I found this post by April Rubin at Axios on the sectors that would be most affected by a crackdown on illegal immigration interesting. The graph at the top of the post was sampled from her post. Here’s a snippet:
President-elect Trump’s vow to deport millions of undocumented immigrants could eliminate workers from U.S. industries already projected to face shortages and cut up to 6.8% of the national gross domestic profit.
The big picture: While undocumented laborers make up a relatively small percentage of the total U.S. workforce, they have outsized roles in fields like construction, agriculture and hospitality.
Zoom in: Construction and agriculture workforces had the highest shares of undocumented workers as of 2022, per the American Immigration Council.
There’s also a hat tip to the common trope, “jobs Americans won’t do”. Ignored is that Americans did do those jobs until the workers began to organize and were replaced, largely by undocumented migrant workers. Undocumented migrant workers tend not to complain about low pay or lousy conditions and if they do you can just turn them in and get others. Furthermore you don’t pay for social insurance or healthcare for them. That adds up to considerable savings.
Looking at private company union membership it has been a steady drop. When you look at the number of votes to form unions it it quickly dropped in the early 80s and then steadily dropped (Page 12). I am not seeing any evidence that there was a surge in workers trying to organize and that is why companies started hiring illegals. Maybe you have evidence to support that claim.
So on reflection, this is a topic I have looked into in the past and have not found a good answer ie why did employers start hiring illegal aliens in such large numbers. The superficial answer is because they are cheaper but they have always been cheaper. Why has this accelerated, I think, in the last 20-40 years? In agriculture I can believe that it is hard to find Americans who want to do the work. It’s physically demanding and doesnt pay well. Big agriculture has moved in and taken over so there are fewer family farms so fewer kids grow up on farms and want to continue working in agriculture. However, I dont quite get construction. It historically paid pretty well. It could be physically demanding but IMHO, having done some of both, nothing like agriculture. It also has more status. I’m a construction worker sounds much better than I pick fruit.
I have to think that if anything the loss of unions may have played a role. I also suspect that the shift to using contract workers may have played a role, although I cant tell if that is causal or just a later result. You could avoid paying benefits by using the agencies and the agencies figured out they could avoid paying market rates by hiring illegals. Anyway, still not clear to me if it started with Americans unwilling to do those jobs so they turned to illegals or if it was companies deciding they would hire illegals because they are cheaper (and dont complain). I would note that this has been going on for a long time. When I was stationed in Texas for a while anytime I needed to get work done on the house or get anything repaired I was always advised to get a wetback. Also the Texas Tribune has been running stories for a long time on corporations pretty openly using illegals. (At link in next box.)
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R47596.pdf
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/12/19/big-name-businesses-exploit-immigrant-labor/
In the past I have written about the experiences of the fruit pickers in the Southeast and later the fruit pickers in the Northwest.
Update
I did a little searching through my archives and couldn’t put my finger on those old posts quickly. I’ll keep searching.
In the Southeast the transition from mostly black orange-pickers to mostly Mexican and Central American happened practically overnight. The black workers were just told to look elsewhere.
BTW the point to keep in mind is that it’s the illegal status that the employers are seeking. It lowers their costs.
You had the fruit pickers in 2 areas of the country but in the rest of the country in the rest of the industries attempts to unionize decreased. After averaging about 7000 votes per year from 1960-1980 it dropped to about 2000 in the early 80s then kept drifting down to about 1200. Union membership dropped drastically in the areas that hire a lot of illegals like construction. To the extent this was driven by employers it looks like it’s profit driven and not avoiding unions.
Steve
Employers use them to avoid workcomp insurance, matching FICA requirements, illegals won’t call OSHA, complain about overtime, pay, safety.
They don’t care about retirement or benefits. Employers LOVE them.
We don’t need any here for agriculture but it’s hard to get on subcontractor’s construction crews if you don’t speak Spanish.
Meat packers are notorious for using illegals, but I have white relatives who worked there 25 years ago for the same money the immigrants make today.
Other thing is our prisons and jails are full of them because fentanyl and meth.
Should we actually deport them from prisons?
That’s a no. Maybe when they turn 65.
This is about the meat-packing plant I mentioned recently:
“In 1987, Cargill Inc. bought the meatpacking plant in Beardstown from the Oscar Mayer Company. To maximize its profits, Cargill crushed the union and decreased wages and healthcare benefits, and to fill the low-wage, de-skilled jobs, they recruited both legal and illegal Mexican immigrants.”
https://web.faa.illinois.edu/app/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/Antipode_Review.pdf
PD- I think Dave is fixated on a couple of widely publicized events with the fruit packers. I think what you cite is probably closer to the norm for other industries except maybe agriculture. With fewer kids being raised on farms you have a smaller potential pool of native American workers. If you are largely growing corn, wheat, soybeans you wont need the illegals but if you are growing the labor intensive crops I dont se there being enough native Americans who would be interested unless the pay was pretty high. IOW, it wouldn’t be that hard to find people to drive a tractor or combine but picking cherries? Not so much.
Steve
Why do you demean yourself by becoming accusatory so quickly?
I picked those two because of articles I stumbled across–no fixations involved. I’ve posted on meatpacking in the upper Midwest as well. PD’s example supports the point I have been making.
Furthermore, it’s not just agriculture. Or meatpacking. There are very few people who will do jobs regardless of how low the compensation goes. Would you have become an anaesthesiologist if it paid minimum wage without benefits?
In PD’s example they crushed an existing union. Efforts to form unions plummeted in the 80s. I think you can say that companies decided to get rid of unions so they could lower pay by hiring illegals but I dont think there is any evidence that companies were turning to illegals because of efforts to organize unions.
Steve
Using illegal migrant labor cuts costs in more ways than just wages. Doing so avoids needing to comply with regulations and reduces capital expense.
Basically, we’re doing the Industrial Revolution in reverse. Instead of automating we’re relying on hand labor.
And worst case, we’re luring working age people away from their lands to become our low wage slaves and underclass.
Can’t find proof, but have heard second hand of billboards across from ElPaso showing directions to the Crete, Nebraska packing plant .
Paved with gold.
They did it in Europe 130 years ago.
As to the premise of the Axios piece, I think it misses a key component of nondocumented workers in agriculture; they are highly concentrated:
California (49 percent)
Washington (9 percent)
Florida (7 percent)
Texas (5 percent)
Oregon (4 percent)
In large part we’re talking about one state, perhaps no more than eight counties in that state.
People only do hard, poorly paid work if they need the money and have no other skills, opportunities or don’t want to be thieves. The huge welfare programs started in the late sixties put an end to that necessity for eligible Americans as the benefits were greater or equal to the income from working. Millions quit working. As those benefits are extended to noncitizens, they too will collect social assistance rather than work.
Poor pay can not be corrected by unionization if the profits from the enterprise are not enough to cover fixed costs and good wages both.To force higher wages on such enterprises only puts them out of business.
” I think you can say that companies decided to get rid of unions so they could lower pay by hiring illegals…”
steve – the United Steelworkers employment fell by 2/3 – 3/4. They don’t hire illegals. As a theory, your comment is arrant nonsense. It may have elements of truth in ag/construction and hospitality. But its subsidy.
I really think william stated it as close to reality as possible. Our income support programs enable US people to “not do the work.” And then Dave, absolutely correctly, and cleverly, states it is the Industrial Revolution is reverse. And Dave hit it, but I would augment william’s comment to say that the customer will always tell you your price. Why the general public, mostly left leaning, cannot get this through their heads baffles me. So if your cost of procurement/production, administration and delivery exceed the customer’s price……….well, you adapt or you are fucked. They walk. Or you accept less return on capital to meet the customer’s price in which case capital may walk. Its called markets. They sort that out.
Automate. Reduce return on capital. Or shrink/exit. But don’t bastardize you border policy to wreck the market. And don’t allow mercantilism and wreck the market.
We have wrecked the “free market” system (through free beer political rhetoric, lobbying, and allowing for mercantilists to take advantage of us etc), price signaling has all but been destroyed. And to correct it all is going to be painful. Economists call it “friction costs.”
The only industries that get away with the current environment are monopolies and subsidized/ third party payer systems. It may inform one commenters views.
Dave Schuler: There’s also a hat tip to the common trope, “jobs Americans won’t do”. Ignored is that Americans did do those jobs until the workers began to organize and were replaced, largely by undocumented migrant workers.
That’s largely due to the natural progression of economic development. American workers are more highly skilled or better connected, so have more technical jobs or management. Even those who are “lazy” will have better jobs with better working conditions than, say, seasonally migrating from place to place harvesting crops. Notably, US unemployment is low, meaning most everyone has a job who wants a job, including immigrants filling millions of positions. Still, there are labor shortages in many sectors.
China is now experiencing the same sorts of changes; and as Chinese workers develop more marketable skills, Chinese businesses are now offshoring factories outside China where labor costs are lower.
America will only prosper if it continues to innovate. Re-shoring manufacture of low-tech consumer goods will serve only to reduce American competitiveness. For instance, ordinary automobiles can be made anywhere; India, Brazil, South Africa—and cheaper. Japan used to make cheap consumer goods, but moved into high quality electronics. As countries develop, their workers and businesses will find more productive means, and countries will specialize looking for profitable niches.
Except that the LFPR increased through the 60s up until early 2000s, this argument by William and Drew might have some merit. (I concentrate on ag and construction since that is where the jobs are, along with retail and hospitality.) Our LFPR, adjusted for age, is at record levels suggesting that people actually are willing to work and are just as or more willing than in the past.
I am not sure why the steel industry would merit much discussion. As you note it has never used many illegals who are more likely to go to true repetitive, manual labor jobs.
Steve