STRUGGLES AGAINST PRECARITY: CHALLENGES IN GERMANY FOR TURKISH NEWCOMERS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In the last decades, precariousness and precarious labor have become more prominent subjects in academic and policy debates. At the same time, we are observing a surge of right-wing views in society and across political landscapes in industrialized and industrializing countries across the world, putting the blame for increased precarity on the influx of immigrants and making claims about immigration leading to increased labor market competition, supposedly putting local workforce at disadvantage. As the Polish sociologist and philosopher Zygmunt Bauman (2000) has argued, however, the driving force of increasing precarious work conditions as well as new precarious livelihoods has been the neo-liberal restructuring of labor in the last decades. Baumann suggests considering carefully how these conditions of economic exploitation and submission interact with instruments of power (2000, p.48-52) and points out that immigrants are one of the groups most vulnerable to becoming subjects of precarity (see also Standing, 2014). Furthermore, current research in Canada (Frenette & Morisette, 2005) and Germany (Schittenhelm, Schmidtke & Weiß, 2014a; Mayer, 2018a) has shown clearly that among many highly-skilled migrants a majority will be employed in lower-skilled jobs in the country they immigrated to. Following Baumann, this study assumes a more complex connection between phenomena of immigration and precarious labor than dominant societal discourses suggest and examines immigrants’ situations in terms of work conditions and legal statuses in the labor market and society. Using a qualitative approach, it explores specifically how highly-skilled Turkish newcomers experience work-related precariousness, analyzing the characteristics and patterns of their employment conditions. Against the backdrop of recent political developments in Turkey, compared to earlier immigration movements growing wave of skilled immigrants in the last 10 years from Turkey to Germany (especially to Berlin) has increased, especially highly qualified Turkish immigrants who work in the jobs categorized more so with low-qualifications was very fascinating to study. The study draws on conversations with workers from four call centers based in Berlin, Convergys, Sykes, Booking, and Arvato / Majorel in Berlin, all of which provide customer or content management services outsourced from US-American social media, entertainment, and sports equipment companies, such as Facebook, PlayStation, Booking.com and Nike. Theoretically, the study is based on the assumption that migration results in a biographic rupture making it necessary to transfer cultural capital (Bourdieu, 2010). In a first step, the interviews reveal different but interlinked forms of uncertainty underlying the call center employees’ working conditions. A contribution of this study to the understanding of “precariousness” here is to fill this broad concept with empirical evidence from the lives of one particular group and thus making it graspable. In a second step, the paper examines the adaptation mechanisms and strategies migrants have to employ in order to transfer their existing expertise, skills, and personal qualities - from attitudes to worldviews, educational certificates to social networks - of highly educated immigrants to the country of immigration. While newcomer Turkish immigrants lose major parts of their cultural capital, other parts can be transferred. These findings underline the fact that if immigration law and labor laws are not well adapted to migrants’ and the labor markets situation, the vulnerable status of immigrants is likely to make them more vulnerable to precarious work conditions. More broadly, the study argues that listening to the underestimated voices of precarious workers provides important hints for future academic debates on precarity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».