They''re not taking jobs from natives, they''re making those jobs better
Immigration is often accused of reducing the wages and job opportunities of native-born workers. But according to an analysis of the US job market by Timothy Bond and Osea Giuntella, immigration in fact has a positive effect on native workers who end up doing better jobs. The study will be presented at the Royal Economic Society''s annual conference at the University of Bristol in April 2017.
The authors demonstrate that when immigrants are prepared to take jobs with anti-social hours or to work in dangerous occupations, native workers feel the benefit. They find that a 10% increase in the share of immigrants in a metropolitan area leads to a 5% reduction in the fraction of American-born men who work at night, and a 3% reduction in their average occupational injury rate.
The results are larger for women; a 10% increase in the share of immigrants leads to a 10% reduction in the share of American-born women who work at night. There is also a knock-on effect on the health and wellbeing of American-born workers.
The authors conclude: ''Our results suggest that immigration may have a positive effect on government finances. Directly, the improvement in native health could reduce the government''s health sector burden. In the long run, healthier native workers may have longer careers and better labour force attachment, thus relying less on government pensions and unemployment insurance.''
More…
Using data from the United States, we find a new benefit of immigration; an increase in immigration causes an improvement in the job quality of native-born workers. A 10% increase in the share of immigrants in a metropolitan area leads to a 5% reduction in the fraction of American-born men who work at night, and a 3% reduction in their average occupational injury rate.
The results on night shifts are even larger for women; a 10% increase in the share of local immigrants leads to a 10% reduction in the share of American-born women who work at night. The results support the idea that immigrants are willing to work in jobs that natives would not normally take.
We also show theoretically how immigration can improve native job quality. Firms often require jobs that have both high and low ''amenity value''. For example, a manufacturing plant may operate a day shift and a night shift. They may also require someone who works with a mechanical saw, which involves a high risk of injury, and a floor supervisor, which has a low injury risk.
Immigrants possess different skills than natives, which give them a comparative advantage in these low amenity tasks. They may have a comparative advantage in physically demanding tasks relative to their language skills.
The consequence is that immigrants work in the low-amenity tasks for which their skills are more suited. This increases the firm''s demand for high amenity jobs, like day shifts and supervisors, fro which native workers'' skills are a comparatively better fit. The net result is an improvement in quality of native jobs.
Immigration is often blamed for decreasing job opportunities and wages of natives, as well as for increasing healthcare costs and taxpayer burden. The fears of negative effects on the incumbent natives and on governments'' public finances attract the attention of media and policy-makers, particularly in recent times.
But working conditions have long-lasting effects on workers'' physical and cognitive abilities. In particular, working irregular shifts or nightly schedules increases the risk of negative health outcomes, and reduces time spent with family and friends, affecting the consumption of relational goods, marital stability, children''s wellbeing and family wellbeing.
Medical evidence suggests that working non-standard hours increases the risk of obesity, ischemic heart disease and breast cancer. More generally, nightly schedules and irregular shifts are associated with chronic fatigue, anxiety and depression.
Our results suggest that immigration may have a positive effect on government finances. Directly, the improvement in native health could reduce the government''s health sector burden. In the long run, healthier native workers may have longer careers and better labour force attachment, thus relying less on government pensions and unemployment insurance.
