Search

This article examines the labor market experiences of Sudanese forced migrants in Israel under prolonged temporary legal status. It underscores how regulatory and legal frameworks, particularly the mechanism of institutional ambiguity as a form of legal violence, shape migrants' socioeconomic outcomes. Employing a mixed-methods approach and comparative analysis, the study adopts Menjívar's, C. (2006. "Liminal legality: Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants' lives in the United States." American Journal of Sociology 111 (4): 999–1037) concept of 'liminal legality' as an analytical lens to compare the experiences of asylum seekers and refugees. The findings reveal significant disparities between these two groups in employment patterns, wages, and exposure to exploitative working conditions, primarily driven by differences in legal status. Asylum seekers are disproportionately relegated to unskilled, precarious jobs at the bottom of the employment ladder, facing heightened vulnerability to exploitative working conditions. Refugees, despite their relatively 'premium' status, also encounter significant constraints in labor market participation, reflecting their confinement to the secondary labor market. By highlighting these disparities, this article advances our knowledge of how positions along the continuum of liminal legality shapes employment outcomes among forced migrants. It also contributes to the broader discourse on socio-political and legal barriers that hinder migrant integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine the impact of evolving forms of governance on migrant workers' rights and employment conditions in Israel we first probe the extensive private recruitment industry that developed in Israel before the implementation of bilateral agreements, and examine migrant workers' employment conditions and wages. Next we show the importance of bilateral agreements for the annulment of illicit practices in labor recruitment, as well as the practical consequences for migrants under the new arrangement. Specifically we scrutinize the impact of implementation of bilateral agreements in the construction sector on recruitment practices and fees, wage levels, and work conditions. Implementation of bilateral agreement were accompanied by dramatic decrease in the sums paid by migrant workers to reach the host country – but did not significantly improve workers' rights, and their wages even declined. The mechanisms whereby a pool of precarious workers has emerged in the local labor market in Israel are highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]