• #Athènes (Grèce) : lendemain du #17_novembre, un goût de sang dans la bouche
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/18/athenes-grece-lendemain-du-17-novembre-un-gout-de-sang-dans-la-bouche

    Très dure nuit pour qui aime #Exarcheia et la lutte révolutionnaire en #Grèce. Beaucoup de nos compagnons ont passé la nuit entre quatre murs, après des passages à tabac systématiques. D’autres ont été blessés, dont trois à la tête transférés en ambulance à l’hôpital. D’autres encore ont dû se terrer durant une bonne partie de […]

    #actions_directes #expulsion #K-Vox #manifestation #Notara_26 #Rouvikonas #sans-papiers

  • #Toulouse : rassemblement contre l’expulsion des habitant-e-s du #Squat_Muret
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/14/toulouse-rassemblement-contre-lexpulsion-des-habitant-e-s-du-squat-muret

    Le 17 octobre, nous avons eu rendez-vous avec la sous préfète. Nous voulions savoir si, nous, les habitant-e-s pourrions passer l’hiver dans le squat. Elle nous promet une réponse « sous quelques jours ». Depuis, nous l’avons relancé, sans réponse. Un mois plus tard, nous sommes toujours dans l’incertitude du devenir de plus de 500 personnes. Nous […]

    #44_avenue_de_Muret #Collectif_Russell #sans-papiers

  • Department of Education criticised for secretly sharing children’s data

    Information commissioner acts after complaint that data is used for immigration enforcement.
    The UK’s privacy regulator has criticised the Department for Education (DfE) for secretly sharing children’s personal data with the Home Office, triggering fears it could be used for immigration enforcement as part of the government’s hostile environment policy.

    Acting on a complaint by the campaigning organisation, Against Borders for Children (ABC), the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) ruled that the DfE had failed to comply fully with its data protection obligations and may face further regulatory action.

    Pupil data is routinely collected by schools, according to the human rights organisation Liberty, representing the complainant, but teachers and parents were unaware in this case that the children’s information could be shared with immigration enforcement and result in their families being deported.

    In a letter to Liberty, seen by the Guardian, the ICO says its investigations team is now considering whether to take further action against the DfE for “wide ranging and serious concerns” highlighted in this case and in response to further concerns raised by “a number of other sources”.

    The ICO only upheld part of the complaint, but its letter said concerns raised had “highlighted deficiencies in the processing of pupil personal data by the DfE”, adding: “Our view is that the DfE is failing to comply fully with its data protection obligations, primarily in the areas of transparency and accountability, where there are far reaching issues, impacting a huge number of individuals in a variety of ways.”

    According to Liberty, the complaint arose out of events which followed the signing of a memorandum of understanding in June 2015, by which the DfE agreed to pass the personal details of up to 1,500 school children to the Home Office each month as part of a policy to create a hostile environment for migrants.

    Parents and campaigners became concerned the following year when the DfE asked schools to start collecting data on children’s nationality and country of birth. This resulted in a mass boycott by families who were worried it might be used for immigration enforcement.

    Following legal action brought in April 2018 by ABC, again represented by Liberty, the DfE announced it would no longer ask schools to collect nationality and country of birth data but, according to Liberty, the DfE’s actions left many parents afraid to send their children to school.

    Liberty lawyer Lara ten Caten said: “Data sharing is just one part of the government’s discredited hostile environment which has left people too afraid to do things like send their children to school, report crime or seek medical help. It’s time to redesign our immigration system so it respects people’s rights and treats everyone with dignity.”

    Liberty called on the DfE to delete children’s nationality and country of birth data that had been collected and urged all political parties to make manifesto commitments to introduce a data firewall which separated public services from immigration enforcement.

    The ABC’s Kojo Kyerewaa said: “The ICO decision has shown that the DfE cannot be trusted with children’s personal data. Without public debate or clear notification, schools have been covertly incorporated as part of Home Office immigration enforcement. These checks have put vulnerable children in further danger as parents are taken away via immigration detention and forced removals.”

    The DfE, unable to respond because of general election purdah constraints, referred to answers to earlier parliamentary questions, which said the department collected data on the nationality and country of birth of pupils via the school census between autumn 2016 and summer 2018.

    “The Home Office can only request information from the Department for Education for immigration enforcement purposes in circumstances where they have clear evidence a child may be at risk or there is evidence of illegal activity, including illegal immigration,” it said.

    An ICO spokesperson said: “As a non-departmental government body, the ICO has to consider its responsibilities during the pre-election period. Our regulatory work continues as usual but we will not be commenting publicly on every issue raised during the general election. We will, however, be closely monitoring how personal data is being used during political campaigning and making sure that all parties and campaigns are aware of their responsibilities under data protection and direct marketing laws.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/nov/12/department-of-education-criticised-for-secretly-sharing-childrens-data

    #école #enfants #enfance #surveillance #données #migrations #réfugiés #asile #sans-papiers #renvois #expulsions
    ping @etraces

  • Entre 3,9 et 4,8 millions de sans-papiers vivent en Europe

    Leur nombre a augmenté en 2015, avec la hausse de la demande d’asile, mais s’est stabilisé dès 2019. La moitié d’entre eux se trouvent en Allemagne et au Royaume-Uni.

    Entre 3,9 et 4,8 millions d’étrangers vivent en situation irrégulière en Europe et la moitié d’entre eux résident en Allemagne et au Royaume-Uni. Dans une étude parue mercredi 13 novembre, le centre de recherche américain Pew Research Center évalue le nombre de personnes qui se trouvaient sans papiers sur le continent en 2017. C’est la première étude du genre depuis dix ans, qui permet notamment d’évaluer l’impact de ce qui a été communément appelé la « crise migratoire ».

    Selon les travaux du Pew Research Center, les sans-papiers représenteraient moins de 1 % de la population européenne (évaluée à 500 millions de personnes). A titre de comparaison, la part des sans-papiers est de 3 % aux Etat-Unis, avec plus de 10 millions de personnes.

    Le Pew Research Center note toutefois une « augmentation récente » du nombre de sans-papiers
    en Europe, due essentiellement à la hausse des demandeurs d’asile depuis 2015, qui pèsent pour
    environ un quart de l’ensemble des personnes en situation irrégulière. Les auteurs de l’étude ont
    en effet choisi d’inclure dans leur estimation les personnes sollicitant un statut de réfugié et qui
    n’ont pas encore obtenu de réponse du fait de leur avenir incertain (38 % des demandeurs ont
    obtenu une protection en 2018). Il est toutefois important de souligner que les auteurs ont
    constaté une stabilisation du nombre de migrants sans titre de séjour à partir de 2016.

    L’Allemagne, le Royaume-Uni, la France et l’Italie, principales destinations
    Environ un million de sans-papiers vivent en Allemagne et autant au Royaume-Uni. Si les volumes
    sont comparables, le nombre de sans-papiers outre-Rhin a presque doublé entre 2014 et 2016,
    alors qu’il est resté plutôt stable outre-Manche, les îles britanniques n’ayant pas été l’une des
    principales destinations des demandeurs d’asile arrivés à partir de 2015. De la même manière, si
    l’Allemagne compte environ quatre fois plus de migrants réguliers qu’irréguliers – ce qui
    correspond à la moyenne européenne –, le Royaume-Uni a autant d’étrangers sans titres que
    d’étrangers pourvus d’un titre de séjour.

    La France et l’Italie arrivent en troisième et quatrième positions avec, respectivement, autour
    de 350 000 et 600 000 sans-papiers. « Comparé aux grands pays de destination des migrants
    en Europe, la France a un nombre relativement plus faible de sans-papiers, soulignent les auteurs.
    Une des raisons possibles est que certains sans-papiers peuvent être régularisés après plusieurs
    années s’ils remplissent certains critères ». Autour de 30 000 personnes bénéficient d’une
    admission exceptionnelle au séjour chaque année, pour des motifs liés principalement à leur
    situation familiale ou professionnelle. Cette particularité montre l’impact des politiques
    gouvernementales sur le volume de sans-papiers.

    Le plus souvent des hommes de moins de 35 ans
    Sur l’ensemble du continent, 56 % des sans-papiers sont présents depuis moins de cinq ans, mais
    plus d’un quart sont présents depuis plus de dix ans. Ils sont, pour les deux tiers d’entre eux, âgés
    de moins de 35 ans et sont des hommes dans plus d’un cas sur deux.
    En Europe, les origines des migrants sans papiers sont plus diverses qu’aux Etats-Unis, où
    l’écrasante majorité d’entre eux viennent du sous-continent américain et en particulier du
    Mexique. En Europe, environ un tiers des sans-papiers sont originaires d’Asie Pacifique – c’est
    particulièrement le cas au Royaume-Uni où ils comptent pour plus de la moitié des sans-papiers ;
    23 % viennent d’Europe et 21 % du Moyen-Orient et d’Afrique du Nord, tandis que 17 % sont
    originaires d’Afrique subsaharienne.

    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2019/11/13/entre-3-9-et-4-8-millions-de-sans-papiers-vivent-en-europe_6019025_3210.html
    #statistiques #estimations #chiffres #sans-papiers #Pew_Research_Center #Europe

    • Europe’s Unauthorized Immigrant Population Peaks in 2016, Then Levels Off

      New estimates find half live in Germany and the United Kingdom.


      Europe has experienced a high level of immigration in recent years, driving debate about how countries should deal with immigrants when it comes to social services, security issues, deportation policies and integration efforts. Among these recently arrived immigrants are many who live in Europe without authorization. Coupled with unauthorized immigrants who were already in Europe, their numbers reach into the millions, though together they make up a small share of Europe’s total population.

      A new Pew Research Center analysis based on European data sources estimates that at least 3.9 million unauthorized immigrants – and possibly as many as 4.8 million – lived in Europe in 2017. The total is up from 2014, when 3.0 million to 3.7 million unauthorized migrants lived in Europe, but is little changed from a recent peak of 4.1 million to 5.3 million in 2016.1

      Overall, unauthorized immigrants accounted for less than 1% of Europe’s total population of more than 500 million people living in the 28 European Union member states, including the United Kingdom, and four European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland). And among the roughly 24 million noncitizens of EU-EFTA countries living in Europe, fewer than one-fifth were unauthorized immigrants in 2017.

      The recent rise in Europe’s long-standing unauthorized immigrant population from nations outside of EU-EFTA countries is largely due to a surge of asylum seekers who mostly arrived in 2015, when more than 1.3 million people applied for asylum in EU-EFTA countries. Many from that wave have been approved to remain in Europe. Many others, however, have had their applications rejected. Some have appealed those denials. Still others whose applications were rejected or withdrawn continue to live in Europe.

      Meanwhile, many asylum seekers in Europe are still awaiting a decision on their pending application, a group that is part of our estimates, and accounted for nearly a quarter (20% to 24%) of Europe’s unauthorized immigrant population in 2017. Although asylum seekers waiting for a decision have a temporary legal standing, their future in Europe is uncertain. Most entered their country of residence without permission, and the majority of applicants are now seeing their applications rejected. Consequently, many have been or could be subject to deportation orders in the future.

      Since asylum seekers waiting for a decision have a temporary lawful status, the Center also produced estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population without this group. These estimates are lower – 2.9 million to 3.8 million in 2017 – yet still show an apparent increase from 2014 before the asylum seeker surge, when the unauthorized immigrant population without asylum seekers waiting for a decision was an estimated 2.4 million to 3.2 million. (For estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population in Europe and by country without waiting asylum seekers, see Appendix C.)

      Unauthorized immigrants made up roughly one-fifth (16% to 20%) of Europe’s total non-EU-EFTA population in 2017, according to estimates, with 4% being unauthorized immigrants with a pending asylum claim that year. This means authorized non-EU-EFTA citizens living in Europe outnumbered unauthorized immigrants by about four to one.
      Who’s counted as an unauthorized immigrant?

      Unauthorized immigrants in this report are people living without a residency permit in their country of residence who are not citizens of any European Union or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) country. Most unauthorized immigrants entered an EU-EFTA country without authorization, overstayed a visa, failed to leave after being ordered to do so or have had their deportation temporarily stayed. The unauthorized population also includes those born in EU-EFTA countries to unauthorized immigrant parents, since most European countries do not have birthright citizenship. Finally, the European unauthorized immigrant population estimate includes asylum seekers with a pending decision. This last group makes up nearly a quarter (20% to 24%) of Europe’s estimated total unauthorized immigrant population.

      Many different immigrant groups can be counted as unauthorized immigrants, as there is no universal definition and the inclusion of some groups over others is a point of debate. A broad definition could include anyone who entered the country without authorization and has yet to procure permanent residency. This definition could include those with subsidiary protection status, a group that does not qualify for refugee status but receives humanitarian protection that can be renewed for one or two years at a time. Those with this status can sometimes sponsor family members and after several years apply for permanent residency.

      By contrast, a narrower definition for unauthorized immigrants would not include those with legal protection from deportation, even if such protection is temporary. From this perspective, unauthorized immigrant populations would not include asylum seekers waiting on a decision, those whose deportation has been deferred or stayed, or children of unauthorized immigrants.

      Pew Research Center has selected an approach that considers a combination of authorized entry, legal certainty and likely permanency. In the U.S., the Center considers those with deportation relief (for example, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or Temporary Protected Status) as well as asylum seekers waiting on their cases as unauthorized immigrants. Although these groups are authorized to work, many entered without permission and their legal future in the U.S. is uncertain, as evidenced by recent policy changes implemented by the U.S. government and subsequent court cases.

      In the same way in EU-EFTA countries, deportees with a stayed or deferred deportation who have a legal right of residence and may even be allowed to work are included as unauthorized immigrants. Children born in Europe to unauthorized immigrant parents are considered part of the unauthorized immigrant population. Similarly, asylum seekers with a pending decision, of whom many entered without permission and whose acceptance rates continue to fall, are also included as unauthorized immigrants. Since the definition of an unauthorized immigrant is a point of debate, the Center has published estimates without asylum seekers awaiting a decision on their application (see Appendix C). Waiting asylum seekers, at nearly 1 million people in Europe in 2017, are likely the largest of unauthorized immigrant groups with an uncertain legal status.

      The Center’s new estimates come at a time when publics across Europe express mixed opinions on the place of immigrants in their societies. A 2018 multi-nation survey from the Center found that majorities in several European countries support the deportation of immigrants living in their countries illegally. On the other hand, when asked about refugees fleeing war and violence, the 2018 survey also found that majorities across Europe support taking them in, a group that has often entered Europe without permission and claims asylum.

      This is the first time Pew Research Center has estimated the size of Europe’s unauthorized migrant population. The methodology used for these new estimates builds on the Center’s more than 15 years of experience in estimating the size of the unauthorized immigrant population in the United States. The unauthorized immigrant population in the U.S. is more than double the size (10.3 million to 10.7 million in 2017) of that in Europe (3.9 million to 4.8 million); has been decreasing in number since 2007; and makes up a larger share of the total population (roughly 3% in the U.S. compared with less than 1% in Europe). (See our related blog post for more details on how unauthorized immigrant populations and their characteristics differ between Europe and the U.S.)

      The Center’s estimates are also the first comprehensive estimate for Europe in a decade. Europe’s unauthorized migrant population was last estimated for 2008 by an EU-funded team of European researchers called the Clandestino project. At that time, the number living in the EU was estimated to be 1.9 million to 3.8 million, not including asylum seekers with pending decisions. By comparison, our estimate for 2017 for EU countries only, excluding asylum seekers with a pending application, is 2.8 million to 3.7 million – the upper end of Clandestino’s 2008 estimate.2
      The Center’s estimates compared with others

      Pew Research Center’s unauthorized immigrant estimates in Europe are in line with other reputable data, including estimates from previous studies, statistics on the number of unauthorized immigrants regularized by governments and analysis of recent migration flows.

      In Germany, for example, a separate 2014 estimate using a different method than the one used by the Center and that did not include waiting asylum seekers, estimated the number of unauthorized immigrants to have been 180,000 to 520,000. For the same year, the Center estimated the number of unauthorized immigrants in Germany to be between 300,000 and 400,000 without waiting asylum seekers, within the 2014 study’s range. Moving forward, our 2017 estimate for Germany of 600,000 to 700,000 unauthorized immigrants, excluding asylum seekers waiting for a resolution in their case, is in line with expected trends. For more, see our Germany estimate methodology.

      Meanwhile, in the UK, a London School of Economics study placed the number of unauthorized immigrants residing in the country between 417,000 and 863,000 in 2007. Ten years later, after hundreds of thousands of additional migrants from non-EU-EFTA countries entered and stayed in the UK, our 2017 estimate of 800,000 to 1.2 million unauthorized immigrants with waiting asylum seekers would be consistent with recent migration trends. For more methodological background, see our UK estimate methodology.

      In Italy, hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers have landed on the country’s shores during the past decade. Many have had their asylum cases rejected, and some have remained in Italy without authorization. Adjusting for regularizations of unauthorized immigrants to authorized status during the past decade, deaths, out-migration and additional arrivals, our estimate of 500,000 to 700,000 for 2017, including asylum seekers with a pending asylum case, is similar to the estimate published by the Iniziative e Studi sulla Multietnicità Foundation. For more information, see our Italy estimate methodology.

      In France, our estimate shows between 300,000 and 400,000 unauthorized immigrants lived in the country in 2017, including some 38,000 asylum seekers waiting for a decision on their case. This estimate is similar to that cited by government leaders as well as several French demographers. Also, some 300,000 people in 2017 were enrolled in a government medical plan accessed by unauthorized immigrants. For more, see our methodology for our France estimate.

      https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/11/13/europes-unauthorized-immigrant-population-peaks-in-2016-then-levels-off

      Pour télécharger le #rapport :
      https://www.pewresearch.org/global/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/11/2019.11.13_EU-Unauthorized_FINAL.pdf

    • Commentaire de Serge Slama sur twitter :

      Le journal @lemondefr @JuliaPascualita pourrait prendre des précautions méthodologiques à l’égard de cette étude @pewresearch avec une appréhension très américaine de l’irrégularité qui inclut les demandeurs d’asile entrés illégalement.

      https://twitter.com/combatsdh/status/1194660424177922050

      En France on n’a pas de moyens de comptabiliser le nombre exact de sans-papiers. On connaît les bénéficiaires de l’aide médicale d’Etat (315 835 en 2017), le nombre de déboutés du droit d’asile (80 000 à 90 000 par an), le nombre d’OQTF non exécutées (environ 60 000 par an).
      Enfin on sait qu’environ 30 000 jeunes nés en France de parents étrangers deviennent français à leur majorité (mais on ignore le statut de leurs parents).

      https://twitter.com/combatsdh/status/1194895286491062273

      –-----

      Et ce commentaire de Nando Sigona, toujours sur twitter :

      I need to have a closer look at the report, but the estimate for the UK seems too high. The UK has only marginally being affected by the 2013-2015 #refugeecrisis, and does more forced/voluntary removals than other EU states...
      Previous estimates, including LSE, Home Office, Clandestino project and our own on #undocumentedchildren, identified pre-accession EU nationals as one of the larger group of undocumented migrants in the UK. A group that was ’regularised’ through the EU enlargement.
      refused but not removed asylum seekers also contributes to the estimate, but total asylum refusals minus returns may be in the thousands but nothing like what the estimate would require.
      The report is also counting people with short term legal status like subsidiary protection which is again questionable. The report recognises that this approach may be controversial and in Appendix C provides an estimate without asylum seekers.
      and yet they went for the splash number for the press release and from initial media reports it is clear that some of the nuances are lost.
      and by the way, it would seem that there is no variation in the UK between the estimates with and without asylum seekers...

      https://twitter.com/nandosigona/status/1194665603388321798

    • @Pewresearch a publié une étude sur la population immigrée « non-autorisée » en #Europe, dont les résultats ont été largement médiatisés depuis hier https://pewrsr.ch/2OalGIV un certain nombre d’éléments ont retenu l’attention de @DesinfoxMig :
      L’étude adopte un parti pris méthodologique basé sur le contexte américain pour définir le groupe étudié, à savoir la population immigrée « non-autorisée » en E. Cela inclut entre autre les #demandeursasile et les enfants nés en E. de parents en situation irrégulière.
      @Pewresearch
      reconnait que l’acception très large de la notion #immigré « non-autorisé » qui considère une combinaison de facteurs (entrée autorisée, séjour régulier et la probabilité de séjour permanent) fait débat.
      Dans le contexte FR il y a débat car la traduction du terme « unauthorized » en #sanspapier, #clandestin ou en situation irrégulière renvoi à un contexte juridique et administratif différent du contexte US.
      Par ex, en France l’immigré ayant introduit une #demandeasile se voit délivrer par la #préfecture une autorisation provisoire de séjour, il ne peut pas être expulsé, et n’est donc pas considéré comme « sans-papiers » aux yeux du droit français.
      Si on peut ne pas être d’accord avec certains choix méthodologiques – et on apprécierait certaines précautions et nuances de la part des médias qui diffusent cette étude - elle propose une approche comparative d’un phénomène par sa nature même très difficile à quantifier.
      Pour la France, on peut retenir que la part des « non-autorisés » dans #immigration est particulièrement basse (10%), comparé à Allemagne ou aux Etats-Unis (environ 20%) et au Royaume-Uni (45%). Ils représentent au total moins de 1% de la population totale.

      https://twitter.com/DesinfoxMig/status/1195073984099946496

    • Pew Research Centre Estimates on the Irregular Migrant Population the UK and the rest of Europe

      The Pew Research Centre has produced new estimates of the number of irregular (‘illegal’ or ‘unauthorised’) migrants in the EU, including the UK. Here we explain briefly what they find and how they reach their conclusions.

      What are the key findings for the UK?

      The report estimates that in 2017 there were between 800,000 and 1.2m people living in the UK without a valid residence permit. The authors also estimate that, in 2017:

      Around one third of irregular migrants had been living in the UK for 10 years or more;
      They included similar shares of men and women, and around 14% were children;
      There was no evidence of any increase in the number of irregular migrants living in the UK since 2014;
      Half came from the ‘Asia Pacific’ region, but there no breakdown by individual countries within that region;
      The UK had one of the largest irregular migrant populations in Europe, alongside Germany.

      How are the figures calculated and are they accurate?

      The study uses the ‘residual method’. It compares the estimated the number of non-EU citizens living in the UK to an estimate of the number holding a valid residence permit in the same year.

      The results come with a high degree of uncertainty, because both of these figures are just estimates—as the Pew report recognises.

      In 2017, ONS estimated that there were around 2.4m non-EU citizens living in the UK (this is lower than the 5.7m non-EU born migrants living in the UK that year, because most people born in non-EU countries now hold UK citizenship). The precise figure is uncertain for various reasons, including because it is drawn from a statistical survey to which not everyone agrees to respond.

      Separately, the Home Office is required to report to Eurostat an estimate of the number of the non-EU citizens holding a valid residence permit each year – ranging from temporary work permit holders to long-term residents with Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). In 2017, this estimate was roughly 1.5m. The UK government does not actually know the precise number of legally resident non-EU citizens, so the estimate requires various assumptions, for example about how many people with ILR have left the country or died.

      Pew’s ‘lower-bound’ estimate of 800,000 compares the estimated non-EU citizen population with the number of valid residence permits of at least 3 months duration. The ‘upper bound’ estimate of 1.2m instead looks only at those with permits lasting at least a year, and also adjusts the figure upwards to account for the possibility that ONS has underestimated the number of non-EU citizens living here.

      The comparison between the UK and other EU countries is particularly uncertain because the estimates of the number of legal residents are produced in very different ways and are not thought to be comparable.

      In summary, without more accurate data on both the number non-EU citizens in the UK and the number holding valid residence authorisation, it is difficult to know how accurate the figures are likely to be.

      Earlier this year, ONS and the Home Office produced a joint statement suggesting they did not plan to produce a new estimate using this method, because of limitations in the data and methodologies.

      What are the remaining evidence gaps?

      Even if we cannot be certain about the number, it is reasonable to assume based on this and previous estimates that the UK has a substantial irregular migrant population. There are still many things that are not known about the unauthorised population, notably:

      It is not known how many entered illegally vs. came legally but later overstayed or were not able to renew their residence authorisation.
      The figures do not tell us what the impacts of policy have been on the decisions irregular migrants make, and/or whether the figure would have been higher or lower if different policies had been in place.

      Migration Observatory comment

      Madeleine Sumption, Director of the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, said: “This report relies on a standard methodology to estimate the irregular migrant population, and gives us the most up-to-date estimate that is available. The big challenge when using this method in the UK in particular is that the data required for the calculation are not very good. In particular, the UK government simply doesn’t have an accurate record of exactly how many people are living in the UK legally. Without more precise data, there will continue to be a high degree of uncertainty around the number of people living here without authorisation.”

      https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/pew-research-centre-estimates-on-the-irregular-migrant-po

    • The Trouble with Pew’s estimates of the “unauthorized” migrant population in Europe

      The Pew Research Center, where I once held a leadership position, published a report on November 13, 2019 entitled, “Europe’s Unauthorized Population Peaks in 2016, Then Levels Off.” The document is at best misleading, the product of an inappropriate statistical exercise. Given the reality of immigration politics in Europe, it is a made-to-order talking point for right-wing nationalists, echoing their attacks on asylum policies and on the migrants themselves. .

      This is Pew’s first effort to estimate the “unauthorized” population in Europe by applying a terminology I authored in 2002 for use in the United States. The current report has led me to conclude that the terminology and aspects of the statistical method that underlie its application are anachronisms that fail to take into account fundamental changes in the nature of migration flow to both Europe and the United States. As such, and no doubt unintentionally, the very knowledgeable people at Pew, including several I value highly as friends and colleagues, have fallen into a perceptual trap with significant political consequences.

      Pew’s critical error is to count as “unauthorized” people who have presented themselves to immigration authorities as required on arrival, have been identified, screened and registered in the lawful exercise of their right to seek asylum and have been granted permission to reside in their country of destination after an initial processing of that asylum claim. Nearly a quarter of the total “unauthorized” population in Europe, and closer to half in Germany, are asylum seekers, according to Pew’s account of its methodology. The estimate claims to be a statistical snapshot of this population on December 31, 2017, but as of that date these individuals, with few exceptions, had been granted documents attesting to their right to reside in these countries legally without fear of deportation and in many cases to work and receive social benefits.

      Pew counts these individuals as “unauthorized” because they had not yet been granted permission to remain as residents on a permanent basis. Germany and other European countries have several different degrees of asylum, including categories that grant protection for a period of years pending developments in their countries of origin and other matters. Moreover, in Europe as in the US, final disposition of asylum cases can take years due to backlogs and appeals, but those with pending cases are fully authorized to remain in the meantime. And, there is another category of persons whose claims have been denied, a small number in the 2017 Pew European estimates but more by now, who are not subject to deportation either by virtue of explicit administrative decisions or the prioritization of enforcement resources, a situation that occurs in the United States as well.

      In an exercise of highly subjective — and, to my mind, ill-informed — speculation, Pew concludes the individuals it observed in 2017 will never be granted permanent status in the future and that they will be subject to removal some day and so they should be counted as “unauthorized” in the present. This prognostication is as highly freighted politically as it is unjustified on any empirical basis. But, it is even more biased and inflammatory as a historical narrative.

      Almost the entire increase in the “unauthorized” population in Europe that peaked as of 2016, according to Pew, is the result of the extraordinary surge of Syrians, more than a million, who came across the Aegean from Turkey from the summer of 2015 to the spring of 2016 to seek refuge. By retroactively categorizing about half of those migrants as “unauthorized,” Pew is offering its statistical support to narratives that characterize that event as illegitimate, an abuse of Europe’s humanitarian values, a criminal effort to exploit social services and rich labor markets, a cynical abuse of the asylum system, a willing dilution of European identity by globalists, a pollution of Europe’s racial purity, etc.

      The methodology is explained in the fine print, and Pew even offers estimates minus the asylum seekers in an appendix. But, that does nothing to change the report’s deliberately attention-grabbing conclusion, its analytical perspective and the way it will be used for political purposes.

      Pew’s US estimates of the “unauthorized” are vulnerable to the same manipulation. They too include asylum seekers and produce the same statistical support for a demagogic portrayal of current migration.

      In the US, more than a million asylum seekers are sitting in an immigration court backlog awaiting adjudication of their claims, a number that has doubled since President Trump took office. These people have identified themselves to immigration officials, registered an asylum claim and have passed a “credible fear” interview with a finding that their claim is worthy of full consideration. By counting them as “unauthorized,” Pew fully embraces the Trump administration’s portrayal of the underlying migration phenomena as illegitimate even criminal. In the US asylum seekers account for a much smaller share of the Pew estimates than in Europe, about 10%, but that does not lessen the weight of the statistical fallacy. They are “unauthorized” only in the eyes of the beholders, in this case Pew and Trump. The result is a highly biased data point.

      In my view the problem with the Pew estimates is that they fail to account for new developments in migration flows to the United States and Europe.

      It was my great fortune to have been asked by the Pew Charitable Trusts in 2001 to create the Pew Hispanic Center and to then be part of the management committee that merged that center and several other stand-alone projects into the Pew Research Center in 2004. When the Pew Hispanic Center began publishing estimates of the “unauthorized migrant” population in 2002, the target was made up overwhelmingly of Mexican labor migrants who had either entered the country illegally or who had overstayed a legal entry and who would be subject to removal if apprehended. I am proud to say those estimates served an important and constructive role in repeated policy initiatives to legalize this population from 2004 to 2014. (I left Pew in 2007 to take a position on the faculty of the University of Southern California.)

      Both the migration phenomena and the focus of policy debate have shifted in the past few years, but Pew’s methodology has not.

      The number of cases in the immigration court backlog did not exceed 200,000 until 2009 and only crossed the 400,000 mark in 2014, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, a source of pure data, just the numbers, on immigration. As such, asylum seekers were a small fraction of the total population which we were measuring in the 00’s which stood at about 11 million people, plus or minus, throughout that period.

      But, in the past decade, as Pew has ably chronicled, migration flows to the United States have changed. Mexican labor migration outside legal channels has been negligible for a decade and meanwhile the number of Central American asylum seekers has increased dramatically in the past five years. In Europe, the 2015–16 events and subsequent arrivals of asylum seekers represent an even more singular event compared to the very small ongoing irregular labor migrations.

      The Pew Research Center remains committed to its version of strict political neutrality, portraying itself as a “fact-tank” that produces data with no spin, no advocacy and only as much analysis as is necessary to make sense of the numbers. (The exercise is fraught and one of the reasons I left, but that is another story.) Taking the institution at its word about its intention, the distortions created by the current report on the “unauthorized” population in Europe should be occasion for a reconsideration of the methodology and terminology.

      First there is a technical issue.

      Both in the United States and in Europe, the population of migrants who are not citizens or legal permanent residents now comprises several categories of individuals with different kinds of status in national immigration systems. Some are indeed “unauthorized” in that they have no legal basis to reside in those countries and would be subject to removal with little recourse if apprehended and put in proceedings. But, there is also this large, and in the United States rapidly growing, population of persons who have presented asylum claims and have been awarded permission to remain in the country until those claims are fully adjudicated. So it is technically a mistake to apply “unauthorized” as a blanket term, and it retrospect it was a technical mistake when I first did it nearly 20 years ago.

      But, now there is a much graver issue about how the data is communicated.

      The nature of the migration phenomena that produce asylum seekers as well as the laws governing migration and the processes to administer it are all the subject of vociferous, brutally-polarized, high-stakes political debates in the United States and across Europe. Pew is taking sides in that debate when it counts asylum seekers as “unauthorized migrants.”

      https://medium.com/@suro_26975/the-trouble-with-pews-estimates-of-the-unauthorized-migrant-population-in-eu

  • #Dijon : d’un squat à l’autre
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/11/dijon-dun-squat-a-lautre

    L’actualité vue par les rues de Dijon et alentours ces dernières semaines. Au programme ce mois-ci des squats pour les migrants, des messages de soutien aux Kurdes, des très grosses fresques et comme toujours des violences policières. D’un squat à l’autre C’est un des gros dossiers de la rentrée : le squat de la CPAM, […]

    #11_rue_Henri_Becquerel #Lentillères #sans-papiers #Squat_rue_Henri_Becquerel

  • #Marseille : appel à la Marche du 9 novembre
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/07/marseille-appel-a-la-marche-du-9-novembre

    Appel à la Marche du 9 novembre, 15h, Notre Dame du Mont, signé par le collectif El #Manba et le squat de Saint-Just. Tous et toutes ensemble dans la rue contre le mal-logement ! Samedi 9 novembre, nous marcherons en mémoire des 8 personnes tuées dans les effondrements de la #rue_d’Aubagne et de Zineb […]

    #Collectif_59_St-Just #manifestation #sans-papiers

  • #Paris : #expulsion de campements de migrants à Porte de la Chapelle
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/07/paris-expulsion-de-campements-de-migrants-a-porte-de-la-chapelle

    Depuis ce matin, le jeudi 7 novembre 2019, 1 600 migrants sont embarqués par près de 600 policiers pour les mettre à « l’abri ». Les chiffres viennent de la pref’. L’évacuation se serait terminée vers 9h. Il est très difficile de savoir vers quelles destinations ils sont emmenés. Si l’on en croit la préfecture, […]

    #sans-papiers

  • #Angers : la #Grande_Ourse réouvre au quai Robert Fèvre
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/07/angers-la-grande-ourse-reouvre-au-quai-robert-fevre

    Trois mois après son expulsion du #34_boulevard_Daviers, la Grande Ourse a ré-ouvert ses portes depuis la semaine dernière… dans un bâtiment de 2500 m² et encore plus près du centre-ville, sous un nouveau format, et avec de nouveaux objectifs. Elle vous convie à ses chantiers collectifs d’aménagement, de bricolage ou de maraîchage (avec […]

    #6_quai_Robert_Fèvre #ex-CPAM_du_34_boulevard_Daviers #ouverture #sans-papiers

  • #Caen : officialisation d’un nouveau #squat_rue_des_Vaux_de_la_Folie
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/01/caen-officialisation-dun-nouveau-squat-rue-des-vaux-de-la-folie

    Aujourd’hui, vendredi 1er novembre 2019, premier jour de la trêve hivernale, l’Assemblée Générale de lutte contre toutes les expulsions officialise un nouveau squat situé au 9, rue des Vaux de la Folie à Caen. 11 personnes, dont 6 enfants de 2 à 15 ans, sans aucune solution occupent ce lieu depuis mercredi 30 octobre. Cette […]

    #9_rue_des_Vaux_de_la_Folie #AG_de_lutte_contre_les_expulsions #Le_Marais #ouverture #sans-papiers

  • #Marseille : communiqué de la Maison du Peuple, expulsée ce matin
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/31/marseille-communique-de-la-maison-du-peuple-expulsee-ce-matin

    La Maison du Peuple située au #57_rue_Brochier a été expulsée tôt ce matin jeudi 31 octobre, quelques heures seulement avant le début de la trêve hivernale, avec l’appui de sept camions de CRS et deux équipes de la BAC. La plupart étaient cagoulés, équipé d’armes de poing et de fusils d’assauts et accompagnés […]

    #Collectif_59_St-Just #expulsion #Gilets_Jaunes #la_Maison_du_Peuple_de_Marseille #manifestation #rue_d’Aubagne #sans-papiers

  • #Saint-Denis (93) : avant la trêve hivernale, #Le_Landy_Sauvage craint toujours l’expulsion
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/11/01/saint-denis-93-avant-la-treve-hivernale-le-landy-sauvage-craint-toujours-l

    Le lieu, menacé d’une expulsion imminente depuis le 28 octobre au soir a reçu le soutien de la mairie de Saint-Denis et de la communauté d’agglomération. Mais le spectre d’une expulsion reste présent jusqu’au début de la trêve hivernale, vendredi 1er novembre. C’est la bonne nouvelle qui est tombée hier, mardi, dans l’après midi. La […]

    #Radio #gentrification #Le_Clos_Sauvage #sans-papiers #Seine-Saint-Denis

  • #Athènes (Grèce) : #manifestation de solidarité avec les migrant·e·s et les squats, le 2 novembre 2019
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/30/athenes-grece-manifestation-de-solidarite-avec-les-migrant%c2%b7e%c2%b7s-e

    Solidarité avec les squats et les structures auto-organisées – Détruire tous les centres de détention L’entassement des milliers de personnes dans des centres de détention à l’écart, dans des conditions de vie horribles, comme à Moria (sur l’île de Lesbos), Skaramanga et Petrou Ralli (à Athènes), et Corinthe (dans le Péloponnèse), représente le sombre destin […]

    #Grèce #sans-papiers

  • #Caen : appel de l’assemblée de défense du Marais
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/27/caen-appel-de-lassemblee-de-defense-du-marais

    Le mardi 22 octobre, #Le_Marais, squat d’habitation et de convergence des luttes ouvert depuis un an et demi à Caen, a été pris d’assaut par un important dispositif policier. Plus de 250 membres des forces de répression ont été mobilisés pour expulser ce lieu, symbole de la lutte pour l’accueil solidaire de toutes les […]

    #5_rue_du_Marais #AG_de_lutte_contre_les_expulsions #expulsion #GIPN/RAID #rassemblement #sans-papiers

  • #Toulouse : #Squat_Muret, plus de 500 personnes mises à la rue avant l’hiver ?
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/28/toulouse-squat-muret-plus-de-500-personnes-mises-a-la-rue-avant-lhiver

    Au seuil même de l’hiver, nous sommes plus de 500 personnes à vivre dans le plus grand squat de Toulouse, au #44_avenue_de_Muret. Qui sommes- nous ? Des hommes, des femmes, des enfants, de tout âge, de plus de 22 nationalités, dans des situations administratives complexes (demandeur-se-s d’asile, réfugié-e-s…) qui demandent à ce […]

    #6_place_Henry_Russell #Collectif_Russell #sans-papiers

  • #Caen : après l’expulsion du Marais, la lutte continue !
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/24/caen-apres-lexpulsion-du-marais-la-lutte-continue

    Mardi 22 octobre, la préfecture du Calvados a procédé à l’expulsion du squat du Marais où 250 personnes avaient élu domicile depuis avril 2018. Ce lieu a été ouvert grâce à une convergence de la CGT Enedis, de personnes non encartées et de l’Assemblée Générale de lutte contre toutes les expulsions. De nombreux collectifs s’y […]

    #5_rue_du_Marais #AG_de_lutte_contre_les_expulsions #expulsion #GIPN/RAID #Le_Marais #manifestation #sans-papiers

  • #Saint-Denis (93) : solidarité et soutien pour les réfugié-e-s
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/20/saint-denis-93-solidarite-et-soutien-pour-les-refugie-e-s

    Ce mardi 15 octobre, quinze familles syriennes — dont 38 enfants — demandeuses d’asile en France,​ ​après avoir fui la guerre dans leur pays, se sont retrouvées de nouveau à la rue ! Quinze familles syriennes — dont 38 enfants — demandeuses d’asile en France,​ ​après avoir fui la guerre dans leur pays, se sont […]

    #expulsion #rue_Raspail #sans-papiers #Seine-Saint-Denis

  • #Athènes (Grèce) : reprise des évacuations de squats à #Exarcheia
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/20/athenes-grece-reprise-des-evacuations-de-squats-a-exarcheia

    Alerte en ce moment à Athènes : Après une longue pause, le gouvernement grec a décidé de frapper à nouveau. Ce matin [mercredi 16 oct. 2019], deux squats sont en cours d’évacuation par la police, des agents de renseignement, la police antiterroriste, des MAT (CRS) et des employés de la voirie de la mairie d’Athènes. […]

    #anti-terrorisme #expulsion #Grèce #K-Vox #Notara_26 #sans-papiers #santé

  • #Marseille : #procès du squat #Saint-Just
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/17/marseille-proces-du-squat-saint-just

    Depuis 10 mois, des mineurs isolés et des personnes en demande d’asile occupent le squat du 59 avenue de St-Just alors que les institutions chargées de les mettre à l’abri, leur refuse délibérément un toit. Pour le procès du #Squat_Saint-Just, rendez-vous Place Monthyon, devant le TGI jeudi 17 octobre à 14h, tables d’infos des […]

    #59_avenue_de_Saint_Just #Collectif_59_St-Just #rassemblement #sans-papiers

  • #Rennes : La fête aux Veyettes
    https://fr.squat.net/2019/10/12/rennes-la-fete-aux-veyettes

    Le #Collectif_Action_Logement_14.09 vous convie à un week-end de festivités, de réflexion collective, de partages gastronomiques et de concerts du 11 au 13 octobre aux Veyettes (30 Rue des Veyettes à Rennes). Cela fera un mois que cette nef industrielle fend les vagues de bitume, brave les tempêtes préfectorales et les coup de […]

    #30_Rue_des_Veyettes #Les_Veyettes #sans-papiers

  • #Sans-papiers grévistes : « Même au bled, on connaît la #CGT »

    Depuis une semaine, des travailleurs franciliens sans #titre_de_séjour, épaulés par des syndicalistes, ont mis en place des #piquets_de_grève. Ils demandent que leurs patrons remplissent des formulaires reconnaissant leur statut et facilitant les démarches de #régularisation.


    https://www.liberation.fr/france/2019/10/08/sans-papiers-grevistes-meme-au-bled-on-connait-la-cgt_1756318
    #grève #travail #France #syndicat

  • Chez #Chronopost, ces #sans-papiers que l’on ne veut pas voir

    Toutes les entreprises concernées par la #grève des travailleurs de la filiale de la #Poste à #Alfortville se renvoient la balle. Et refusent de traiter le dossier.

    Scoop : Libération a rencontré des gens qui n’existent pas. Début juillet, on relatait le combat des travailleurs sans papiers de Chronopost, qui ont installé le 11 juin un piquet de grève devant le site de la filiale de la Poste à Alfortville (#Val-de-Marne). Ces quelque trente Maliens, Sénégalais ou encore Guinéens chargés de la #logistique demandent depuis trois mois maintenant leur #régularisation, en dénonçant des #conditions_de_travail intenables - conditions contre lesquelles ils peuvent difficilement lutter, vu qu’ils risquent l’expulsion. Mais voilà : ces dernières semaines, les différentes entreprises concernées ont invariablement répondu à Libération, qui voulait savoir ce qu’elles allaient faire pour régler la situation, qu’elles ne connaissaient pas ces personnes. Une pyramide de #déresponsabilisation permise par un système de #sous-traitance en cascade. Reprenons.

    Au sommet de l’édifice, on trouve la #Poste, maison mère de Chronopost, qui sous-traite une partie de sa logistique à #Derichebourg sur son site d’Alfortville, lequel Derichebourg fait appel à une société d’#intérim pour trouver de la #main-d’œuvre. C’est d’abord vers la Poste que l’on se tourne tout naturellement, comme l’a fait en juillet le député PS du Val-de-Marne Luc Carvounas, qui a adressé un courrier au PDG de l’entreprise publique, Philippe Wahl. « Seriez-vous prêt, monsieur le président, à donner les instructions nécessaires afin de régler […] la situation professionnelle de ces travailleurs en leur délivrant enfin un véritable contrat de travail en bonne et due forme ? » demandait Carvounas. Réponse de Philippe Wahl : ces « travailleurs se présentant comme des sans-papiers » ne sont « aucunement des salariés Chronopost », et donc encore moins de la Poste.

    Le deuxième échelon, c’est donc Chronopost. Joint par Libération sur les bons conseils de la Poste, l’entreprise tient sans surprise le même discours : « Nous sommes sensibles à la situation des personnes qui manifestent actuellement devant notre site d’Alfortville. Ces personnes n’ont cependant jamais été employées par Chronopost. » Chronopost, qui « subit une situation dont elle n’est pas responsable » (dixit Philippe Wahl), renvoie donc vers l’entreprise Derichebourg, « qui se porte garante du respect de l’ensemble de ses obligations vis-à-vis de la législation. C’est elle qui recrute, encadre et gère au quotidien les salariés qu’elle emploie ».

    Fort bien, Libé se tourne donc vers Derichebourg. Réponse : « Nous n’avons aucun salarié gréviste. Nous n’avons également aucun salarié sans papiers, ni aucun intérimaire sans papiers. » Etonné, Libération relance : ces salariés rencontrés en juillet devant le siège de Chronopost sont-ils imaginaires ? « Je ne me permettrais pas de dire que ces salariés sans papiers sont imaginaires », rétorque la chargée de communication de Derichebourg, complétant : « Qu’il y ait une manifestation est un fait. Je vous réaffirme simplement que nous n’avons aucun salarié gréviste, aucun salarié sans papiers, ni aucun intérimaire sans papier. »

    Il ne reste alors qu’un acteur à interroger : la société #Groupe_Europa, qui gère l’agence Mission intérim de Corbeil-Essonnes - celle qui fournit la main-d’œuvre. Une femme - dont on ne connaîtra pas l’identité - décroche le téléphone et affirme, catégorique : « Ces gens n’ont jamais été employés par #Mission_intérim. » « Les victimes sont les entreprises », complète-t-elle, sans vouloir qu’on la cite tout en demandant que l’on reprenne ses propos, avant de conclure sur cette observation : « On ne peut pas accueillir les problèmes de tout le monde. »

    Par quel miracle ces quatre entreprises peuvent-elles chacune affirmer qu’elles n’ont rien à voir avec le schmilblick ? En fait, chacune joue sur les mots, et sur une réalité : du fait de leur situation, les sans-papiers doivent recourir à des alias pour travailler. C’est ainsi que la femme de Groupe Europa nous explique tranquillement : « Les journalistes parlent tout le temps de l’#exploitation par les employeurs, mais ce sont les gens qui s’exploitent entre eux. Ils se louent les papiers. » De son côté, elle l’assure : « Nous avons des personnes qui ont les papiers en règle. S’ils trafiquent les papiers entre eux, on ne le sait pas. »

    En réalité, tout le monde a au moins sa petite idée, puisque Philippe Wahl écrit dans sa réponse à Luc Carvounas que des travailleurs « ont ouvertement admis qu’ils pratiquaient l’#usurpation_d’identité pour tromper leur employeur afin de revendiquer leur présence effective au travail ». « La meilleure preuve qu’ils savent, c’est que les sous-traitants et intérimaires n’ont pas de #badge pour accéder au site, précisément parce qu’ils sont sans-papiers », répond Eddy Talbot, membre du bureau fédéral de SUD PTT. Pour lui, Chronopost devrait dire « on ne peut pas vous employer dans ces conditions ». Et rompre avec Derichebourg.

    En attendant, puisque les entreprises refusent de traiter le dossier, le collectif de sans-papiers échange essentiellement avec la préfecture du Val-de-Marne. Théoriquement, cette dernière peut aller au-delà des critères de la circulaire Valls (du nom d’un ancien ministre de l’Intérieur), qui fixe plusieurs conditions, notamment un certain nombre d’heures travaillées au cours des derniers mois, pour prétendre à une régularisation.

    Mais est-elle prête à le faire ? Au téléphone, la préfecture explique que pour se prononcer, elle attend que des dossiers soient déposés. Mais de leur côté, les grévistes demandent un traitement collectif. « Au cas par cas, on n’a pas de garantie que ça ne se terminera pas avec des #OQTF », des obligations de quitter le territoire français, relève Jean-Louis Marziani, de Solidaires 94. Fin septembre, une délégation a pu pour la première fois échanger avec le préfet en personne. « On nous a dit que les dossiers seraient examinés avec bienveillance », rapporte Eddy Talbot, comprenant par là que la #préfecture est prête à aller au-delà des critères Valls. « Mais on nous a aussi dit par avance que tous les dossiers ne seront pas acceptés », regrette-t-il.

    De son côté, la préfecture maintient sa position : impossible de s’engager sur quoi que ce soit tant que les dossiers individuels n’auront pas été déposés. Ni de s’engager publiquement à une certaine mansuétude pour ceux dont le dossier serait refusé, par exemple en les exemptant d’OQTF : « Le préfet est chargé d’appliquer la loi. »


    https://www.liberation.fr/france/2019/10/08/chez-chronopost-ces-sans-papiers-que-l-on-ne-veut-pas-voir_1756319
    #travail #France

  • Flexibiliser le travail et produire des vies illégales

    En France, l’#ubérisation trouve des ressources dans les migrations. Ce phénomène est ici analysé et décrit par un ressortissant de Guinée qui vit à Grenoble depuis 2016, co-auteur d’une recherche-création entre géographie, art et droit.

    Si les migrations vers l’Europe et la France occupent les discours politiques et médiatiques, leurs modalités d’exploitation par le travail y sont bien moins évoquées. Les vies rendues illégales constituent une réserve de #main-d’œuvre exploitable et hyperflexible, dans un contexte précisément de flexibilisation et d’ubérisation du travail, notamment par le développement des applis de VTC ou de #livraison. Dans leurs travaux portant sur les liens entre migrations et travail, Sandro Mezzadra et Brett Neilson précisent que « la flexibilité, qui fabrique de la #précarité, est devenue la norme », tandis que les migrations forment « un terrain crucial d’expérimentation pour de nouvelles formes de "capture" du travail ».

    Cette exploitation du travail en #France, de vies rendues illégales, s’inscrit dans des formes d’exploitations plus larges de la force de travail, notamment d’entreprises européennes et françaises en Guinée pour l’extraction de ressources minières, qui entraînent des destructions sociales et environnementales et des migrations. Autrement dit, les liens entre migrations et exploitation de la force de travail se comprennent depuis un continuum qui dépasse très largement les frontières nationales, et s’inscrit dans des rapports en grande partie hérités de la #colonisation.

    #Pathé_Diallo, ressortissant de Guinée qui réside à Grenoble depuis 2016, décrit cette relation entre migration, exploitation et ubérisation dans le cadre d’une œuvre de création et de recherche intitulée Bureau des dépositions (1), à laquelle participent plusieurs géographes.

    « C’est un cercle vicieux »

    « Les Etats font exprès de ne pas délivrer des papiers à tout le monde pour que d’autres puissent exploiter les #sans-papiers dans des conditions difficiles, sur certains #chantiers ou dans les sites touristiques de ski en montagne, ou dans les travaux de #ménage. Depuis quelques mois à Grenoble, des personnes exploitées et sans papiers font de la #livraison de nourriture sur des #vélos. Ils sont mal payés et la cible de #Uber et des Etats, qui autorisent que le #droit_du_travail soit réduit à rien. C’est comme si les personnes donnaient toute leur énergie pour ne rien avoir.

    « C’est comme dans le domaine de la #sécurité. Dans la sécurité, c’est 12 voire 15 euros de l’heure pour la nuit. Celui qui te sous-traite va te payer 7 ou 8 euros par heure. Toi tu es sur le terrain. C’est parfois mieux que rester toute la journée à ne rien faire. Dans l’attente des papiers, beaucoup deviennent fous. Etre exploité devient préférable pour ne pas rester assis, passer toute la journée sans rien faire pendant des années, sans savoir quand le papier viendra. Ce sont les Etats et les entreprises qui se servent de la #main-d’œuvre qui sont responsables, en n’autorisant pas à travailler. C’est un #cercle_vicieux : pour se régulariser, il faut du travail ; pour avoir du travail, il faut des papiers.

    « Créer un syndicat sans-papiers permettrait de réduire le taux de chômage. En France, la #clandestinisation des travailleurs permet de réduire le #coût_du_travail, aux bénéfices des patrons et de leurs sous-traitants qui ainsi échappent à l’impôt.

    « Il faut respecter l’homme. C’est l’homme qui fait le papier, pas le papier qui fait l’homme.

    « L’exploitation des sans-papiers en Europe entre en écho avec l’exploitation de la main-d’œuvre dans les #mines en #Guinée. Ce sont les mêmes personnes qui exploitent et ce sont les mêmes personnes qui sont exploitées. Un mineur d’or ou de bauxite, en Guinée, peut parvenir à rejoindre la France pour travailler dans des conditions plus précaires encore que la mine. Dans les mines, les patrons sont souvent étrangers. Tout ce qui est exploitable en Guinée est exporté en tant que matière première à l’extérieur : Canada, Etats-Unis, pays d’Europe, comme la France, l’Allemagne… Dans la mine, il y a beaucoup de pollution, qui entraîne des maladies : sinusite, cancer du foie… La poussière mélangée aux produits chimiques crée des colonnes de plusieurs kilomètres, ce qui pollue les cours d’eau. L’eau est puisée par les populations. Les employés des mines ne sont pas bien payés. »


    https://www.liberation.fr/debats/2019/10/02/flexibiliser-le-travail-et-produire-des-vies-illegales_1754677
    #travail #exploitation #illégalisation #asile #migrations #réfugiés #flexibilisation #tourisme #extractivisme #continuum_colonial #post-colonialisme #économie

    ping @albertocampiphoto @reka @karine4

    • Sfruttamento e caporalato tra i migranti della #gig_economy

      #Deliveroo, #Uber_eats, #Glovo, #Just_Eat, da quando le #app di consegna a domicilio sono diventate una realtà di uso quotidiano per migliaia di potenziali fattorini si sono spalancate le porte della «gig economy», i cosiddetti lavoretti gestiti tramite applicazioni per #smartphone. A Milano due terzi di loro sono migranti e sebbene portino in spalla lo zaino delle più famose app di consegna a domicilio, raccontano di non lavorare direttamente con le piattaforme e di avere degli intermediari. Ora anche la Procura di Milano ha annunciato l’apertura di un’indagine conoscitiva sulle condizioni di lavoro dei rider e sulle imprese che ne gestiscono le consegne - con un’attenzione particolare alla sicurezza stradale e al possibile impiego di fattorini stranieri senza i documenti per lavorare e potenzialmente soggetti a caporalato. Lorenzo Pirovano ci fa conoscere la loro quotidianità.

      Michael non era mai riuscito a lavorare in Italia. Ospite di un centro di accoglienza straordinaria a cinquanta chilometri da Milano, aveva passato gli ultimi due anni sospeso tra l’attesa del verdetto sul suo status di rifugiato e la complicata ricerca di un impiego. “Il responsabile della casa non voleva che lavorassimo, soffrivo a starmene fermo e aspettare chissà cosa”.

      Poi nel 2017 a Milano è arrivato il boom delle app di consegna a domicilio in bicicletta (Deliveroo, Uber eats, Glovo e Just Eat) e per migliaia di potenziali fattorini si sono spalancate le porte della gig economy (i cosiddetti “lavoretti” gestiti tramite applicazioni per smartphone).

      Da allora, ogni mattina, cubo termico sulle spalle e mountain bike accessoriata, centinaia di migranti come Michael raggiungono Milano e pedalano per le sue strade nella speranza di effettuare più consegne possibili. “Ci sono giorni che lavoro undici ore” rivela Michael, 33 anni e una fuga dalla Liberia passando per l’inferno libico. “Ma alla fine del mese non ho mai portato a casa più di 600 euro”.

      Michael e i suoi colleghi sono i “migranti della gig economy” che rappresenterebbero quasi due terzi dei rider che effettuano consegne a domicilio per le strade della città. Molti di loro sono ospitati nei Cas (Centri di accoglienza straordinaria) disseminati nell’hinterland milanese o nelle province attigue. Alcuni, come Michael, ne sono appena usciti e condividono una stanza in periferia. Secondo i dati raccolti dall’Università degli Studi di Milano la maggior parte risiederebbe in Italia da più di due anni.

      Come tutti i ‘ciclofattorini’, anche i migranti devono fare i conti con un contratto di lavoro occasionale che riconosce poco più di tre euro a consegna, senza un minimo orario e senza chiare coperture contributive e assicurative. Nonostante questo il settore delle consegne a domicilio si sostiene principalmente sulla loro manodopera, grazie alle permeabili barriere all’entrata (in molti casi non è necessario sostenere un colloquio), alla necessità di guadagno immediato e alla dimostrata possibilità di lavorare anche se sprovvisti di documenti. Molti di loro ammettono di non conoscere i propri diritti di lavoratori, altri raccontano di non avere scelta, trattandosi dell’unica occupazione trovata. Raramente si rivolgono ai sindacati e anche Deliverance, il sindacato auto organizzato dei ciclofattorini milanesi, fa fatica a coinvolgerli. “Rivendichiamo tutti gli stessi diritti ma esiste una spessa barriera linguistica e culturale” ammette Angelo, membro e portavoce del collettivo.

      La settimana scorsa la Procura di Milano aveva annunciato l’apertura di un’indagine conoscitiva sulle condizioni di lavoro dei rider e sulle imprese che ne gestiscono le consegne, con un’attenzione particolare alla sicurezza stradale e al possibile impiego di fattorini stranieri senza i documenti per lavorare. “Che ci sia un’inchiesta in corso, seppur con colpevole ritardo, è una buona notizia” commenta Angelo. “Che non si trasformi però in una caccia alle streghe tra la categoria di lavoratori più vulnerabili, quella dei migranti”.
      “Riceviamo la metà della cifra visualizzata sull’app”

      Sotto Porta Ticinese, nei pressi della Darsena, trovano riparo una decina di rider con gli occhi fissi sullo smartphone in attesa di una consegna da effettuare. Attorno a una delle sue colonne si raccolgono alcuni nigeriani mentre al centro, seduti sugli scalini, un drappello di giovani ragazzi chiacchiera in bambara. Uno di loro approfitta della pausa per togliersi le scarpe, stendere un lenzuolo, inginocchiarsi e pregare.

      Molti di loro, sebbene portino in spalla lo zaino delle più famose app di consegna a domicilio, raccontano di non lavorare direttamente con le piattaforme e di ricevere la paga da alcune aziende italiane.

      L’occhio dei magistrati milanesi potrebbe così cadere anche sulla catena di intermediari che connette i rider in bicicletta all’app da cui ricevono i soldi.

      L’avvento della gig economy – che in origine doveva portare a una totale disintermediazione del lavoro – ha infatti ricreato dinamiche già conosciute: alcune legali, come l’attività delle imprese di intermediazione; altre illegali, come il “subaffitto dei profili” e, appunto, l’impiego di manodopera irregolare.

      Uber eats – costola del colosso Uber, valutato 75 miliardi di dollari e conosciuto in tutto il mondo per il servizio privato low cost di trasporto passeggeri – è attiva a Milano principalmente grazie a due imprese (Flash Road City e Livotti SRL) che si avvalgono della sua applicazione per gestire e spartirsi il lavoro di centinaia di fattorini migranti. “Queste imprese non fanno ufficialmente parte di Uber eats ma il rapporto di collaborazione c’è” raccontano alcuni loro lavoratori, “il risultato è che alla fine del mese puoi ricevere anche solo la metà dell’importo che visualizzi sull’applicazione”

      L’intermediazione infatti ha un costo elevato, un prezzo che però molti migranti sono pronti a pagare per afferrare, come ammettono loro stessi, “un’opportunità unica di lavorare, soprattutto per chi non ha i documenti”.

      Lo schema è semplice: Uber mette l’applicazione, il sistema di pagamento e il marchio al servizio di queste imprese, mentre loro si occupano delle relazioni coi ristoranti e del rapporto con i lavoratori. “Dalle cifre visualizzate sull’app bisogna togliere la nostra parte, ma questo lo diciamo chiaramente ai nostri dipendenti” spiega il rappresentante di un’impresa intermediaria. Così il margine di guadagno per il rider si abbassa notevolmente, come testimoniato da Michael e da altri suoi colleghi stranieri.
      Possibilità e trucchi

      Intermediazione o no, il lavoro tramite app si è convertito in una possibilità anche per chi non ha le carte in regola per lavorare, come dimostrano i primi controlli della Procura di Milano che su una trentina di rider ha individuato tre migranti senza i documenti.

      I rappresentanti delle imprese di intermediazione negano però di impiegare migranti senza permesso di soggiorno. Uno di loro sostiene che “a volte siamo noi stessi ad aiutarli nella pratica per rinnovare il permesso”, mentre Uber e Glovo hanno invece ammesso di non essere in grado di garantire che tutti i rider attivi sulle loro applicazioni abbiano i requisiti per lavorare. “Da parte nostra c’è tutto l’impegno affinché ad operare sulla piattaforma ci siano solo corrieri che hanno i requisiti per farlo” ha dichiarato un rappresentante di Uber in Italia. Glovo aveva dichiarato che “il rischio esiste, ma ogni giorno cerchiamo di monitorare meglio la situazione”.

      Nonostante le quasi inesistenti barriere all’entrata, l’offerta di lavoro supera la domanda e molti aspiranti rider non vengono accettati dalle app. Per un migrante la probabilità di veder approvata la propria candidatura si assottiglia, soprattutto quando non conosce la lingua o non ha i documenti in regola. Nascono così dei meccanismi di reclutamento nascosti che riducono al minimo il margine di guadagno del rider, ultimo anello di una catena fatta anche di trucchi e inganni.

      Pietro, giovane egiziano, si era candidato a lavorare in alcune delle app attive a Milano, senza successo. Poi un amico gli ha proposto una scorciatoia. «Mi ha dato un numero di telefono dicendomi che c’era un account disponibile. Così ho telefonato ad H. ed è iniziata la mia esperienza come rider».

      Pietro ha iniziato quindi a lavorare con il “profilo” di un’altra persona, ricevendo ogni mese i soldi direttamente da H. al netto della sua “trattenuta”. “H. fa così con tutti i profili che affitta. Per farti lavorare si prende il 10% di ogni consegna” racconta. “Non so da dove venga il profilo che uso e non conosco gli altri rider che lavorano in questa maniera”.
      “Molti migranti vogliono lavorare ma non possono”

      “I richiedenti asilo sono una piccola minoranza tra i migranti presenti sul territorio italiano” spiega Pietro Massarotto, avvocato volontario del Naga, associazione milanese che dal 1987 si occupa di cittadini stranieri, soprattutto di quelli privi di permesso di soggiorno e dei richiedenti asilo. “Nella maggior parte dei casi abbiamo a che fare con migranti “ordinari”, il cui permesso di soggiorno dipende strettamente dal lavoro svolto”.

      Consegnare a domicilio tramite le app, seppure senza garanzie e con margini di guadagno assai risicati, può diventare fondamentale per mantenersi “in regola” ed evitare la condizione praticamente irreversibile di irregolarità. Questa, nel caso venga raggiunta per il diniego della richiesta di asilo o per la mancanza di un impiego regolare, si converte nella necessità urgente di trovare alternative per poter sostenersi economicamente. “Qui va sfatato il mito del cittadino straniero che non vuole lavorare” precisa Massarotto. “È vero il contrario: spesso non viene messo nelle condizioni di lavorare”.

      Le risposte della politica sono proseguite però sulla via di un accesso più duro allo status di migrante regolare. “Purtroppo le politiche di gestione dell’immigrazione stanno determinando e determineranno sempre più un incremento esplosivo dei soggetti senza permesso di soggiorno, che per ovvie ragioni lavorano lo stesso”.
      “Fare il rider è meglio di niente”

      Omar è uno dei tanti che di mattina lascia il “campo” dove vive per tornarci solo dopo mezzanotte. Ci sono giorni in cui il bottino è talmente magro da coprire appena il prezzo del biglietto. Viene dal Gambia, ha 22 anni e uno sguardo perso nel vuoto. “Ogni giorno prendo il treno e torno a casa per questo cazzo di lavoro” si sfoga indicando lo zaino termico. È rimasto senza permesso di soggiorno e insieme a quello ha perso la speranza di costruirsi una nuova vita in Italia. “Vorrei impegnarmi in altro, ma qui se non hai i documenti non puoi fare nulla”. A chiedergli se è felice annuisce poco convinto: “fare il rider è meglio di niente, diciamo così. Meglio di niente.”

      https://openmigration.org/analisi/sfruttamento-e-caporalato-tra-i-migranti-della-gig-economy
      #Italie #rider

  • Italy presents plan to accelerate expulsion of migrants

    Italy presented a scheme on Friday to accelerate the expulsion of migrants who have no right to stay in the country, cutting the time it takes to decide on whether an asylum seeker must return home.

    Immigration flows helped fuel the rise of Italy’s far-right League party, whose leader Matteo Salvini imposed a crackdown on arrivals while he was interior minister until August.

    Salvini closed Italy’s ports to migrant rescue ships, threatening the charities operating them with fines of up to 1 million euros ($1.10 million) if they tried to dock.

    After the League unexpectedly quit the government in a failed bid to trigger an early election, its former ally the 5-Star Movement formed a coalition with the center-left Democratic Party, ushering in a less aggressive approach to immigration.

    The new government has already agreed with four other EU states a scheme to distribute people saved in the Mediterranean, and it hopes its plan to send back those already in Italy will defuse accusations by Salvini that it is soft on immigration.

    “I do not believe that redistributing migrants to other European countries is the final solution”, 5-Star leader and Foreign Minister Luigi Di Maio told a news conference.

    Under the new decree, the time to examine asylum requests of migrants who come from a list of 13 “safe” European and African countries, including Tunisia and Albania, will be reduced from two years to four months.

    If the request is rejected, the expulsion procedure will be immediately triggered.

    “More than one third of those who arrived in Italy in 2019 comes from these countries,” Di Maio said.

    Fewer than 8,000 migrants came to Italy by sea in 2019, down 62% from 2018 and down 92% compared to 2017, official data show. However, expulsions fell far short of Salvini’s electoral promises.

    The League leader said he would repatriate 100,000 migrants in his first year in power, followed by another 400,000 during the rest of his five-year term in office, but Interior Minister Luciana Lamorgese told parliament this month that only 5,244 people had been repatriated this year up to Sept 22.

    Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte welcomed the new plan as “a great step forward” and said he was confident it would produce more rapid repatriations.

    “Italy has always been inefficient in this,” Conte said.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-italy-expulsion/italy-presents-plan-to-accelerate-expulsion-of-migrants-idUSKBN1WJ1YH
    #Italie #expulsions #migrations #réfugiés #machine_à_expulser #sans-papiers #déboutés #renvois

    • Analyse de Matteo Villa sur twitter

      Oggi l’Italia ha varato una lista di 13 paesi considerati sicuri.

      Non significa che sarà più semplice rimpatriare, ma che aumenteranno ulteriormente gli stranieri irregolari presenti in Italia.

      Seguitemi, ve lo spiego.

      Cos’è successo.

      Con un decreto interministeriale è stata varata una lista di 13 paesi (NON “porti”, come è stato detto) considerati sicuri.

      L’azione è consentita dal #DecretoSicurezza (oggi legge), varato dal precedente Governo a ottobre dell’anno scorso.

      Quali sono i 13 paesi che sono stati designati come “sicuri”?

      Tutti quelli dei Balcani occidentali, l’Ucraina, e alcuni paesi dell’Africa settentrionale e subsahariana.

      Li trovate in arancione su questa mappa (il giallo ve lo spiego tra poco).

      Tra i paesi dell’Unione europea, altri 12 hanno una loro lista di “paesi sicuri”.
      Li trovate in blu scuro in questa carta.

      Oggi, il tredicesimo diventa l’Italia.

      Insomma, siamo in buona compagnia.

      Tornando alla carta del mondo, in arancione ho indicato i 13 paesi extra-europei designati come sicuri dall’Italia.

      In giallo, invece, trovate tutti i paesi designati come sicuri da almeno un altro paese UE, ma non da noi.

      Poteva andare molto peggio (Turchia, Nigeria, Etiopia).

      Cosa succede se designi un paese come sicuro?

      Chi chiede asilo in Italia possedendo la nazionalità di uno dei «paesi sicuri» avrà davanti a sé molti più ostacoli.

      Di fatto, aumenterà ulteriormente il tasso di diniego delle protezioni.

      La conseguenza? Aumentano gli irregolari.

      L’aumento degli irregolari sarà probabilmente piccolo rispetto all’effetto dell’abolizione della protezione umanitaria nel 2018.

      Ma andrà a complicare una situazione già molto precaria, anziché regolarizzare parte di chi oggi è qui e qui resterà.

      https://www.ispionline.it/it/pubblicazione/i-nuovi-irregolari-italia-21812

      Sì, ma i rimpatri?

      Sul fronte dei rimpatri, designare un paese come sicuro non cambia nulla.

      Se un paese terzo già collaborava con noi (per es.,
      🇹🇳
      Tunisia), continuerà a farlo.

      Se un paese terzo non collaborava (per es.,
      🇬🇭
      Ghana), continuerà a non farlo.

      Del resto, se c’entrassero in qualche modo i rimpatri sorgerebbe spontanea una domanda: perché includere nella lista dei «sicuri» paesi che, in media, hanno già un tasso di rimpatrio superiore rispetto a quelli esclusi dalla lista?

      La realtà è una: convincere i paesi dell’Africa subsahariana a collaborare sui rimpatri è difficile.

      L’Italia ha tassi in linea con quelli di altri grandi paesi, come Francia e Germania, che hanno «leve» (legami post-coloniali, commercio, aiuti) ben maggiori delle nostre.

      CONCLUSIONE.

      La lista di «paesi sicuri»:

      ☑️
      è consentita da un decreto adottato dal precedente governo;
      ☑️
      aumenterà il numero degli stranieri irregolari presenti in Italia;
      ☑️
      non avrà alcun effetto sui rimpatri.

      https://twitter.com/emmevilla/status/1180135437358243840?s=19
      #cartographie #visualisation #pays_sûrs #clandestinisation #illégalisation #statistiques #chiffres #Matteo_Villa