Conclusions and policy implications from Workpackage 4

Workpackage 4 was concerned with how public and private policies might alleviate pressures that immigrant families experience when managing work and care responsibilities at the same time. As foreign people continue to immigrate into European countries, policy- makers often question whether policies at work are “integrating” migrant families. However, they rarely ask whether policies are successful in supporting the duality of work/family obligations of immigrant families and whether more could be done in this respect. The effects of work/family problems on the lives of second generation children are also rarely questioned.

The qualitative study of this workpackage allows us to understand some of the problems and dissatisfactions experienced by immigrant families. It is important to mention the following.

(1) A major problem is the absence of sufficient collective structures. Even if the coverage of care provision varies significantly between the countries, interviews show that the most vulnerable immigrant families (unskilled labour migrant families, lone parent families and refugee families) experience problems in all five countries. Lack of care provision means that there is, above all, a shortage of low cost, universally available, care provision. We are referring, here, to low cost facilities that cover not only the typical working hours of parents but also take into consideration a certain period of time before and after standard working hours and the starting and finishing times of schools. In some countries, such as the UK, there is a general lack of universal care provision. In other countries, such as Finland, the problem emerges for certain parts of the day/week or for a particular age group (for example, for young school children who finish school at noon). In Portugal, the high concentration of African immigrant families in areas of social deprivation causes that the existing third sector collective structures in these areas do not cover the extensive needs for care provision for young children.

(2) A second major problem is the absence of information on care provisions in the receiving country. Easy access to information, not only on work life and social security issues but also on existing provisions (schools, after school care, nurseries, transportation of children, childminders, school holiday care), preferably in native languages (or, at least, in English), was wished by different kinds of immigrant families, the highly qualified professional families as well as the low qualified labour migrant families.

(3) A third general problem concerns the social and cultural integration of immigrant families, in particular of unskilled labour migrant and asylum seeker families and especially during the first years after their arrival in the host country. The social isolation problems of some women in other migration patterns, like in the mixed marriage migration, should not be forgotten, either. Social and cultural integration problems that affect the well-being of these families include low paid and atypical working hours, housing problems, language barriers, social isolation, discrimination on the labour and housing market and in schools, and not being able to work due to delays or difficulties in legalisation. This last-mentioned problem affects not only asylum seekers and labour migrants but also, in some countries, the wives of legal working migrants who are entitled to family reunion but not to a work permit. Interviews show that difficulties in integrating the labour market (or in keeping a full-time job) are a major problem as they considerably reduce the family’s level of income. On the other hand, atypical or long working hours are frequently a characteristic of the type of jobs that immigrant workers, especially first generation migrants, have access to. Such unsocial work schedules affect strongly and directly caring arrangements. If we consider that this kind of pressure from work is not likely to diminish, given the general trend of the labour market, then policies have not been sufficiently concerned with the consequences on family life. In this respect, public policies as well as employer policy (with work site care provision?) need to be reconsidered.

To end the discussion on policy implications of Workpackage 4, we present here a short synthesis of the different policy measures suggested by the national reports on the basis of interviews with local professionals working in the field of migration/social care combined with suggestions emerging from the interviews with immigrant families.

Policy measures suggested in the Finnish national report: • Language courses for immigrants,

• Those who move to Finland to work or marry need to get the same type of support that refugees and returning migrants receive,

• Centres for information about services and social benefits in English,

• More care provision (afternoon clubs) for primary-school children. Policy measures suggested in the British national report:

• Centres for information about services and social benefits in English,

• To increase the care provision and to extend the opening hours of formal care services,

• More affordable formal care services,

• To create a Central Agency from which immigrants can get information and access to care services,

• “One Stop Shops” for information about the entitlements and the services that are available.

Policy measures suggested in the Portuguese national report:

• To develop a childminders’ net (properly trained) to support immigrants who have atypical working hours,

• To extend the opening hours of the formal care services (for young children and dependent elderly people),

• More affordable formal care services (for children below age six as well as for primary school children: especially pre- and after-school care provision),

• Public support for housing,

• To develop policies against social exclusion, in particular for labour immigrant families.

• To develop policies against social exclusion, in particular for labour immigrant families.

Policy measures suggested in the Italian national report: • Public support for housing,

• Decrease the bureaucracy of public migration offices,

• Language courses for immigrants,

• To extend the opening hours of the formal care services (for young children and dependent elderly people).

• To develop policies against social exclusion, in particular for labour immigrant families.