Talk:Migrant worker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

No longer a stub?[edit]

Maybe this needs to be expanded

WP:RFE--Acebrock 06:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I've added some more material. it could be expanded further, especially about migrant workers in China, but surely it is beyond stub size? --GwydionM 18:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm planning on adding additional material on migrant workers in China, as well as likely creating a full article - there's a lot of research deserving a full featured discussion on its own page. GavinCross (talk) 21:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

It seems to be inconsistent that the Foreign worker section contains both Legal Definition of Migrant Worker and Migrant Worker Organizers sections. It would seem to make sense to move the Migrant-worker-related stuff from the Foreign worker section to this Migrant worker section, and link to it from the Foreign worker section.

I agreeOsakadan 14:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Migrant worker seems to imply moving to survive, or to escape from poverty, whereas Foreign seems to merely mean "different nationality". So a university lecturer working overseas would be a "Foreign worker" rather than a "Migrant worker". LittleBen 14:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I moved the confusing text about the United Nations use of this term to the bottom and repeated the point that the term is used differently in the USA. I am making an attempt to reduce the finesse' and obfuscation of our illustreious politicians as they worm their way through immigration reform. --The Trucker 03:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Needs Fixing[edit]

Can we improve this page? I'd suggest merging "foreign worker" into this page and creating several sub-sections to describe different types of migrant workers (internal, foreign etc...), the changing definition of the term, etc... Wanzhen 09:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Clarified worldview[edit]

I've changed the article around to try to give it a structure that has potential to get the worldview straight. Because the term is used in such different ways in different countries the solution I've tried is to break it up by country.

I agree with the commenter above who suggested that foreign worker should be merged here. For most of the world they refer to the same concept - someone working in a country that isn't their home country. For those countries that have a distinction between the two terms we can easily explain in that country's section the circumstances in which each term should be used. (talk) 15:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

This page needs more information that explains the migrant more in detail. As in what happend that long ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


deleted advertising from this section and will update with more detail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

What's the word for "someone who regularly works away from home" outside of US?[edit]

So how do you call "someone who regularly works away from home" outside of United States? Cause that situation is quite common in China as well, so there is a Chinese article on it, I have interwikied it to this article, but wish there is a better choice. --Voidvector (talk) 03:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Major Changes and Expansions[edit]

My colleague and I wish to propose major changes to this page. Firstly, we would like to change the title from "Migrant worker" to "Migrant Labor" which focuses more broadly on the general theme and phenomenon more so than just the narrow scope of the individual worker. In terms of content, we wish to add sections on the gender issues associated with migrant labor, the safety issues and protection of migrant laborers, national vs. transnational migration, and migration and its effects on care labor and the family. We would appreciate any input or further ideas. FaithSara (talk) 02:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC), DArquero (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The proposed additions, providing they are well organized and written, meet the usual critera such as WP:RELIABLE, and don't duplicate things that other articles say, may indeed improve this article. Certainly we could do with a denser, carefully chosen, and strategically placed set of WP:BTW internal links to relevant articles. As for changing the article's name, I don't see the need. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Migrant labor is a more general concept than migrant worker, and would be a better name for a revised article, as it can also encompass labor conditions, causes, etc.; is better linked to the relevant literature on this topic. Dpj363 (talk) 04:54, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Migration and sex work as a specific type of labor[edit]

I plan on creating a page titled Migration and Sex Work. I think having pages/subsections specifically concerning the different types of labor that migrants seek would be a good idea, especially because these labor forms have significant differences in how prevalent they are, where they occur, and the types of issues that arise. I plan on creating a page on sex work performed by migrant laborers in different international contexts as an example of the type of article that could be created. Sex work as a specific labor sector in the larger literature of migration is significant not only for its prevalence among female migrants, but for the intense reaction state governments have had and the debates that have appeared that make it quite different in some ways from other forms of labor. The literature has shown that there is something about commercial sex as a form of migrant labor that has influenced and spurred larger debates on immigration, human trafficking, and gender inequality that do not necessarily arise in the same way regarding other labor sectors. A growing population of female migrants who engage in sex work over other forms of labor, formal or informal, is extremely prevalent in many regions and nations of the world I believe an article that summarizes not only the characteristics of migrant sex work, but also explains the context and reactions for migrant sex work would fill in many of the missing gaps and subsections on Wikipedia. I would love to get people's feedback on such an article, including how to keep it focused on the migrant laborer aspect of the article. Lillyyu (talk) 03:53, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Women Migrant Workers[edit]

I want to revise the information on Women in the Nigerian state Migrant Workers prison that more fully describes the situations that women who leave their homelands for work abroad. Whereas this provides a good background into females involved in foreign markets, there is still much to be discussed and explored within the realm of migrant work. I want to provide more detail and more information on this topic, and also add a title of Women Care workers, as it is a more common position for these female care workers.Erinbb1 (talk) 06:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

US History Section[edit]

I deleted a significant portion of the US section and just wrote in a disclaimer. I did this because I do not know how to include those official looking boxes that caution against a poorly written section.

The portion about slavery was misinformed, and I genuinely think, had a hint of unreconstructed revisionism. It referred to the concentration of slavey in the South as a "myth." There are further problems without how immigrant and migrant works are described as being "brought in." This implies coordination, some kind of agency, when the truth was that these movements occurred mostly as the result of many independent decisions by the migrants themselves, not a policy of bringing people in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:16, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Also a problem was the claim that migration began after slavery. This was not true in the North (the country is founded on migration), nor is it true in the South where large scale migrations was NOT common after slavery. Furthermore, that section of the article referred to the "importation" of labor from abroad. This is both a strange way to describe human migration, and completely misunderstands American immigration policy. I sadly do not have citations to back this up. The citations in the original article were rather obscure, and I believe misrepresented. I do not, however, want people to get the wrong idea. Better to leave some things out than spread misinformation.

My attempts to change this article just lead to it reverting.

Please remember to sign with four tildes. Anyway I got rid of some of the above, but further consideration led me to the suspicion that my effort was wasted and the whole subsection is just a skimpy, haphazard and poorly sourced attempt at what History of immigration to the United States does much better. This in turn inspired a feeling that it ought to be reduced to, at most, a small paragraph without header and a MAIN template to direct the reader to that article. Anybody agree? Disagree? Jim.henderson (talk) 22:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Slavery was never migrant labor. At best, I could imagine this article hosting a link to the US slavery article, or a few sentences comparing migrant labor to slavery, supported by reliable sources. Binksternet (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

A US section needs to be added. There were many different laws authorizing, deauthorizing, deporting, and whatnot of migrant workers in the US in the last century and a half. But the history is now missing from the article, as are any links to other wiki pages. (talk) 15:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Expatriate[edit]

Under this proposal expatriate would merge into this article and also into immigration

In English, the term "expatriate" (as a noun) does not have a clear distinction from that of "migrant". While the lead of expatriate does note that "In common usage, the term is often used in the context of professionals or skilled workers sent abroad by their companies", this is essentially a loosely defined subset of migrant worker. Thus these articles discuss different aspects of the same topic.

The articles Immigration and migrant worker discusses the topic more comprehensively and it is not clear that the reader gains any benefit for being given a different article if they search for expatriate. Presently, expatriate reads as fork of migrant worker with a focus on modern business practices. Migrant worker would benefit from incorporating some this content.

It does not seem likely that the particular subtopic of human migration that "expatriate" covers can be satisfactorily distinguished from the scope of these other articles, and, as such, a separate article is not justified. LukeSurl t c 16:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

To clarify the proposal: much of the content of expatriate should be merged into migrant worker, with some other content possibly going to immigration or other subtopics thereof. Expatriate itself should be treated like migrant (possibly redirecting to that disambig). --LukeSurl t c 16:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

  • No expats include retirees who never naturalize and are not workers. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:02, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose merge: The Migrant Worker article is already long enough. Perhaps we could add a small section which briefly mentions expatriates and links to the 'Main article' on that topic? And, to be quite blunt about it, they are two different things: migrant workers are often poor and exploited, whereas expats are relatively rich and sometimes exploitative. Also, I agree with the Emir and Richard that expats include retirees who are not workers. If anything, we should be merging the articles Foreign worker and Migrant worker. Cheers - Meticulo (talk) 16:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I've withdrawn this. I still hold that "expatriate" is a problematic article, and we need to either specifically define what it means or dissolve it into other articles. At the moment it is a slightly arbitrary sub-section of migration-related content. Might be a question of taking expatriate to AfD, but I don't have the stomach for that right now. --LukeSurl t c 16:57, 5 February 2017 (UTC
    • I agree that the "expatriate" article is a mess. I'm going to have a crack at improving it, condensing its human resource management section and attempting to sharpen the definition. --Meticulo (talk) 00:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)