Migration Regime and “Language Part of Work”: Experiences of Syrian Refugees as Surplus Population in the Turkish Labor Market

Abstract

The literature on migration, language and employment is dominated by the human capital approach and promotes multilingualism as a universal good. This paper examines the relationship between language and work for migrants illustrating how they are ascribed value as capital according to their position and the “language part of work.” First, we trace a genealogy of the migration regime in relation to the labor and linguistic market of migrants in Turkey, characterized by informality and exploitation. Then, we look at the experiences of refugees qualitatively to show how language is differentially valued and has modest effects on social mobility. We argue that language learning instead of stemming from individuals’ possession of capital should be examined within a broader linguistic and employment framework. This research goes beyond conventional wisdom about the centrality of language as a means to improve employment by shedding light on the structure that shapes language value.

Encounters of Syrian refugees and locals in the informal garment sector of Esenler district, Istanbul

“…Interviews with locals show that this confrontation has also caused a new position-taking process for them, which includes withdrawing from the sector. The findings of this research, as many other studies (Ceritoglu et al, 2017;Erol et al, 2017;Lordo glu and Aslan, 2016;Nimer and Rottmann, 2020;İçduygu and Millet, 2016), show that during the process, this gap in the informal garment atelier has been filled by Syrian workers. A young refugee garment worker Suheyil reflects on this situation:…”

“…(Suheyil, Syrian worker, male, aged 28)As Schierup et al (2018) mention, informal employment of migrants carries on sustaining the labor needs of employers. Correspondingly, Nimer and Rottman (2020) note that the demand for informal labor has increased enormously in recent years in Türkiye. Contrary to the local workers’ withdrawal from the sector, the struggle of the Syrian workers is shaped by the tactics of entering in and holding on to the sector, as we have emphasized before.…”

Compulsory guesthood, social cohesion, and the politics of hospitality in Turkey

“…Hospitality also allows the Turkish state to evade international oversight by maintaining discretionary power over the entry, stay, and deportation of Syrian refugees (Danış 2018). Economic and social insecurity imposed upon Syrians under this temporary regime sustains their exploitation in the informal, labour‐intensive sectors of the market with impunity (Canefe 2016; Nimer & Rottman 2021, Yılmaz, Karatepe & Tören 2019). Researchers tracing the rhetoric of hospitality at the everyday level demonstrate how it leads to social fragmentation along sectarian, ethnic, and class lines that build on and exacerbate ethno‐nationalist sentiments and stereotypes (Altunkaynak 2016; Carpi & Şenoğuz 2019; Yükseker, Tekin & Taşğın 2021).…”

Logistification and Hyper-Precarity at the Intersection of Migration and Pandemic Governance: Refugees in the Turkish Labour Market

“…Chaotic policymaking and a patchwork of initiatives with micro effects left refugees having to find their own way ( ICG 2019 ). The result was a high degree of precarity for refugees who were treated as a cheap and exploitable labour force ( Bélanger and Saracoglu 2020 ; Nimer and Rottmann 2020 ).…”

“…By looking at what happens during the pandemic crisis, our research shows that the simultaneous inclusion and exclusion of Syrians make them an essential shifting surplus and disposable labourer within the Turkish economy. Prior research discusses the employment needs of refugees, and how the functioning of the Turkish migration regime responds to market demands ( Nimer and Rottmann 2020 ; Bélanger and Saracoglu 2020 ). Other research points to Syrians being in competition over the lowest-level jobs with the poorer factions of society (e.g.…”