Perceived threat and exclusionary attitudes towards foreign workers in ...

6 downloads 94 Views 163KB Size Report
Sep 5, 2004 - Israel is a multi-ethnic society inhabited by Jews and Arabs. Although ... Bank and Gaza strip had begun joining the Israeli economy mostly in.
Ethnic and Racial Studies Vol. 27 No. 5 September 2004 pp. 780 799 /

Perceived threat and exclusionary attitudes towards foreign workers in Israel Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

Abstract The present article focuses on determinants of attitudes towards granting social rights to overseas labour migrants in Israeli society. The analysis is based on a national representative sample of the adult population in Israel. The findings reveal that a substantial number of respondents (both Jews and Arabs) oppose granting equal social rights (i.e. education, welfare, health, housing) to foreign workers. These attitudes can partially be explained as resulting from perceived threat to social and economic well-being of individuals as well as threat to national identity and Jewish character of the state. Part of the exclusionary attitudes that cannot be attributed to threats, are explained by individuals’ socio-economic characteristics, ethnicity and political orientation. The findings are discussed within the context of Israel as an ethno-national state.

Keywords: Israel; labour migrants; minority rights; exclusionary attitudes; competition; threat.

Introduction Overseas labour migration is a recent phenomenon in Israeli society. During the 1990s an increasing number of migrant workers (both documented and undocumented) were recruited and incorporated into the Israeli labour market, amounting to approximately 8 per cent of the labour force (Ministry of Labor and Welfare 2001). Their presence is growingly felt as they seem to be changing not only the labour market composition, but the ethnic fabric of Israeli society as well (Borowsky and Yanay 1997; Bartram 1998; Schnell 1999). Consequently, questions are being raised regarding social rights of labour migrants. These questions are of special significance in Israel, a state that encourages Jewish immigration but discourages settlement

# 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd ISSN 0141-9870 print/1466-4356 online DOI: 10.1080u0141987042000246345

Foreign workers in Israel

781

of non-Jewish migrants. Indeed, Israel provides a particularly illuminating setting to examine attitudes towards labour migrants in light of the ethno-national character of the state to which non-Jewish migrants pose a challenge (Kemp et al. 2000). This article will focus on determinants of attitudes towards granting social rights to labour migrants in Israel. By distinguishing between threat to the individuals’ social and economic well-being and threat to the national character of the state, and by comparing majority and minority views towards non-citizens rights, we provide a better understanding of the sources of exclusionary attitudes and insights into the nature and meaning of membership in contemporary multiethnic societies. The Israeli setting Israel is a multi-ethnic society inhabited by Jews and Arabs. Although Jews of European origin are socio-economically advantaged when compared to Jews of Asian and North-African origin, the most meaningful ethnic split in Israel is between Jews and Arabs (e.g. Lewin-Epstein and Semyonov 1993). The Arab minority (which constitutes approximately 20 per cent of the citizens of Israel) is disadvantaged relative to Jews (whether European-American or AsianAfrican) in every aspect of social stratification, including education, occupational status, earnings, and standard of living (Lewin-Epstein and Semyonov 1993; Semyonov et al. 1996). These disadvantages can be attributed largely to socio-economic discrimination (Lustick 1980; Wolkinson 1991, 1994) and should be understood within the context of the Jewish-Arab conflict (e.g. Lustick 1980; Al-Haj and Rosenfeld 1988; Lewin-Epstein and Semyonov 1993). In addition to the Jewish and Arab citizens, a third group of noncitizen migrant workers can be identified in Israeli society. The origin of labour migration to Israel can be traced to the end of the six-day war (in 1967) when non-citizen Palestinian workers from the West Bank and Gaza strip had begun joining the Israeli economy mostly in low-paying jobs in construction, agriculture and services. By the late 1980s Palestinian workers comprised about 8 per cent of the Israeli labour force (Semyonov and Lewin-Epstein 1987). As a result of the Palestinian uprising in 1987 (intifada), daily commuting of Arab workers from the West Bank and Gaza was curtailed. Hence, economic sectors in which Palestinian workers had been concentrated suffered from labour shortages. The ‘temporary’ solution sought to overcome labour shortages was importation of overseas labour migrants. By 1987 the number of permits accorded by the Israeli Ministry of Labor was 2,500, and it increased gradually up to 9,600 in 1993 when Israel had begun

782

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

importing large numbers of overseas foreign workers mostly from Rumania (construction sector); Thailand (agriculture sector) and Philippines (geriatric care, nursing and domestic services). By 2001, the total number of labour migrants in the Israeli labour market was estimated to be 240,000; of those 60 per cent are working without permits (Ministry of Labor and Welfare 2001).1 Although non-national workers have become an integral part of the Israeli economy, they are placed at the bottom of the labour market and the social order. In Israel, unlike Western European countries work permits are given to employers, but not to employees, thus transforming documented workers into a de-facto ‘captive labour force’ (Rozenhak 2000). Foreign workers hold the least desirable jobs and occupations; they earn the lowest salaries (many times below the minimum wage), suffer from the worst working conditions, and do not generally benefit from the welfare system and union protection accorded to Israeli citizens (e.g. Borowsky and Yanay 1997; Bartram 1998; Yanay and Borowsky 1998; Rozenhak 2000; Amir 2002). Labour migration in Israel has become a major public issue around which much debate is taking place. The fact that foreigners reside in the host society creates a new category of residents  foreign workers. The presence of foreign workers has significant social, cultural, economic and political implications. Indeed, the receiving society cannot just benefit from the participation of labour migrants in the production process; it is also confronted with the responsibility for their reproductions costs (Raijman and Kemp 2002). The explicit position of the State is that Israel is not an ‘immigration’ country but rather an ‘Aliya’ (Jewish immigration) country. From the State’s point of view foreign workers ‘are not migrants but only workers’. As such, its jurisdiction extends exclusively to labour migration policy (work permits, deportation) rather than to labour migrants’ needs. The State ignores the special needs of this population, because acknowledging them would entail the recognition of foreign workers as legitimate residents of the nation-state (Raijman and Kemp 2002). The official discourse that frames debates about foreign workers is based on the basic assumption regarding the Jewish character of the State according to which non-Jewish labour migrants pose a challenge. This is clearly reflected by the xenophobic tone towards labour migrants in Israel set by both the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Labor and Welfare which are headed by ministers belonging to the ultra-orthodox party (see Kemp et al. 2000). Recent research carried out in Israel on attitudes towards labour migrants has shown that prejudice, antagonism, and discriminatory attitudes towards labour migrants are quite prevalent in Israel (e.g. Bar-Zuri 1996; Nathanzon and Bar-Zuri 1999; Pedahzur and Yishai 1999; Semyonov, Raijman, and Yom-Tov 2002). Nonetheless, we know /

Foreign workers in Israel

783

very little about the social mechanisms underlying the emergence of such discriminatory attitudes. This will be the goal of our study. Theoretical considerations In the last decade several studies have shown that the institution and meaning of citizenship has been changing over time in contemporary nation-states (Soysal 1994, Jacobson 1996). The Marshallian sequence in the acquisition of membership rights stresses that political rights precede entitlement to social rights (Marshall 1964) has proved to be inexact in the case of migrant workers. In most Western immigrantreceiving countries, economic and social rights were the first ones to be fully granted to migrant workers. Thus, labour migrants’ participation in social welfare schemes, education systems, labour markets, and politics challenges traditional notions and the fundamental logic of citizenship (Soysal 1994). The notion of migration challenging the nation-state has been subjected to two different theoretical interpretations (for a thorough discussion on this debate see Joppke 1998). The first and more theoretically conservative approach, sees migration and labour migrants as a challenge to be incorporated within a presumably transcendental framework of the nation-state, if only in the absence of a viable political alternative (e.g. Brubaker 1989). The second interpretation presents the fragmentary and partial incorporation of labour migrants within national regimes as a form of membership in its own right rather than as a deviation from the ‘standard’, i.e. national model of membership. According to Soysal (1994), for example, new forms of ‘post-national’ membership are made possible through a gradual ‘decoupling’ between various civil, social and political rights and the national identity of those entitled to such rights. Along this line of argument, processes of decoupling are institutionally grounded in a transnationalized discourse of human rights and in the multi-level politics of the European Union (Hammar 1990; Jacobson 1996; Feldblum 1998; Guiraudon 1998). At the same time that incorporation regimes in Western Europe have reconfigured their membership systems, anti-immigrant sentiments and ethnic tension have steadily increased. Research conducted in receiving societies during the last decades reveal high levels of antiimmigrant sentiments among the native populations.2 Labour migrants are perceived as outsiders in the cultural, economic, social and political spheres, and as a threat to economic success, national identity, and social order. It is argued that perceived threat by dominant groups in the society is likely to develop attitudes that exclude non-nationals from access to public goods and services (e.g. Esses et al. 2001; Scheepers et al. 2002).

784

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

A series of theoretical propositions have been advanced in the sociological literature to explain xenophobic attitudes and antiminority sentiments. These explanations range from competitive threat, racism, symbolic racism, authoritarian personality, prejudice and right-wing mobilization (for an insightful discussion of theoretical explanations see Wimmer 1997). In this article we confine ourselves to two sets of theoretical explanations that can be advanced to explain the way in which threat prompts anti-minority and anti-immigrant sentiments in Israel. The first explanation stresses competition at the socio-economic level and the impact of socio-economic forces on ethnic antagonism. The second one traces the roots of hostility to cultural preferences and prejudice and stresses the role of national identity in explaining discrimination against minority and out-group populations. These two theoretical approaches seem most relevant to explain the mechanisms underlying the support of exclusionary attitudes towards labour migrants in an ethno-national State like Israel. The central tenet of the competition model is that attitudes towards minorities and migrants are shaped by group identifications and the struggle between groups for power, resources, benefits, and rewards. This theory posits that individuals have a zero-sum view of politics: us against them. Thus, anti-minority attitudes are influenced by an individual’s perception of group conflict or even the threat of group conflict (Blumer 1958; Blalock 1967; Bobo 1988; Olzak 1992, 1995; Quillian 1995; Bobo and Hutchings 1996; Wimmer 1997; Semyonov et al. 2002). The logic embodied in this framework suggests that individuals with vulnerable positions in the society and in the labour market hold negative attitudes towards subordinate and out-group populations because they feel threatened by their presence. That is, individuals of low socio-economic origin feel that subordinate and out-group populations generate greater competition over scarce resources (e.g. fewer jobs, lower wage rates, fewer opportunities for mobility, more competition for housing, social services, and education) (Gaashlot and Togeny 1995; Quillian 1995; Espenshade and Hempstead 1996; Dustmann 2000; Esses et al. 2001). Thus, the perception of threat or fear of competition rationalizes the exclusion of subordinate minorities (e.g. labour migrants) from equal access to societal and material goods. The central tenet of the cultural model suggests that ethnic minorities and migrants, for example, are perceived as posing a threat to the cultural and national homogeneity of society. Furthermore, it has been suggested that questions of national identity tend to mobilize popular sentiments even more than issues of labour market competition. Hence, the perception of threat to cultural and national

Foreign workers in Israel

785

homogeneity may give rise, for example, to discriminatory attitudes and anti-immigrant sentiments (Schnapper 1994; Fetzer 2000). The feeling of cultural threat reflects fear of the intrusion of values and practices that are perceived as both alien and potentially destructive to the national culture. According to this approach, conservative views (mainly expressed through religious fundamentalism and right-wing political orientation) mobilize negative sentiments towards out-group members, activate prejudice and lead to discrimination against out-group populations. Hence, the perception of threat to cultural and national homogeneity of the society prompts antiminority sentiments (Castles and Miller 1993; Schnapper 1994; Baumgartl and Favell 1995; Fetzer 2000); and these sentiments become more pronounced, the more dissimilar the minority population is ethnically and culturally from the majority population (Watts 1993; Adler 1996; Wimmer 1997; Dustmann 2000; Fetzer 2000). It should be noted that the cultural thesis is of special importance and meaning in Israel where membership in the nation (i.e. Jewish origin) is a pre-requisite for substantial membership in the State (citizenship) (e.g. Shafir and Peled 2002). Thus, the basis for exclusionary attitudes (especially among Jews) towards out-group populations lies not only on economic rational and labour market competition but also on the commitment to maintain the Jewish character of the State. To date most studies on the topic have not distinguished between the two types of threat and their differential impact on exclusionary attitudes. Nor have they compared minority and majority attitudes towards out-group populations. In this paper we intend to contribute to the literature on exclusionary attitudes by distinguishing between the two types of threat: threat to socio-economic well-being of individuals and threat to the national homogeneity of the State. We argue that the two types of threat are mutually constitutive in the emergence of discriminatory attitudes and will be differentially perceived by minority (Arabs) and majority (Jews) members of Israeli society. Thus, in the analysis that follows we estimate the relative effects of these two types of threat on attitudes towards granting rights to foreign workers in Israel and compare the effect of majorityminority membership on exclusionary attitudes.

Hypotheses The theoretical review leads to a series of general propositions regarding the determinants of attitudes towards foreign workers’ social rights. First, perception of threat to socio-economic well-being is expected to be higher among subordinate populations (i.e. Arab

786

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

citizens) and individuals of low socio-economic status. Second, perception of threat to the national homogeneity of society is expected to be more pronounced among Jews, orthodox religious respondents and individuals holding right-wing political orientation as they fear that the presence of foreigners in Israel is a threat to the Jewish character of the State. Third, support for exclusionary policies (i.e. denial of social rights) towards migrants is expected to increase with level of perceived threat to both socio-economic well-being and national homogeneity of society; the higher the perceived threat, the more likely are respondents to deny social rights to foreign workers. Fourth, as a corollary of hypothesis 3 we expect both ‘socio-economic threat’ and ‘national threat’ to mediate the effects of the exogenous variables on attitudes towards granting social rights to labour migrants. Specifically, we expect that threat to socio-economic wellbeing would intervene in the relations between individuals’ socioeconomic position and attitudes towards granting social rights; and that threat to the Jewish character of the state would intervene in the relations between ethnicity, religiosity and right-wing orientation and attitudes towards granting social rights to foreigners.

Data and variables Data for the present analysis were obtained from the ‘Attitudes Toward Minority Workers Survey’ conducted by the B.I. and Lucille Cohen Institute for Public Opinion Research at Tel-Aviv University during the second half of 1999. The survey solicited data from a national representative stratified sample of 1,100 Israeli adults (800 Jews and 300 Arabs aged 25 65). Respondents provided information on demographic, labour force status and socio-economic characteristics, as well as on their attitudes towards foreign workers.3 /

Dependent variables The dependent variables in our analyses* respondents’ attitudes towards granting social and economic rights to foreign workers were measured on a 1 7 scale (1strongly agree; 7 strongly disagree) are based on response to the questions: ‘whether the State should grant foreign workers with rights in the following areas: (1) health services; (2) education; (3) welfare; (4) decent housing; (5) minimum wages. The five measured items were used in the data analysis to create a latent variable ‘Attitudes towards granting socio-economic rights to foreign workers’ (hereafter RIGHTS).4 /

/

/

/

Foreign workers in Israel

787

Explanatory variables Fear of socio-economic competition was measured on a 1 7 scale (1 not at all; 7  strongly affect) based on response to the questions: ‘To what extent do foreign workers negatively affect’: (1) your wage level, (2) your employment opportunities, (3) your social benefits, (4) the level of health services, (5) the level of education of your children, and (6) the housing conditions in your area of residence. The six measured items were used to construct a latent variable ‘threat of socio-economic competition’ (hereafter SOTHREAT).5 Threat to the Jewish character of the State was constructed as an interaction term between two variables. The first variable is the response (on 1 to 4 scale) to the question: ‘To what extent do you agree that in the future the proportion of foreign workers would be so high that they would be a threat to the Jewish majority of the state.’ The second variable measures (on 1 to 7 scale) response to the question: ‘whether Israel should be a Jewish state.’ It serves us as an indicator of identification-level with the ethno-national character of the State. The interaction between these two variables provides us with a measure of the sense of threat posed by foreign workers weighted by the level of commitment to preserve the ethno-national character of the state (hereafter NATHREAT).6 The background variables included in the analysis are: age (in years), gender (male1), ethnicity (1Jewish origin), political orientation (1right-wing) and religious orientation (1Jewish orthodox). The socio-economic characteristics of respondents consist of education (years of formal schooling) and household income per capita (in New Israeli Shekels). labour force position is defined by a set of dummy variables representing white-collar and blue-collar employment plus two additional categories: not in the labour force and unemployed (the omitted category). /

/

/

/

/

/

/

Data analysis Descriptive overview In Table 1 we display descriptive statistics regarding attitudes towards foreign workers in Israel pertaining to: perception of threat in the social and economic realm, perception of threat towards the Jewish character of the State, support for the ethno-national character of the State, and attitudes towards granting social rights to labour migrants in Israel. The data displayed in Table 1 reveal that Israelis express rather moderate levels of threat to their social and economic well-being. Fear of competition is least pronounced in the social realm, especially with

Table 1. Perception of Threat and Attitudes Towards Granting Rights to Foreign Workers (Means, standard deviations and percentages)

788

Variables

Jews

SOTHREAT

Mean (S.D)

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

Arabs

Threat to Wage Level Threat to Employment Opportunities Threat to Social Benefits Threat to the level of Education Threat to Health Services Threat to Housing Conditions NATHREAT Threat to the Jewish Majority ‘‘Israel should be a Jewish State’’

3.39 (2.59) 3.15 (2.61) 3.07 2.97 2.40 3.33 14.7 2.34 6.20

RIGHTS

Mean (S.D)

Social Benefits Education Services Health Services Housing Minimum Wage

4.35 4.32 3.20 4.36 2.26

(2.40) (2.45) (2.18) (2.59) (7.8) (1.01) (1.66)

(2.40) (2.50) (2.45) (2.49) (2.15)

Total

) Strongly Support

Mean (S.D)

) Strongly Support

31.2 29.6

4.68 (2.43) 4.65 (2.58)

53.1 55.7

23.6 24.6 15.8 30.7

3.47 (2.22) 3.0 (1.97) 2.83 (1.96) 3.29 (2.29) 5.3 (5.3) 2.52 (0.90) 2.10 (1.89)

25.5 16.0 15.0 26.7

Mean (S.D)

) Strongly Oppose 46.1 51.0 45.0 44.3 46.2

38.4 80.4 ) Strongly Oppose 42.5 41.0 26.5 45.0 15.5

5.19 5.28 4.90 5.04 4.93

(1.65) (1.67) (2.01) (1.88) (1.97)

50.7 11.6

Mean (S.D)

3.64 (2.61) 3.44 (2.67) 3.15 2.97 2.49 3.21 12.8 2.37 5.38

(2.37) (2.36) (2.15) (2.51) (8.3) (0.99) (2.37)

Mean (S.D) 4.52 4.52 3.54 4.50 2.80

(2.30) (2.39) (2.47) (2.40) (2.37)

) Strongly Support 35.5 34.7 23.8 22.9 15.7 28.0 40.9 66.7 ) Strongly Oppose 43.3 45.2 30.2 44.8 21.5

Foreign workers in Israel

789

regard to health services (x ¯ 2.49), and the quality of education for children (x ¯ 2.97) and most salient in the labour market, whether with regard to employment opportunities x ¯ 3.64, and wage level x ¯ 3.64. Threat to social benefits (x ¯ 3.15) and threat to housing conditions (x ¯ 3.21) are in between. With the exception of housing conditions, Arabs, the subordinate ethnic group in Israel, express higher levels of perceived threat than Jews.7 The data also reveal that Israelis perceive the presence of foreigners as a potential threat to the Jewish character of the State. It is worth noting that both Arabs and Jews (circa 41 per cent) agree with this statement. However, Jews, but not Arabs, support the idea that ‘Israel should be a Jewish state.’ Specifically, while 80 per cent of the Jewish respondents strongly agree with this statement, only 11 per cent among Arabs support the notion that Israel should be a Jewish State. Indeed, concern for the national homogeneity of the state of Israel is more pronounced among Jews than among Arabs. The difference between Jews and Arabs is clearly captured in the mean values of the variable NATHREAT  Threat to the Jewish Character of the State  (x ¯ 14.7 and x ¯ 5.3, among Jews and Arabs, respectively). Overall Israelis exhibit a tendency to deny social rights to nonnationals. Opposition to granting social rights to foreigners is more pronounced with regard to social benefits, education, and housing (x ¯ 4.5) and least pronounced for health services (x ¯ 3.54) and minimum wage (x ¯ 2.81). Consistent with our expectations, Arabs (subordinate ethnic group), tend to express a greater opposition to granting social rights to foreign workers than Jews on all five items. It is interesting to note that when put in a comparative perspective, Israelis, regardless of their ethnicity, display higher levels of exclusionary attitudes than do citizens of European countries.8 /

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Estimating the model Although interesting, the descriptive data do not tell us whether and to what extent perception of socio-economic threat and perception of threat to the Jewish character of the State intervene between individuals’ characteristics and their attitudes towards granting social rights to foreign workers. Thus, in the analysis that follows we estimate a structural equation model [SEM] with latent variables, using AMOS (version 4.01) full information maximum likelihood procedure to examine these propositions (Arbuckle and Wothke 1999).9 The model simultaneously estimates (1) the direct effects of the exogenous variables on the latent variable SOTHREAT, (2) the direct effects of the exogenous variables on NATHREAT, (3) the direct effect of SOTHREAT on NATHREAT,10 (4) the direct effects of SOTHREAT and NATHREAT on the latent variable RIGHTS, and the

790

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

direct and indirect (via SOTHREAT and NATHREAT) effects of the exogenous variables on RIGHTS. In Table 2 we display the parameter estimates and fit measures for the model according to the path diagram displayed in Figure 1. The data provide a good fit to the model with the ratio of X2 to the degrees of freedom (CMINuDF) lower than 3. The RMSEA is 0.04 providing high level of confidence in the models’ fit (PCLOSE0.997). In addition, it should be noted that all other fit indices well exceed the 0.90 level which is considered highly acceptable. The results strongly support our first hypothesis that individuals with vulnerable positions in the labour market are more threatened by the presence of labour migrants in society. The model’s coefficients reveal that perception of threat to socio-economic well-being posed by foreign workers tends to decrease with level of education (b 0.15) and with income (b 0.11). Perception of threat is lower among individuals with white-collar jobs (b 0.15). Neither age, nor gender, nor ethnicity, exert a significant effect on fear of socioeconomic competition. While we did not expect age and gender to significantly affect perception of threat of socio-economic competition, we expected Arabs, the subordinate ethnic group in Israel, to express higher level of threat to their socio-economic well-being. Apparently, after controlling for socio-economic differences between majority and minority populations we find no significant differences in perceived threat to socio-economic well-being between the two groups. The data displayed in column 2 of Table 2 reveal that perception of threat to the Jewish character of the State is affected by demographic, socio-economic characteristics and by religiosity. The perception of threat to the national homogeneity of the state is positively associated with age (b0.08) and negatively affected by income (b 0.12). As expected, NATHREAT is significantly higher among Jews than among Arabs (b 0.47) since Jews (but not Arabs) are committed to preserve the Jewish character of the State. Net of socio-economic factors and net of ethnicity, religiosity exerts a significant effect on NATHREAT (b0.08) as orthodox Jews are more concerned than others with the Jewish character of the State. It should be noted, however, that political orientation has no significant net effect on perception of threat to the Jewish character of the State.11 The effect of threat of socio-economic competition (SOTHREAT) on threat to the Jewish character of the State (NATHREAT) in the model is positive and highly significant (b0.25). These findings suggest that net of socio-economic characteristics respondents who are more threatened by foreigners in the socio-economic arena are also more concerned with the impact foreigners exert on the Jewish character of the State. The coefficients displayed in column 3 of Table 2 examine the impact of both types of threats on attitudes towards granting social /

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Table 2. Standardized and Unstandardized Coefficients of Trimmed Structural Equation Model (SEM) Predicting Propensity for Social Discrimination (RIGHTS) against Foreign Workers in Israel.a

Exogenous Variables

Standardized Coefficients

Endogenous Variables

Endogenous Variables

SOTHREAT (1)

NATHREAT (2) RIGHTS (3)

SOTHREAT (1) NATHREAT (2)

RIGHTS (3)

10.21* (0.63) 0.05* (0.02) / 0.91 (0.49) 1.52* (0.52) /0.09 (0.06) /4.75* (1.10) / / / / 1.10* (0.13)

/0.04 /0.01 0.04 / / /0.15* /0.11* /0.15* /0.08 /0.05 / /

/0.22* /0.03 0.08* 0.15* 0.02 /0.12* /0.08* /0.005 0.01 0.01 0.16* 0.15*

/0.19 (0.17) /0.002 (0.005) 0.14 (0.12) / / /0.08* (0.02) /0.99* (0.30) /0.57* (0.18) /0.34 (0.19) /0.25 (0.20) / /

/1.04* (0.19) /0.004 (0.005) 0.31* (0.11) 0.58* (0.13) 0.09 (0.14) /0.06* (0.02) /0.72* (0.30) /0.02 (0.17) 0.03 (0.18) 0.07 (0.19) 0.03* (0.01) 0.15* (0.03)

Fit Measures: Chi-Square /385.65 DF/131 CMINuDF /2.944 P/0.000 RMSEA /0.04 RMSEA 90-Percent Confidence Interval/0.037;0.047 St.RMR /0.293 PCLOSE /0.997 GFI: 0.969 AGFI /0.941 NNFI/0.953

791

a. t -value in parentheses. b. See Figure 1. * pB/.05.

0.47* 0.08* / 0.05 0.08* /0.04 /0.12* / / / / 0.25*

Foreign workers in Israel

Ethnicity Age Gender Right Wing Orthodox Education Income per Capita White collar workers Blue collar workers Not in labour Force NATHREAT SOTHREAT

Unstandardized Coefficients

792

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

Figure 1. Structural Standardized Coefficients Predicting Attitudes Toward Granting Social Rights to Foreign Workers.

rights to foreign workers. The findings provide firm support for the hypothesis that threats are likely to prompt anti-foreigner sentiments. That is, respondents who feel threatened by competition in the socioeconomic arena are more likely to deny social rights to foreign workers (b 0.15). And respondents who perceive foreign workers as a threat to the Jewish character of the State are more likely to deny social rights to foreign workers (b0.16). It should also be also noted that part of the effect of SOTHREAT on RIGHTS is mediated via NATHREAT. The direct effect of ethnicity on RIGHTS is strong (b  0.22) and significant, with Jews expressing less opposition than Arabs to granting social rights to foreign workers. Evidently, when both types of threats are included in the model, we find that Arabs  the subordinate ethnic group in Israel  are less tolerant and less likely to support granting social rights to foreigners. Political orientation directly influences attitudes towards granting social rights to foreign workers. Net of perception of threats, right-oriented respondents were more likely than others to express negative views regarding concession of rights to labour migrants (b 0.15). /

/

/

/

/

/

/

Foreign workers in Israel

793

Decomposing direct and indirect effects on RIGHTS The findings presented thus far suggest that the perception of threat posed by foreigners to socio-economic well-being of individuals as well as concerns regarding the ethno-national character of the State (especially among Jews) are highly associated with discriminatory attitudes towards foreigners’ social rights. To evaluate the mediating role of both types of threat (SOTHREAT and NATHREAT) on attitudes towards foreigners’ social rights, we decomposed the total effects of the exogenous variables on RIGHTS into direct and indirect effects. The findings displayed in Table 3 show that fear of socioeconomic competition and perception of threat to the national homogeneity of the Jewish state do not fully intervene between individual’s socio-economic characteristics and attitudes towards foreigners’ rights, providing only partial support to the fourth hypothesis. The only variables that their effects on attitudes towards granting social rights to foreign workers are fully (or almost fully) mediated by perceptions of threats are labour market position (via SOTHREAT) and religiosity (via NATHREAT). All other variables included in the model exert direct and significant effect on RIGHTS. Most of the effects of education and income on exclusionary attitudes are direct and at least, twice as large as the indirect effects. Net of level of threats, highly educated people and individuals with high incomes are more willing to grant social rights to foreigners. Almost all the effect of Table 3. Decomposition of Direct and Indirect (Standardized) Effects on RIGHTS Variables

Ethnicity Age Gender Religion Right Wing Education Income per Capita White color Workers Blue Color Workers Not in labour Force SOTHREAT NATHREAT

Trimmed Model Total Effects Direct Effects on RIGHTS on RIGHTS

Indirect Effects on RIGHTS (via SOTHREAT/ NATHREAT)

/0.149 /0.019 0.091 0.033 0.155 /0.155 /0.118 /0.039 /0.015 0.001 0.192 0.159

0.068 0.010 0.007 0.012 0.008 /0.036 /0.039 /0.029 /0.015 /0.009 0.040 0.000

/0.217 /0.028 0.084 0.021 0.146 /0.119 /0.079 /0.009 0.000 0.010 0.152 0.159

794

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

gender and political orientation on attitudes towards foreigners’ rights is direct. Specifically, men and right-wing respondents are more hostile towards granting social rights to labour migrants regardless of level of threat. The effect of ethnicity on attitudes towards granting social rights to foreigners is somewhat surprising in face of results presented by previous studies (e.g. Semyonov et al. 2002, Raijman et al. 2003). According to these studies, when compared to Arabs, Jews express higher level of discriminatory attitudes towards foreigners (both in the economic and political arena). The present analysis however, suggests, that when threat to the national homogeneity of the state and to socioeconomic well-being of individuals are taken into consideration, Jews are less likely to express discriminatory attitudes towards granting social rights to foreigners. It is also important to note that the direct effect of ethnicity on exclusionary attitudes is considerably higher (b  0.217) than its total effect (b 0.149). Apparently, Jews and Arabs evaluate access to social rights differently from the way they evaluate access to economic rights, especially when threat to economic well-being and to the national homogeneity of the State are taken into consideration. /

/

/

/

Conclusions The major goals of the present article were to understand, first, the extent to which Israeli citizens, both Jews and Arabs, are willing to grant social rights to non-Jewish labour migrants  the new de-facto residents in Israeli society, and second, the extent to which attitudes towards foreigners’ rights are affected by two distinct types of threat  perception of threat to individuals’ socio-economic well-being and perception of threat to the ethno-national character of the State. Altogether our data show that a substantial number of Israelis, whether Jews or Arabs, are resistant to grant social rights to foreign workers and that the level of resistance is higher than the resistance found in most European countries. The findings presented by the analysis suggest that exclusionary attitudes in Israel are produced through two main mechanisms. The first one is associated with individual’s fear of competition over socioeconomic resources and the second one is related to the perception of threat to the Jewish character of the State. Foreign workers are viewed by Israelis as competitors in the social and economic arena. That is, many Israeli citizens fear that more labour migrants mean fewer jobs, lower rates of pay, fewer opportunities for mobility, more competition for housing and for social services, and fewer opportunities for their children in the educational system. Thus, perceived threat of competition over resources becomes a major motivation for exclusion of /

/

Foreign workers in Israel

795

labour migrants from collective goods (i.e. rights). This is especially evident among individuals of low socio-economic background who fear the detrimental consequences of such competition. In addition, Jews fear that the incorporation of non-Jews into Israeli society challenges the ethno-national character of the State. That is, labour migrants are viewed as posing a threat to the ‘ethnic-religious’ homogeneity of the nation. Thus, threat to the Jewish character of the State becomes a major motivation (among Jews) for excluding nonJews from access to social rights. Our findings suggest, however, that discriminatory attitudes towards foreign workers cannot be fully explained by perception of threat either to social and economic well-being of individuals or to the national homogeneity of the state. Specifically, individuals of low education and low income and individuals holding right-wing political views seem to be more hostile towards foreigners’ rights, net of level of threats. In other words, we find considerable evidence for xenophobic sentiments that cannot be explained by the perception of threat. These differences can be attributed to the lack of liberal views held by individuals of lower socio-economic status and lower education (e.g. Hello et al. 2002) and to conservative views held by individuals with right- wing political orientation (Adler 1996; Wimmer 1997). Furthermore, our findings reveal that when perception of threats is controlled, Arabs are more likely than Jews to deny social rights to foreign workers. It is possible that Arabs’ exclusionary views towards foreigners’ social rights are derived from their unique status in Israel. Arabs are not only an ethnic minority but also a political minority and their status should be understood within the general context the ArabIsraeli conflict. We can speculate that granting social rights to nonJewish (and non-Palestinian) labour migrants can have a detrimental effect on the already weak political status of the Arab minority. The presence of foreigners entitled to social rights not only generates competition but also changes the demographic balance of the society. That is, a decrease in the relative proportion of the Arab minority may lead to decline in their negotiating power. Notwithstanding differences among sub-populations, Israelis are willing to benefit from the cheap labour foreign workers provide, but are reluctant to grant them equal access to social rights. These exclusionary attitudes should be understood within the general context of an ethno-national State like Israel. In fact, despite similarities with European countries the Israeli case seems to be more complex. The ethnic-religious nature of nationalism in Israel (and of its incorporation regime), the absence of an egalitarian notion and practice of citizenship for non-Jews, and the highly restrictive character of its naturalization policy, all make Israel a de-facto multicultural society with little prospects for multiculturalism.

796

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

Acknowledgements This research was supported by a grant from the Israeli Foundation Trustees (grant no 72u98) and by a grant from the G.I.F., the German Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Developmant (grant no. 1-596-14). We would like to thank Peter Schmidt, Anat Yom-Tov, Evgeniya Kotsiubinski, Anat Oren and Yasmin Alkalay for their help and advice. Notes 1. Undocumented non-Jewish labour migrants come from a variety of countries: East Europe(15)); Former- USSR (25)); South Asia (20)); Arab countries (11)); Africa (14)) and Latin America (15)). Most of them reside in the south-side of Tel-Aviv where they comprise around 20 per cent of the local population (Menahem 2000). 2. See, e.g., Hoskin and Mishler, 1983; Simon, 1987; Goot, 1991; Hoskin, 1991; Espenshade and Calhoun, 1993; Simon and Alexander, 1993; Watts, 1993; Baldwin-Edwards and Schain, 1994; Baumggartl and Favell, 1995; Gaasholt and Togeby, 1995; Quillian, 1995; Cole 1996; Espenshade and Hempstead, 1996; Pettigrew, 1998; Fetzer, 2000, Scheepers et al. 2002). 3. The information was obtained through face-to-face interviews in respondents’ homes, lasting, on average, 40 minutes. Israeli Arabs were oversampled in order to increase the number of observations for greater confidence in the statistical estimates. The sample was weighted accordingly in the data analysis. 4. Alpha Chronbach/.82. 5. Alpha Chronbach/.85. 6. In order to confirm the argument that RIGHTS, SOTHREAT and NATHREAT are not only three distinct theoretical concepts but also empirical entities, we conducted factor analysis. Three factors were identified and the correlations among these three variables range between r/0.19 to 0.24. As shown in the findings section, AMOS model with multiple indicators reconfirms this observation. 7. Most foreign workers reside in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area. Hardly any foreign workers reside in Arab communities. Thus, it is not surprising that Arabs are less threatened than Jews with regard to the impact that foreign workers have on housing conditions. 8. For example, the figures reported in our study are considerably higher than those reported by Scheepers et al . (2002, p. 24) for fifteen European countries. Scheepers et al. measured ethnic exclusionism on a 1 to 5 scale. In our study exclusionism was measured on a 1 to 7 scale. Regardless of the scale, in Israel all figures were above the mean whereas in most European countries figures were well below the mid-point. 9. The estimation procedure was based on the observed covariance matrix of the measured variables (pairwise matrix). 10. Perception of threat to socio-economic well-being and perception of threat to national homogeneity of the state are interrelated, with correlation between SOTHREAT and NATHREAT (r /0.19). We tested for the causal relationship between NATHREAT and SOTHREAT. We found no significant effect of NATHREAT on SOTHREAT but highly significant effect of SOTHREAT on NATHREAT. Following this finding we decided to estimate a model with only one causal path between the two variables. 11. We believe that the insignificant effect of political orientation on NATHREAT can be attributed to the fact that in Israel right-left distinction pertains mostly to individuals’ position regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Foreign workers in Israel

797

References ADLER, M.A. 1996 ‘Xenophobia and ethnoviolence in contemporary Germany’, Critical Sociology 22, pp. 29 /51 AL-HAJ, M. and ROSENFELD, H. 1988 Arab Local Government in Israel, Tel Aviv: International center for Peace in the Middle East AMIR, S. 2002 ‘Overseas foreign workers in Israel: Policy aims and labor market outcomes’, International Migration Review, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 41 /57 ARBUCKLE, J.L. and WOTHKE, W. 1999 Amos 4.0 User’s Guide, Chicago: Smallwaters BALDWIN-EDWARDS, M. and SCHAIN, M.A. 1994 ‘The politics of immigration: introduction’, in M. Baldwin-Edwards and M. Schain (eds). The Politics of Immigration in Western Europe, Essex: Frank Cass and Co., pp. 1 /16 BARTRAM, D. 1998 ‘Foreign workers in Israel: History and theory’, International Migration Review 32, pp. 303 /25 BAR-ZURI, R. 1996 ‘Foreign workers in Israel: Conditions, attitudes, and policy implications,’ in Ed. R. Nathanson (ed.), The New World of Work in an Era of Economic Change, Tel Aviv: Friedrich Ebert Foundation (Hebrew) BAUMGARTL, B. and FAVELL, A. (eds) 1995 New Xenophobia in Europe, London: Kluwer Law International BLALOCK, H. 1967 Toward a Theory of Minority-Group Relations, New York: John Wiley BLUMER, H. 1958 ‘Race prejudice as a sense of group position’, Pacific Sociological Review no. 1, pp. 3 /7 BOBO, L. 1988 ‘Group conflict, prejudice, and the paradox of contemporary racial attitudes’, in P. Katz and D.A. Taylor (eds), Eliminating Racism: Profiles in Controversy, New York: Plenum Press BOBO, L. and HUTCHINGS, V.L. 1996 ‘Perception of racial group competition: Extending Blumer’s theory of group position to multiracial social context’, American Sociological Review vol. 61, pp. 951 /72 BOROWSKY, A. and YANAY, U. 1997 ‘Temporary and illegal labour migration: The Israeli experience’, International Migration , pp. 495 /509 BRUBAKER, W.R. 1989 Immigration and the Politics of Citizenship in Europe and North America, London: University Press of America CASTLES, S. and MILLER, M. 1993 The Age of Migration. International Population Movements in the Modern World, New York: Guilford Press COLE, J. 1996 ‘Working-class reactions to the new immigration in Palermo (Italy)’, Critique of Anthropology, vol. 16, pp. 199 /220 DUSTMANN, C. 2000 Racial and Economic Factors in Attitudes To Immigration . IZA Discussion Paper No 190 ESPENSHADE, T. and CALHOUN, C.A. 1993 ‘An analysis of public opinion toward undocumented immigration’, Population Research and Policy Review, no. 12, pp. 189 /224 ESPENSHADE, T. and HEMPSTEAD, K. 1996 ‘Contemporary American attitudes toward US immigration’, International Migration Review, no. 30, pp. 535 /70 ESSES,V.M., DOVIDIO, J.F., JACKSON, L.M. and ARMSTRONG, T.L. 2001 ‘The immigrants dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice and national identity’, Journal of Social Issues, no. 53, pp. 389 /412 FELDBLUM, M. 1998 ‘Reconfiguring citizenship in Western Europe’, in C. Joppke (ed.), Challenge to the Nation State: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 231 /71 FETZER, J. S. 2000 Public Attitudes toward Immigration in the United States, France, and Germany, New York: Cambridge University Press GAASHOLT, Y. and TOGEBY, L. 1995 ‘Interethnic tolerance, education, and political orientation: Evidence from Denmark’, Political Behavior no. 17, pp. 265 /83

798

Rebeca Raijman and Moshe Semyonov

GOOT, M. 1991 ‘Public opinion as paradox: Australian attitudes to the rate of immigration and the rate of Asian immigration, 1984 /1990’, International Journal of Public Opinion Research no. 3, pp. 277 /94 GUIRAUDON, V. 1998 ‘Citizenship rights for non-citizens: France, Germany, and the Netherlands’, in C. Joppke (ed.), Challenge to the Nation State: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 272 /318 HAMMAR, T. 1990 Democracy and the Nation State: Aliens, Denizens, and Citizens in a World of International Migration, Aldershot: Avebury HELLO, E., SCHEEPERS, P. and GIJSBERTS, M. 2002 ‘Education and ethnic prejudice in Europe: Explanations for cross-national variances in the educational effect on ethnic prejudice’, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research , vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 5 /24 HOSKIN, M. and MISHLER, W. 1983 ‘Public opinion toward new migrants: A comparative’, International Migration, vol. 21, pp. 440 /61 HOSKIN, M. 1991 New Immigrants and Democratic Society: Minority Integration in Western Democracies, New York: Praeger JACOBSON, D. 1996 Rights Across Borders: Immigration and the Decline of Citizenship, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press JOPPKE C. (ed.) 1998. Challenge to the Nation State: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States, New York: Oxford University Press KEMP, A., RAIJMAN, R. REZNIK, J. and SCHAMMAH, S. 2000 ‘Contesting the limits of political participation: Latinos and Black African migrant workers in Israel’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 23, pp. 94 /119 LEWIN-EPSTEIN, N. and SEMYONOV, M. 1993 Arabs in Israel’s Economy: Patterns of Ethnic Inequality, Boulder, CO: Westview Press LUSTICK, I.S. 1980 Arabs in the Jewish State: Israel’s Control of a National Minority, Austin: Austin University Press MARSHALL, T.H. 1964 Class, Citizenship and Social Development, New York: Doubleday Anchor Books MENAHEM G. 2000 ‘Jews, Arabs, Russians and Foreigners in an Israeli City: Ethnic divisions and the restructuring economy of Tel Aviv, 1983 /1996.’ International Journal of Urban and Regional Research , vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 634 /52 MINISTRY OF LABOR AND WELFARE 2001 Foreign Workers Without Permits in Israel, Jerusalem: Manpower Programming Authority NATHANSON, R. and BAR-ZURI, R. 1999 ‘Survey of public attitudes toward foreign workers’, in R. Nathanson and L. Achdut (eds), The New Workers. Wage Earners from Foreign Countries in Israel, Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad, pp. 90 /118 (Hebrew) OLZAK, S. 1992 The Dynamics of Ethnic Competition and Conflict, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press / / 1995 ‘The dynamics of ethnic competition and conflict’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. ** 18, pp. 373 /74 PEDAHZUR, A. and YISHAI, Y. 1999. ‘Hatred by hated people: Xenophobia in Israel’, Studies in Conflict and Terrorism vol. 22, pp. 101 /17 PETTIGREW, T.F. 1998 ‘Reactions toward the new minorities of Western Europe’, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 24, pp. 77 /103 QUILLIAN, L. 1995 ‘Prejudice as a response to perceived group threat: Population composition and anti-immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe’, American Sociological Review, vol. 60, pp. 586 /611 RAIJMAN, R. and KEMP, A. 2002 ‘State and non-state actors: A multi-layered analysis of labor migration policy in Israel’, in D. Koren (ed.) Public Policy in Israel, Lexington Books, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers RAIJMAN, R., SEMYONOV, M. and SCHMIDT, P. 2003 ‘Do foreigners deserve Rights? Public views towards labor migrants in Germany and Israel’, European Sociological Review, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 379 /92

Foreign workers in Israel

799

ROZENHAK, Z. 2000 ‘Migration regimes, intra-state conflicts and the politics of inclusion and exclusion: Migrant workers and the Israeli welfare state’, Social Problems, vol. 47, pp. 49 /67 SHAFIR, G. and PELED, Y. 2002 Being Israeli. The Dynamics of Multiple Citizenship, New York: Cambridge University Press SCHEEPERS, P., GIJSBERTS, M. and COENDERS, M. 2002 ‘Ethnic exclusionism in European countries: Public opposition to civil rights for legal migrants as a response to perceived ethnic threat’, European Sociological Review, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 17 /34 SCHNAPPER, D. 1994 ‘The debate on immigration and the crisis of national identity’, in M. Baldwin-Edwards and M. Schain (eds), The Politics of Immigration in Western Europe, Essex: Frank Cass and Co., pp. 127 /39 SCHNELL, Y. 1999 Foreign Workers in South Tel-Aviv-Jaffa, Jerusalem: Florsheimer Institute for Policy Research (in Hebrew) SEMYONOV, M. and LEWIN-EPSTEIN, N. 1987 Hewers of Wood and Drawers of Water, Noncitizen Arabs in the Israeli labor Market , New York: ILR Press SEMYONOV, MOSHE, LEWIN-EPSTEIN, N. and SPILERMAN, S. 1996 ‘The material possessions of Israeli ethnic groups’. European Sociological Review, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 289 / 301. SEMYONOV, M., RAIJMAN, R. and YOM-TOV, A. 2002 ‘Labor market competition, perceived threat, and endorsement of economic discrimination against foreign workers in Israel’, Social Problems, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 416 /31 SIMON, R. 1987 ‘Old minorities, new immigrants: Aspirations, hopes and fears’, The Annals of the American Academy of Political Sciences, 530, pp. 61 /73 SIMON, R. and ALEXANDER, S.H. 1993 The Ambivalent Welcome: Print Media,Public Opinion and Immigration , Westport, CT: Praeger SOYSAL, Y. 1994 Limits of Citizenship. Migrants and Postnational Membership in Europe, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press WATTS, M. 1993 Xenophobia in United Germany: Generations, Modernization, and Ideology, New York: St. Martin’s Press WIMMER, A. 1997 ‘Explaining xenophobia and racism: A critical review of current research approaches’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 20, pp. 17 /41 WOLKINSON, B. W. 1991 ‘Ethnic discrimination in employment: The Israeli experience’, Journal of Ethnic Studies, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 121 /33 / / 1994 ‘Recruitment and selection of workers in Israel: The question of disparate impact’, ** Ethnic and Racial Studies, pp. 260 /81 YANAY, U. and BOROWSKY, A. 1998 ‘Foreign workers in Israel: Rights and access to welfare services’, Social Security, vol. 53, pp. 59 /78 (In Hebrew)

REBECA RAIJMAN is Professor of Sociology at the University of Haifa. ADDRESS: Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. Email: [email protected] MOSHE SEMYONOV is Professor of Sociology at Tel-Aviv University. ADDRESS: Department of Labor Studies and the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Aviv. P.O.B 39040, Tel-Aviv 69978. Email: [email protected] /

/