Family–work dilemma of female migrants: patterns and strategies

Abstract

Focusing on the differentials associated with migrants’ region of origin, this paper examines the effects of family structure on women’s work. This analysis aims to provide empirical evidence to shed further light on the existing knowledge and to explore the more appropriate theoretical model regarding the association between family structure characteristics and immigrant women’s work outside the home in the multicultural and multiethnic context. The multivariate results of this analysis support the key fact that the substantial effects of family structure characteristics on women’s work outside the home tend to persist beyond the influence of migration status and ethnic diversity.

Keywords:

• family
• work
• multiculturalism
• female migrants
• human capital

Acknowledgement

Earlier versions of this paper were presented in The International MatchPoints Conference on the Culture of Politics, Economics and International Relations (Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, 24–25 May 2013), an international workshop funded by the European Commission on “Migration and Development: The Role of Women in Migration and Development” (Brussels, Belgium, 1–2 February 2011), and the Annual Meeting of Population Association of America (Washington DC, the United States of America, March 30 to April 02, 2011). In particular, comments of the chairs and discussants of the sessions at which the papers were presented are gratefully acknowledged. The author would also like to gratefully acknowledge support and comments from Professor Peter McDonald at The Australian National University, ACT, Australia.

Notes

1. The United States of America, Canada and Australia are known as the three traditional destinations for migrants throughout the world (Freeman & Birrell, 2001).

2. However, it should be also noted that the double peak pattern is no longer as prevalent as it was in the past because ‘women are finding ways to combine family responsibilities with market work’ (United Nations 2000, p. 111).

3. ESB refers to English Speaking Background immigrants in Australia who were born in Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the Republic of South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, whereas all other overseas-born persons are classified NESB: Non English Speaking Background (Wooden & VandenHeuvel, 1997, p. 129).

4. Based on the composition of overseas-born women aged 15-54 by individual country of birth, the classification of regions of origin in the original database used here was developed. Also, this paper aims to compare the employment of Australian-born women with that of overseas-born women. Accordingly, the same age range (that is, 15–54) has been used for both Australian-born and overseas-born women in this paper to keep the consistency and accuracy of the comparison.

5. Labour force participation rate for Australian-born women is about 70 per cent (Foroutan, 2008a, 2008b).

6. It is also acknowledged that the work pattern of this migrant group might be in part the consequence of disadvantage and discrimination hypothesis (Foroutan, 2011a).

7. It is, however, acknowledged that besides the cultural differences in values attached to family rather than to market employment, these cross-national differences in women's employment can also be partly due to institutional and political variations in employment characteristics such as availability of part-time work, pay rates etc.