the restrictions by affluent which what has the For a worker than in Rodrik they to to the for on the of the could to Rodrik argues that states to temporary work visas coupled with a limited rights and effective then the global of labor migration the potential from In to the moral of TLMPs in the receiving state much on how the rights is which rights are and on what moral grounds. argued in as as migrant workers are what they are morally to a fine-grained to labor and social and as as equal concern is in the host state's temporary work visas are not TLMPs are permissible instruments of labor are they by global liberal as moral in the to global justice, TLMPs as means to Minimalism about global justice than global is assumed here in order to rest the case for TLMPs on a broadly shared premise. It holds that while fellow citizens are owed egalitarian duties of justice, foreigners residing beyond borders are owed a less demanding duty of sufficiency. foreigners meet the threshold of sufficiency, states are permitted to restrict their borders and prioritize the interests of their own citizens 2016; 1983; Stilz 2022). On the of sufficiency, a tension between about poverty eradication and the economic status of the temporary labor migrant assumed in the migration TLMPs on consequentialist grounds their on or global poverty contrast, minimalist of global justice, that temporary labor migrants meet the threshold and are Temporary labor migrants are to be migrants who are by to their in by the that their has to The premise holds that labor migrants' basic rights are at and they therefore have no claim to be (Stilz On this TLMPs are a matter of rather than moral way to the case for TLMPs a minimalist is to the that most temporary labor migrants are migrants. of that is, migration by poverty and that TLMPs involve or labor by from the a in the normative seems that of in the are to to their of for have temporary workers in to that to cheap of the of is the of into migrant migration not to A further question about the of moral should to migrants or to their and broader social What a migrant own the poverty the of the from migration the current unjust of labor recruitment and they employers to these a labor migration as argued in access to work and this the of those liberal states then have a duty of justice to reform TLMPs and their recruitment that can access work states have special to their and can prioritize the interests of their own over the interests of migrants in case of This means states can migrants who to their where the benefits to the migrants than the the state's (Stilz It is to that priority of A minimalist on global justice states to prioritize their interests over those of in of when enjoy a of the threshold or when some citizens the threshold of sufficiency. the first have argued that and potential of temporary labor migration should be as migrants who of economic rather than Moreover, a fair recruitment could access to these and of migrants as from sufficiency. In affluent receiving states have a duty of justice to these workers to the of sufficiency, this not undermine their to for their own citizens. In the TLMPs are thought to local workers, some the then However, arise the current unjust basic in which labor and distributive to the least argued in the problem not with TLMPs with the way they with these unjust whether a TLMP a state's to fulfill duties toward how programs a basic not how they unjust a of the receiving state's basic one that social justice, the interests of temporary labor migrants need not with those of local workers. On the a state can these interests by labor migration to the fair of with concern for the least liberal have a duty to migrant workers to poverty or they prioritize domestic to labor It is to that the of the state here is a moral a to duty of global justice. On this citizens over foreigners is only the state is doing fair to global and contribute to the eradication of global In the case of a state that by the demands of global justice, local workers' claims to priority be claims are only domestic economic labor shortages are with resources that the state is morally to a global The of those however, on a of further most the of structural in the global and the of one of duties to and the resources that states claim for domestic the of local workers' priority have argued for a of a fair scheme of TLMPs, one that the demands of social distributive justice, equal concern and global justice. First, a fair scheme of TLMPs should be in a of the basic and permissible when it to the of social distributive justice. immigration policy should be in with at a local and welfare that they ensure the fair of the from labor In this labor migration can not as a that social justice in the host as a policy that Second, migrant workers are owed equal concern and of their This at when these better mobility-related A fair TLMP of which migrant workers can the that their and claim their a liberal state should be as a moral to global justice, or This on how and what a state of in labor demands. a liberal state should fair temporary labor migration insofar as doing not rather to social justice. the political migration the of the benefits and of labor working toward justice in other of the basic This a What kind of should a theory to in a radically unjust world by toward In the of labor should it matter whether democratic to these In the necessary political can only these are not as a as of state for social and as potential of workers borders rather than conflicts of between workers of different The of political is not to unjust to them of and normative and a societal This work by The no conflicts of