Search

One of the most salient findings in research on immigration has been that immigrants experience substantial economic mobility as they accumulate more years in the host-society labor force and eventually approach earnings parity with their native-born counterparts. However, we do not know whether this progress is sustained in retirement. In this paper, I develop a framework of Latent Cumulative (Dis)advantage and hypothesize that even as immigrants are approaching parity with the native-born in terms of current earnings, they accumulate disadvantages in lifetime earnings, job benefits, and retirement planning that eventually lead them to have growing disadvantages in income in later life. Drawing on decades of longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study, I find that while foreign- and native-born men in the United States both experience a decline in income after age 50, the decline is much more substantial among foreign-born men. As a result, immigrant men's economic assimilation is reversed in later life. I find evidence that this phenomenon is driven mainly by immigrants' lower lifetime earnings and cumulative exposure to worse job benefits. Given that the foreign-born elderly population in the United States is projected to quadruple by 2050, findings from this paper have important implications for long-term policy planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community-based organizations (CBOs) are key players in mitigating the impact of restrictive policy changes on immigrant communities. The ability of these organizations to help diffuse the stress caused by restrictive, rapidly changing immigration policies depends, in part, on the capacity and health of their workforce. This study presents findings from a qualitative study conducted with 10 Bangladeshi community frontline workers working in various CBOs and advocacy organizations to understand their experience navigating a heightened anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim climate. Through thematic analyses, we inferred that the 2016 presidential election increased stress and mobilization among community frontline workers, with a meaningful distinction between participants working for immigration-focused institutions versus those in institutions where immigration issues were not the primary focus (e.g. health services, cultural programming). For those working in immigration-focused institutions, work burden increased due to challenges in managing misinformation, making sense of policy changes, and meeting the needs of families impacted by deportation. A toll on frontline workers' own physical health and mental health was discussed, as well as the need for culturally congruent mental health supports for the South Asian community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]