States that need migrant labour to function but don’t want to accept immigration find themselves in a constant bind. They effectively want doors to be open and closed at the same time.
Temporary workers, many policymakers hope, offer a way to square that circle. They dream of a system where sufficient numbers of people (but no more) arrive legally, accept that personal freedom will be constrained for the duration of stay, and leave at an appointed time – ideally before they need to access healthcare or get included in net migration statistics.
It’s an enticing, have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too sort of proposition, so of course there have been attempts to put it into practice. Many countries have operated temporary migration programmes (TMPs) for years, and in recent times we’ve seen renewed interest in the idea. With anti-immigrant sentiment growing in many countries, policymakers are increasingly wondering if TMPs might offer a way forward.
But are TMPs good for workers? Proponents say yes, claiming such programmes are a ‘triple win’. Destination countries get workers who contribute to their labour market and grow economies, whilst not having children, getting sick or growing old while there. Countries of origin receive remittances. And temporary migrants enter a country without risking their lives, begin work with a formal contract in hand, and earn money legally as long as they are there.
The elements of TMPs that most benefit states almost exactly match those that put workers severely at risk
If only it were that simple. The series we’re starting this week looks at the impact of TMPs on workers around the world. It asks if they really do benefit migrant workers, or if they are primarily a tool for increasing control over migrants while serving the needs of industry in destination states.
Taken as a whole it concludes that, whilst TMPs are increasingly popular with governments of origin and destination, their proliferation has consequences for workers’ rights and labour exploitation. From a worker’s perspective, TMPs may be the only route on offer. But they are rarely the ‘solution’ some claim them to be.
Temporary migration or temporary exploitation?
Evidence shows that the elements of TMPs that most benefit states almost exactly match those that put workers severely at risk.
Take, for example, the way that most TMPs fundamentally limit workers’ freedom by tying them to the specific labour provider that sponsored their visa. Evidence from many countries shows that the dependency this creates significantly increases the risk of exploitation, yet it provides precisely the kind of constraint and control that states desire. This is not win-win: it’s a case of directly opposing interests.
This series explores the risks of exploitation for workers on TMPs in more detail. Our authors include people who have experienced such programmes as well as individuals who have worked alongside workers migrating on TMPs in countries of origin and destination. Together they reflect on what the proliferation of such programmes means for labour rights and labour exploitation globally. They also explore the implications of states increasingly relying on TMPs to address low paid labour shortages.
Our hope is that this series initiates a practical conversation about where we go from here that is centred around the real experiences of workers within these programmes.
The collection
From Spain, Yoan Molinero shares his findings on the ‘Collective Management of Hiring in Origin (GECCO)’ programme. This highly managed route operated by the Spanish government for the past 25 years brings seasonal agricultural workers, largely from Morocco and predominantly women, to work in the soft fruit sector for up to nine months.
The scheme has long been viewed as a model of safe migration by the European Commission, yet it has been widely critiqued for both the conditions workers on it face and the debilitating effect of its controls on workers’ power and rights. In the context of proposed scheme expansion, Molinero details GECCO’s history and explains how it prioritises the needs of the Spanish government and employers over the rights, safety and equality of workers. He argues that it systematically undermines them and leaves them vulnerable to exploitation.
From Canada, Amanda Aziz reflects on her support work for those in the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) including its sub-stream the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP). The SAWP permits workers to migrate to Canada from 12 specified countries for employment in agriculture for a period of up to eight months. It has been strongly criticised for limiting worker freedom and leaving temporary migrant workers open to abuse and exploitation.
Workers are structurally vulnerable, with few cards in their hand to play
Aziz makes a powerful case for wholesale reform of the TFWP, tackling its tied nature, in-built barriers to justice, and prevention of settlement. She, like many other advocates in Canada, critiques the government’s sticking plaster approach to addressing the scheme’s problems, such as its 2019 decision to introduce an open work permit for workers facing abuse or exploitation rather than investing in wholesale reform. Aziz sets out the programme’s challenges and emphasises the urgent need to listen to workers when constructing rights-respecting immigration systems.
In the UK, Valeria Ragni looks at the impact of the rise of TMPs since the country’s departure from the European Union and consequent loss of access to workers from the continent. In particular, the UK established a new, two-year seasonal worker pilot in 2019. This led to the establishment of the UK Seasonal Worker Visa (SWV) – a six-month visa in horticulture and ten-week visa in poultry where workers are sponsored by a licensed ‘scheme operator’ and employed by a farm.
Home Office data for 2023 shows that 32,724 individuals across 65 different nationalities were issued a visa, comprising 62% of “seasonal casual or gang workers” in agriculture. The scheme has been widely condemned for the safeguarding risks it poses to workers. This includes risk of severe exploitation, as outlined in a letter to the previous UK government issued by four United Nations envoys.
The very nature of the SWV makes it hard to organise workers, so that they could push for better conditions themselves. Their stay in the UK is short, there is no minimum language requirement, their earnings are low, and their workplaces are dispersed. Unite the union, which traditionally represents agricultural workers, has struggled to organise horticultural workers for these reasons, coupled with employer hostility in a sector that has very little tradition of trade union engagement.
The Worker Support Centre (WSC), principally responds to the risks posed to workers in Scotland through this scheme. Ragni, WSC’s centre manager, outlines the needs met by the WSC, how we support workers, and what we do to address gaps in oversight and to achieve decent work for all.
Margarita Permonaite, WSC’s peer engagement officer continues this discussion by exploring how WSC supports workers to build solidarity and power. Workers on the SWV are structurally vulnerable, with few cards in their hand to play. They are excluded from most dismissal rights, face barriers to healthcare, and are restricted from social benefits.
Following this, Jean-Pierre Du Toit, a seasonal worker to the UK, explains why he's never coming back. Having just returned home from a season in UK agriculture, Jean-Pierre sets out in detail what he experienced and what he thinks needs to change to better protect workers on temporary migration programmes such as the SWV.
On Israel, Maayan Niezna sets out the history of the Israeli tied visa regime – the ‘Binding Arrangement’ for both migrant workers and Palestinian workers. Established in the 1990s, this programme was actually rejected in a successful constitutional challenge in 2006 on the grounds that it exposed workers to the risk of exploitation. It continues despite this ruling with private labour recruiters playing an intermediary and compliance role. In a second piece, Aelad Cahana from Kav La Oved provides detail on how this regime is working now. They look at recruitment debt, worker dependency on employers, and their impact on exploitation.
From Germany, Kateryna Danilova writes about working conditions for seasonal agricultural workers and the work of the Fair Farm Labour Initiative. The FFLI is a network of trade unions and advice organisations that jointly conduct seasonal migrant worker outreach in agricultural settings. It enables workers to access a range of services and information, and supports the unionisation of temporary workers in German agriculture. Danilova outlines how it works in practice.
Finally, from the Gulf, Vani Saraswathi writes about the much-discussed kafala system. They explain why the tweaks and safeguards that have been introduced have done so little to address the power imbalance that the kafala system creates.
A conversation is needed
The examples set out in this series highlight the common issues faced by workers on TMPs across the world. Some national governments, despite their own flawed schemes, have at least started to question the truth of the ‘triple win’. They are exploring ways to fulfil temporary labour requirements whilst not drastically increasing the risks of exploitation.
Many more need to face up to the inherent risks in TMPs and the drivers of exploitation embedded in the immigration systems themselves. In the UK, the last government sought to distance itself from such questions. Our hope is that this new government will not do the same.
We hope that this series provides evidence and ideas of how to build rights-based immigration systems that take account of power and who is being supported to wield it. This power imbalance is the common thread that binds many TMPs. It tips the odds against the very workers that drive our key industries, making them both essential yet entirely expendable. It’s time to put some new cards in their hands.
Explore the rest of the series
This series looks at how seasonal worker visas, which usually tie workers to their employers, are putting migrant workers around the world at risk of exploitation.
- Seasonal worker visas are tying migrants into exploitation
Caroline Robinson, Worker Support Centre - Exploitation embedded in Spain’s seasonal worker programme
Yoan Molinero-Gerbeau, Comillas Pontifical University - Migrant workers demand justice after abuse, exploitation in Canada
Amanda Aziz, Migrant Workers Centre - Seasonal worker visa puts migrants at risk on UK farms
Valeria Ragni, Worker Support Centre - Non-citizen workers still exploited in Israel, despite court rulingMaayan Niezna, University of Liverpool
- Israel is going backwards on protecting migrant workers
Aelad Cahana, Kav La'Oved - Did Brexit unleash new suffering on UK farms?Margarita Permonaite, Worker Support Centre
- Why I quit being a migrant farm worker in the UK
Jean-Pierre du Toit, seasonal migrant worker - The wage slaves of the Kafala systemVani Saraswathi, migrant-rights.org
