Employment & the Economy
Recent Activity
This report examines the immigration regimes of European nations, particularly those with points systems and “shortage lists,” and highlights the flaws of such systems which base selection on formal indictors of applicants’ educational qualifications, work experience, previous salary, and occupation.
This report examines the large presence of unauthorized and mixed-status families, and the growing size of the second generation and its concerns within Los Angeles County and in California, drawing comparisons to broader national demographic trends and rationales for immigrant integration.
Over 100 million migrants live in the more developed regions of the world, including nine million in Northern Europe, 22 million in Western Europe and 38 million in the United States. This report takes a closer look at the challenges of immigration for Western countries.
For many Armenians, working abroad and sending money home has become the main way of coping with poverty and limited job prospects. Aleksandr V. Gevorkyan, Arkady Gevorkyan, and Karine Mashuryan examine recent labor migration flows, the growth in remittances, and concerns about the country's dependence on both.
In response to an agricultural worker shortage over 40 years ago, Canada initiated a temporary migration program to brings workers from the Caribbean and later Mexico. But this "model" program also has its drawbacks, as Tanya Basok of the University of Windsor explains.
Migrants' networks and relatively small travel distances help explain migration from one developing country to another. Dilip Ratha and William Shaw of the World Bank look at these and other reasons for and effects of South-South migration.
In the 1990s, Mexican immigrants began to leave California, Texas, and Illinois for the so-called new settlement states where they had not previously resided. As Ivan Light of UCLA explains, their reasons for leaving or bypassing Los Angeles were both economic and political.
This report explores the proposed implementation of the Department of Homeland Security’s new guidance which mandates employers who receive “no match” letters to determine the source of the discrepancy, take steps to resolve it within 90 days, and if this isn't possible, terminate the employee.