IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indlaw/v53y2024i1p63-93..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Migrant Work, Gender and the Hostile Environment: A Human Rights Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Natalie Sedacca

Abstract

This article addresses work-related and gendered harms of the ‘hostile environment’, a set of measures implemented through the Immigration Acts of 2014 and 2016, which aims to make life in the UK impossible for irregular migrants. The hostile environment criminalises work without legal status, facilitates data sharing between public bodies and immigration enforcement, and restricts access services and benefits. The article examines factors that can make women susceptible to irregularity and exposure to hostile environment measures, and distinctive forms of gendered harm such as workplace sexual harassment. It argues that the detrimental impacts of the hostile environment contravene international and regional human rights obligations. Barring certain migrants from access to the labour market may violate the socio-economic right to work and/ or the right to private and family life, while a lack of access to legal remedy or labour inspection fuelled can violate migrants’ right to decent work and undermine protections against forced labour. The UK’s recent ratification of the Council of Europe’s ‘Istanbul Convention’ and ILO Convention 190 on violence and harassment at work signifies a renewed commitment to safeguarding women regardless of migration status, but the universalistic potential of these instruments is undermined by the hostile environment’s continued operation.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalie Sedacca, 2024. "Migrant Work, Gender and the Hostile Environment: A Human Rights Analysis," Industrial Law Journal, Industrial Law Society, vol. 53(1), pages 63-93.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:53:y:2024:i:1:p:63-93.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/indlaw/dwad034
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:53:y:2024:i:1:p:63-93.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ilj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.