Dynamics of precarity among ‘new migrants’: exploring the worker–capital relation through mobilities and mobility power

Abstract

This article conceptualises the role of mobilities within precarious working and living conditions, drawing on qualitative analysis of interviews (n=52) and a policy seminar (n=50) in NorthEast England. It focuses on refugees, asylum seekers, and Eastern European EU migrants, as policy-constructed groups that have been identified as disproportionately concentrated in precarious work. The article develops three 'dynamics of precarity', defined as 'surplus', 'rooted', and 'hyper-flexible', to conceptualise distinct ways of moving that represent significant variations in the form that precarity takes. The article concludes that understanding precarity through mobilities can identify points of connection among today's increasingly heterogeneous working class.

‘We are still quite patchy about what we know’ International migration and the challenges of definition, categorisation and measurement on local service provision

“…It showed that international migration became more concentrated over time in central areas and that the majority of international migrants had arrived since 2001, in line with impact on centrally located GP practices and schools. This spatial concentration was linked to available and cheap housing stock in areas of high deprivation and existing networks of migrants, as found by others (Vickers et al, 2019, Sue et al, 2019, also Park and Burgess, 2019[1925). However, service providers regarded the 2011 Census as an outdated source.…”

“…This creation of exclusionary bordering, it is argued, has rationalised popular public anxiety and negative perceptions of migrants, raised public awareness of borders, reduced social solidarity and affected people's rights (Guentner et al, 2016;Lukes et al, 2018). This is further applied to political distinctions between categories of migrant where 'refugee' is portrayed as a more deserving category than 'migrant', even those moving because of poverty and environmental change (Jones, 2017), creating a hierarchical system of rights in migrant regimes (Crawley and Skleparis, 2018;Vickers et al, 2019). However, the process of category construction, the nature of the categories, or global border regimes are rarely problematized politically, instead the individual is emphasised (Crawley and Skleparis, 2018;Jones, 2017).…”

“…International migration has a consistently high profile in national and international politics, the media and popular discourse (Crawley and Skleparis, 2016;Morrison, 2019;Murray, 2018;Vickers et al, 2019;Winlow et al, 2017). It is also recognised as one of the most complex parts of population change to measure and understand (Office for National Statistics (ONS), 2019a), complicated by lack of consistency in definitions and measurement.…”

“…This sensitive context is important in relation to the data produced and used as 'evidence' in policy and public discourses as effectively contesting dominant discourses is hindered by uncertainty and inconsistency in definitions which highlight a disjuncture between statistical measures, evidence and popular usage (Anderson, 2017;Wallace, 2018). Consequently, 'migrants' are politically scapegoated (Anderson, 2017;Vickers et al, 2019) and immigration is an empty signifier for a range of public concerns and complaints (Jones et al, 2017).…”

Migrant subjectivities and temporal flexibility of East‐Central European labour migration to the United Kingdom

“…This can be partially attributed to the widespread perception that migrants are much more "flexible" than nonmigrants (Rolfe, 2017b). In particular, recent migrants from East and Central Europe are often portrayed as "hyper-flexible" workers due to their precarious cyclical mobility and acceptance of variable landscapes of opportunity in the United Kingdom (Vickers et al, 2019).…”