EMPLOYMENT BEFORE 1914
The central focus of many contemporary authors on the period following World War II can mislead many readers into believing that globalisation, as the process involving labour migration or the international division of labour along with the spread of industrialisation and the integration of economies worldwide, is a recent phenomenon. Kaur (2000, 2004) was quick to point out that globalisation which means ‘the integration of separate national markets into a single global marketplace with cross-border flows of goods, capital and people’ (p. 3), has an earlier history. He advised that the period from around 1840 to 1914 was significant because it drew Asia and Africa into the “old” (Kaur 2004, p. 4) international division of labour and integrated their economies with those of Europe and the United States. This was a period of “imperial-led” (ibid, p. 3) globalisation, trade and capital flows from Europe or the era best recognised as the formal domination of European colonial powers in Asia and Africa.
Even so, Papastergiadis (2000) promulgated that global migration history has commonly been accepted to begin in the sixteenth century when tall ships were invented, including improvements to cartography and navigation, which made transoceanic trade and migration more viable. The global domination by the British and Venetians, for example, was distinct because western capitalism was linked to the control over mercantile ports and shipping routes rather than mere consolidation of a land base through territorial expansion. Most of the migration from this period (until much of the twentieth century according to Stalker 1994, p. 13) was ‘forced and coercive’ (ibid, p. 25). Colonialism and the demand for unskilled labour resulted in slavery and indentured labour and when these were gradually eliminated with the advent of Christianity and Islam, obligated (corvée in Dutch Java) and convict labour were used to develop the colonial settlements (Kaur 2004, p. 21-24; Papastergiadis 2000, p. 25-27; Stalker 1994, p. 12-13). European colonialism also generated many
forms of migrant employment when sailors, soldiers, farmers, traders, priests and administrators migrated from Europe, first to Africa and Asia, later to the Americas and then to Oceania. These overseas migrations resulted in significant changes, both in the economic structures as well as in the cultures of European sending countries and the colonies (Castles & Miller 2003, p. 49-51).
Colonisation was not the only process that generated a mass migration of people in these earlier centuries. According to Papastergiadis (2000), ‘the process of industrialisation and depeasantization of the west’ (p. 27), which took place from the early nineteenth to mid-twentieth century, also brought about a mass exodus transfer from rural communities to new urban centres of the industrialising nations within Europe as well as internationally. Stalker (1994, p. 13-16) suggested that the onset of industrialisation was marked by the year when railway tracks first exceeded 1,000 kilometres, starting with the British Isles in 1838 and the whole of Europe by 1879. During the period of industrial transformation (1846-1924), about 48 million people or roughly 12 per cent of the population in Europe at 1900 left the continent. Rural poverty and crop failures like the potato famine, which affected Ireland in 1845-47, also contributed to this impetus for mass migration.
As it happened, Kaur (2004) disclosed, the global economy was impacted not only by this outmigration from Europe to the New World but also by the outflows from China and India into Southeast Asia. Large-scale migration associated with poverty, overpopulation and political dissension inflated the workforce numbers of most Southeast Asian colonies and caused them to grow in importance in the world economy (Kaur 2004; Tan 1986).
Labour migration for this period (1840-1914) was significantly different from earlier migrations because it gave rise to two new groups in the migration process, that is, apart from the migrants. The first group was the private labour brokers and recruitment agencies that organised travel arrangements and employment. The second group consisted of state officials. The process also saw labour depots (warehouses) and immigration funds being set up. Of the migration networks, those recruiting workers from China, India and Java were notable for facilitating the flexible use of the migrant labour force in Southeast Asia (Kaur 2000, p. 7-8). These two migration network groups continued to grow and by the mid-twentieth century, developed into an important industry responsible for the outflows from many third
world countries such as the Philippines, Thailand, Bangladesh etc. (Stalker 2000, p.122-128).
An era (1914-1945) of trade restrictions and protectionism followed the end of the First World War. This led to the banning of indentured labour migration and mass repatriation of workers to their countries of origin. Some countries such as Malaya, Burma and Thailand, imposed restrictions on economic migration and foreign labour employment. However, following the end of the Second World War, the dominant world powers of the United States, Britain etc., moved to reinstate globalisation to aid war-ravaged countries and to assist with the economic development of many less-developed countries (Kaur 2000, p. 17-18).
2.4 GLOBALISATION, TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION IMPACT ON FOREIGN LABOUR EMPLOYMENT FROM 1945 ONWARDS
The process of globalisation that occurred after World War II took on a ‘new international economic order’ (Kaur 2000, p. 17), known otherwise as the ‘new imperialism’ (Wood 2003, p. 9). In the words of Smith (1990), the world became anew with ‘economic giants and superpowers, of multinationals and military blocs, of vast communication networks and international division of labour’ (p. 174).
Instead of European colonialism, the world economy began to be monopolised by multi- or trans-national corporations (MNCs or TNCs) of industrialised countries from Europe, United States and Japan (Bailey & Parisotto 1993, p. 140; Castles 1989, p. 1; Kaur 2000, 2004; Papastergiadis 2000, p. 81; Stalker 1994, p. 29). There has been a continuous growth of multinationals, both in size and numbers, and in recent years this has been taking place even in newly industrialising economies and developing countries in Latin America, South Asia and South Africa (Debrah & Smith 2002; Dow & Parker 2001).
Three factors have contributed to effect this new ‘shift towards a more integrated and interdependent world economy’ (Hill’s 2001 economic understanding of globalisation). The first was the liberalising of international trade restrictions such as lower tariffs and deregulation of currency controls, which encouraged foreign direct investment (FDI) and trade growth around the globe. The second was that with
such pervasive adoption of free market ideology there was a greater need for organisations to become more competitive on price, productivity and profits, both locally as well as internationally. The third was technological advancements that have been instrumental in not only reducing much of the cost but also increasing the efficiency of global communications, information processing and transportation, especially that of air, shipping and freight (Debrah & Smith 2002, p. 2-5).
Together these factors have enabled multinationals to make quite an impact on the international economy, both in terms of their contribution to national outputs and employment (Panic 2003). According to Korten (2001), approximately 70 per cent of the world trade is being managed by 500 multinationals. Seventy of the largest multinationals, Handy (1998, p. 76) asserted, have revenues larger than the GNP of Cuba. Findlay (1993, p. 153) suggested that the largest companies in the world have labour forces that are many times the size of the populations from some of the world’s smaller nations.
The employment and deployment of personnel from multinationals around the globe has contributed to the rise of an international form of labour employment, more commonly referred to as the ‘new international division of labour’ by many present day authors such as Kaur (2000), Stalker (1994), Papastergiadis (2000), Castles (1989) and Findlay (1993).
Findlay (1993) acknowledged Petras’ (1981) work as one of the first to make the link between the hierarchical system of large-scale production and patterns and types of labour migration. Technological progress has made specialisation of the production process possible, adding at the same time not only to its differentiation but also to its task and labour content. As companies grew in size, expanding from regional multi-branches into multinationals, larger scale production inevitably promoted greater specialisation of tasks and more skilled workers. But more importantly, the changes in technology (mechanisation, improved international communication and transportation) and the evolution of new management forms permitted the spatial separation of production functions from those of management and research and development. Fundamentally, this is what has transformed the organisation of the patterns of production on a global scale (Findlay 1993, p. 153- 154).
According to Stalker (1994, p. 37), even while multinationals tended to keep their corporate headquarters and most research functions in the country of origin,
their steady dispersion of manufacturing, distribution and sales operations worldwide have caused a corresponding distribution of personnel internationally. For example, a survey of 190 American companies conducted by the US Employment Relocation Council in 1982 indicated that of the American expatriates, 30 per cent were in Europe, 20 per cent in Asia and 15 per cent in Central and South America.
The temporary movements-cum-transfers of professionals (known also as ‘professional transients’ by Appleyard 1989, p. 32) do not just take place within the same company (Stalker 1994, p. 38; Papastergiadis 2000, p. 40). Many appointments have been carried out by international recruitment agencies, largely specialising in matching specific countries or industries with high-technology personnel. The increasingly integrated nature of higher education has been another way by which the flows of professionals have been encouraged. Students pursuing higher studies in Western universities make up a labour reserve, which is receiving similar methods in training in a common language and thus provide a ready pool of substitutable workers (Stalker 1994, p. 38).
From the 1960s, these flows have together generated a growing class of professionals or highly qualified technicians/specialists in addition to the predominantly and ever increasing class of low and semi-skilled foreign workers (Findlay 1993). The latter comprises not only of labour migrants driven by economic opportunities but also of illegal or undocumented immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees. In the final decades of the last century, the general tightening of entry labour quotas by many countries around the globe has led to the swelling numbers of clandestine foreign workers. Ecological disasters, wars and political/geopolitical crises in, for example, Europe, Africa, Latin America and China, have also caused unprecedented numbers of asylum seekers and refugees to abandon their home countries for neighbouring countries as well as classical countries of immigration like USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (Castles & Miller 2003, p. 5; Debrah & Smith 2002; Papastergiadis 2000, p. 38-43; Stalker 1994, p. 4).
Stalker (2000, p. 6) stated that the total migrant stock grew from 75 to 120 million between 1965 and 1990, which approximates a 1.9 per cent rise per year. Papastergiadis (2000, p. 10) reported that a figure of 100 million international migrants, 27 million of whom are stateless refugees, meant that there were more people living in areas outside of their homeland than at any previous point in history.
Temporary and clandestine arrival of immigrant workers is gradually replacing legal settlement.
Skeldon (1995, p. 532-536) declared that there has been a major global change of international population movements over the past two and a half decades. Instead of migrations out of Europe across the Atlantic and to Australasia, the movements have become trans-Pacific movement out of Asian countries to traditional destinations for European settlement. Papastergiadis (2000, p. 38) added that the manufacturing base of the global economy’s move to the Pacific Rim in the early 1980s directed greater flows of migrations towards and within non-western directions.
Since 1945, international employment related migration has increased significantly and thus been identified as one of the important factors in global change (Castles & Miller 2003). Comparisons made recently of these movements have shown five general tendencies that will likely be, according to Castles and Miller (2003, p. 4-16), pivotal for global migration in the next 20 years.
[1] Globalisation of migration – Migratory movements are affecting nations worldwide, whether they are countries of emigration, receiving/hosting or both. Entrants have been coming from an increasingly diversity of areas of origin and possessing a broad spectrum of economic, social and cultural backgrounds. Growing ethnic diversity within the society will prove to be challenges for social policies and national identity.
[2] Acceleration of migration – The expanding volume of migrations taking place in all major regions presently has intensified the urgency and difficulties of government policies curb on international migration.
[3] Differentiation of migration – Most countries provide a whole range of immigration possibilities such as labour migration, refugee or permanent settlement etc. Despite government efforts, migratory chains, which might begin with one type of movement typically, continue on to other forms and become a hindrance to national and international policy measures.
[4] Feminisation of migration – Increasingly, women are gaining more prominence in all regions and in all types of migration. Further discussions in the section on ‘Foreign Labour Employment Effects on Individuals as Foreign Labour’.
[5] Politicisation of migration – Domestic policies, bilateral and regional relationships and national security policies of nations (as with three countries to be reviewed in Chapter III) worldwide are continually affected by international migration.
Likewise, reforming global institutions or international regulatory bodies, for example, the World Trade Organisation, International Labour Organisation, International Monetary Fund, World Bank etc, have effectually during this latter period of globalisation become the watchdogs of global labour migration (Bezuidenhout 2002; Moran 2002). Considered as ‘high-status standard setters’ (Weaver, Trevino & Cochran 1999, p. 43) along with government agencies, professional and accrediting bodies, interest groups and other loci of public opinions, they carry sufficient institutional status to influence formal/informal standards of corporate ethical programs. For example, high publicity by academic researchers and the media on the perils of FLE, particularly of the less-skilled and least-skilled workers in foreign–owned or foreign-controlled organisations who labour for paltry wages in poor unfavourable work conditions and are subject to mistreatment or abuse, contributed greatly to the development of employment and industrial relations obligations and sanctions by these institutions, including core labour standards for multinationals. These developments have been responsible for the growing importance given to international corporate governance and corporate social responsibility issues (Andrews, Chompusri & Baldwin 2003, p. 307; Birch 2001; Blanpain 2000; Moran 2002, p. 2).
2.5 WORK REVOLUTION – TRANSFORMATIONS TO WORK &