Damon W. Root | February 6, 2009
Loyola Law School professor Gregg Kettles has posted a very interesting article to the Social Sciences Research Network examining the history and economics of day labor markets, ranging from the mid-19th century New York dock workers who would "shape up" each morning to the frequently demonized Mexican (and Central and South American) immigrants who make up much of today's day labor force. In Kettles' view, state and local governments today are pursuing two equally flawed strategies. The first is to exclude day workers entirely, using loitering and vagrancy laws, traffic regulations, and the like to push them off of public property. The second strategy is to shelter them in indoor work stations that double as job placement/recruitment centers. But Kettles' research points to a very different option, "one rarely emphasized to local government policy makers: day laborers should largely be left alone and allowed to solicit work on the street." From the paper's abstract:
The strategy of exclusion ignores economic theory, which justifies the presence of day labor markets in public space. Exclusion also overlooks the nation's rich history of allowing day laborers and other temporary workers to use the sidewalk to solicit work. Exclusion further ignores fundamental economic and demographic changes that have increased demand for day laborers—whether illegal immigrants or not—and made public sidewalks the most efficient way to match these workers with potential employers. Finally, the strategy of exclusion is at odds with the contemporary push toward the "New Urbanism," with its sidewalk-intense uses, and the character of today's suburbs, which are increasingly integrated. The strategy of shelter similarly misunderstands the advantages offered by the street to day laborers. Like those who in earlier advocated sheltering the homeless and helping them find work, advocates of sheltering day laborers exhibit good intentions. But they risk turning street entrepreneurs into dependents. The defects of exclusion and shelter point to a third way to respond to day labor—one that gives them a place on the street.
Whole thing here. Read Reason's extensive immigration coverage here.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Finally, the strategy of exclusion is at odds with the
contemporary push toward the "New Urbanism," with its
sidewalk-intense uses, and the character of today's suburbs, which
are increasingly integrated.
That's an interesting point. Well, to me, anyway.
One of the central concepts behind New Urbanism is that settlements
with a greater amount of actively-used public space (eg, sidewalks
that people actually use in their daily lives, rather than
sidewalks that they could use, in theory, but don't actually
provide useful or attractive connections for pedestrians) are going
to promote spontaneous interactions between people.
This is usually pointed out in a social sense - someone on a front
porch just behind a busy sidewalk is more likely to chat with a
passing neighbor, for example. It's interesting to see this pointed
out in terms of economic relationships.
I had an argument recently about this topic with some other
people. They were complaining about how todays jobs can't provide a
high school graduate with a decent living anymore, and claiming the
debt crisis was due to poor people needing to living on credit in
order to support themselves.
I pointed out that Mexican day laborers somehow manage to make a
living and have extra cash to send home to family.
They responded by complaining about how the Mexican day laborers
took jobs away from Americans and drove down wages.
A non sequitor since the argumnent was over wether you can live on
day-laborer wages.
The point is that Americans live beyond their means. They refuse to
make economic sacrifices such as sharing a house or apartment,
cooking their own meals, not spending money on beer, and taking the
bus.
Most white middle-class Americans today find the idea of sharing a
bedroom as an adult unthinkable. But it's common place in much of
the world.
I pointed out that Mexican day laborers somehow manage to
make a living and have extra cash to send home to
family.
Though, you got to include in your calculations that a good chunk
of the day laborers are living rather simply (and doing stuff as
you say like communal living arrangements to save money) and the
money they are sending home goes a lot further wherever it ends
up.
There's a distinct difference between that and supporting a family
that you live with, even if you cohabitate with other people as
well.
And the whole ideal of 'middle classness' is rather defined by the
ability to *not* have to cohabitate with people outside your
nuclear or even extended family.
"But they risk turning street entrepreneurs into dependents. The
defects of exclusion and shelter point to a third way to respond to
day labor-one that gives them a place on the street".
Yeah. Better they piss in the street and stand in the
rain-entrepreneurs all.
What bullshit.
"not spending money on beer, and taking the bus."
I take the bus. It's why I have beer money.
"Most white middle-class Americans today find the idea of
sharing a bedroom as an adult unthinkable."
But have you SEEN my whife???
O what a tangled web we weave when we either can't follow the money or are perhaps trying to take a taste.
I fully support the rights of MexicanImmigrants to stand on the sidewalk eating their hideous LeguminousFoods, so long as UpstandingCitizens have an equal right to go on the sidewalk and beat them like SoggyPinatas. I also admit I have a good time watching CalienteLatinas shaking their asses on the sidewalk on my way to work every day.
"one rarely emphasized to local government policy makers:
day laborers should largely be left alone and allowed to solicit
work on the street."
There's some weird juju that goes through most folk's minds, where
they cannot concede to the notion that folks who cause no harm to
anyone or anything should be left the fuck alone. Even when they do
something as crass as looking for a job.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245