A report published by the UK Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development in March 2013 suggests that the rise in the employment of migrant workers, which is often attributed to the better skills or work ethic of these workers, reflects a complex mix of factors and has long-term implications for both young British workers and employers. The report highlights the value of ensuring that career progression paths are set out clearly for entry-level employees.
Background
In March 2013, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), the professional body for UK human resource practitioners, published a report exploring the factors affecting the growth in employment of migrant workers from both within and outside the EU. The report, The state of migration: Employing migrant workers (3.2Mb PDF), is based on a survey of 1,000 employers and 16 case studies. This article focuses on its key findings and policy recommendations.
Key findings
The report highlights the growth in the proportion of migrant workers employed in the UK from 2002–2012, although CIPD survey data suggest that demand for migrant workers has fallen over recent months. NonUK-born workers currently make up 17% of the UK’s workforce, compared with around 10% in 2002. The accession of the EU8 countries made a substantial contribution to this upward trend from 2004. Much of the increase in migrant worker numbers has been driven by demand to fill low-skilled jobs. A disproportionately large share of low-skilled employment is accounted for by EU8 nationals.
Among the main findings of the CIPD’s quarterly labour market outlook survey, published in the report, are that:
- employers report that seven in 10 migrant workers they employed came from inside the EU, and 30% came from non-EU countries;
- on average, the proportion of migrant workers in private sector firms (11%) is higher than in public sector organisations (3%);
- overall, a quarter of employers that employ migrant workers used a recruitment agency, but this figure was notably higher among private sector employers (32%) than public sector employers (5%);
- the majority of employers (71%) stated that the high availability of migrant workers has had no impact on wages.
Reasons for hiring migrant workers
The report explores the issues that influence employers’ decisions to recruit both EU and non-EU migrants. The most commonly cited reasons by employers for hiring EU migrants in the CIPD survey are:
- better job-specific or practical skill (56%);
- work ethic (34%);
- better prepared for work (26%);
- more work experience (25%);
- better qualifications (23%).
In relation to the 36% who cited other reasons, interviews with HR practitioners suggested that a consistent factor was that EU workers had stayed in the job longer than UK-born workers. Another issue that featured prominently in the hiring of EU migrants was the practice of ‘, migrant workers recommending relatives and friends to their employer, particularly for low-skilled roles.
Many of the same reasons accounted for the recruitment of non-EU workers. Some 38% of employers identified better job-specific or practical skills as a reason for employing non-EU workers, but employers were much less likely to identify a better work ethic (16%) or better qualifications.
A majority of employers (58%) do not believe that the present UK government’s more restrictive immigration policy will have an impact on their recruitment of non-EU workers. Among those that do, 32% report that their response will be to train existing workers’ and 30% report that they will recruit more EU workers.
Implications and policy recommendations
The CIPD report finds that, while there is insufficient evidence to conclude that employers are overtly favouring migrant workers, there are a number of factors that contribute to a situation in which some employers expect a greater pay-off from recruiting migrant workers. The report identifies the risk that, as a result, UK-born workers find it difficult to secure low-skilled, entry-level positions. This can have long-term implications for their career development and for employers’ workforce planning. The report states:
Businesses that rely disproportionately on migrant workers potentially miss out on the advantages of investing in home-grown workers and the opportunity to recruit and retain employees with the potential to become long-serving members of staff and future leaders.
The report highlights the value of ensuring that career progression paths are set out clearly for entry-level employees. This, the CIPD believes, would help address the issue of high attrition rates among UK-born workers in low-skilled roles. The report recommends that employers explore the business case for investing in young people – and for a diverse workforce more generally, and consider the risks associated with relying on too narrow a source of labour.
Commenting on the publication of the report, its author, CIPD public policy adviser Gerwyn Davies, said:
The question of whether immigration is restricting jobs for British workers needs to be reframed to reflect the complex set of factors that have driven the rising share of migrant workers in employment in the UK over the past decade.’
Mark Hall, IRRU, Warwick Business School