Content uploaded by Jeremaiah Opiniano
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jeremaiah Opiniano on Feb 15, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Migranti, Covid, Mercato del Lavoro
2020-2021: tra paura e speranza
(a cura di Lorenzo Prencipe e Matteo Sanfilippo)
International Migration Report
of the SIMN - Scalabrini International
Migration Network in Europe-Africa Region
ISBN: 978-88-85438-28-6
© Centro Studi Emigrazione Roma
(CSER) 00153 Roma
via Dandolo 58
tel. 065897664 / cser@cser.it
www.cser.it
Immagine di copertina: Elaborazione CSER
Roma, Febbraio 2022
3
Indice
INTRODUZIONE. Covid-19, migrazioni e mercato del lavoro:
uno sguardo d’insieme dopo due anni di pandemia ...................................... 5
EUROPA ........................................................................................................ 17
Il welfare scandinavo alla prova del Covid-19:
l’impatto sui migranti ................................................................................... 17
Inégalités sociales, inégalités ethno-raciales et Covid-19
en Belgique ................................................................................................... 43
Gli effetti dell’epidemia da Covid-19 sui migranti presenti
nel mercato del lavoro francese .................................................................. 59
Germania: Migrazioni, mercato del lavoro e Covid ..................................... 81
Italia: De-integrazione? Come e perché cresce
l’esclusione socioeconomica nella popolazione immigrata ......................... 95
Italia: l’azione associativa con e per i migranti .......................................... 104
VIDES – Volontariato Internazionale Donna Educazione Sviluppo ............ 104
ASCS – Agenzia Scalabriniana per la Cooperazione allo Sviluppo .............. 107
MONDO ...................................................................................................... 111
Migrazione, lavoro e pandemia: alcune riflessioni dall’Australia .............. 111
Seeking for and returning to overseas work? Developments
surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic ........... 119
Perdere l’impiego nella terra delle opportunità economiche:
l’impatto del Covid-19 sull’occupazione dei lavoratori immigrati
negli Stati Uniti ............................................................................................ 133
Gestion étatique des migrations au Canada et au Québec
à l’ère de la Covid-19 .................................................................................. 145
Brasile: Covid-19 e migrazioni .................................................................... 157
La inserción laboral de migrantes en tiempos de Covid
en Sudamérica ............................................................................................ 165
INDICE
4
Covid, migranti e mercato del lavoro. Situazione e prospettive:
uno sguardo sull’Africa ............................................................................... 173
Il Covid nei paesi arabi del Golfo. Analisi delle conseguenze
e delle strategie adottate ........................................................................... 185
Tra il Covid e un mercato del lavoro discriminante:
le donne migranti tra Etiopia e Libano ....................................................... 205
CONCLUSIONE. Il Covid-19 ha esacerbato l’esclusione dei migranti ................. 209
119
Seeking for and returning to overseas work?
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to
overseas jobs beside a pandemic
Alvin P. Ang
apang@ateneo.edu
Ateneo de Manila University
Jeremaiah M. Opiniano
jmopiniano@ust.edu.ph
University of Santo Tomas
Introduction
The running Covid-19 pandemic continues to negatively impact the
incomes and jobs of international migrant workers. The pandemic also
persists in stifling the desires of host countries to hire foreign labor while
their economies try to rebound and move forward from the pandemic.
Since the World Health Organization had declared a pandemic on 11
March 2020, analysts have projected an immediately sharp decline in
demand for foreign labor1. The overseas labor demand situation did take a
hit on migrants’ origin countries, with them even receiving droves of
returnee and repatriated migrant workers2. The pandemic affected both
the economies of origin and destination countries, as well as supply and
demand sides of these individual countries (especially during the early
months of SARS-CoV-2’s spread in 2020).
Nearly two years have passed since 11 March 2020, countries
worldwide have been increasing vaccination efforts in the race to
achieve herd immunity. Should these vaccination levels continue to
increase, developed countries slowly begin to re-open and may begin
1 GAMLEN, Alan, Migration and Mobility after the 2020 Pandemic: The End of an Age?
Geneva, International Organization for Migration, 2020.
2 OPINIANO, Jeremaiah, A Reset for Overseas Migration? Recent Developments in Filipinos’
Migration in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Geneva, ILO, 2021 (Migration
Research Series No. 69).
MONDO
120
luring back foreign workers. Not surprisingly, the Philippines closely
monitors the situation. Since the welcoming back of over-800,000
returnee and repatriated migrant workers because of the pandemic3,
returnees feel the difficulties associated with their economic
reintegration. These returnees try to do some economic activities, but
some of them have expressed the desire to try their luck again overseas4
when lockdowns ease, travel restrictions slowly get lifted, and re
receiving governments begin arrangements to welcome back foreign
workers. Admittedly, returning to overseas work becomes a desired
economic option for some 48 percent of about 8,332 repatriated Filipino
workers who were surveyed recently5.
The Philippines handles the world’s most organized migration
management bureaucracy by an origin country6. Given the pandemic,
the entire migration management machinery of the Philippine state
became frontliners in assisting affected overseas Filipino workers
(OFWs) in returning home, undergoing quarantine, returning to their
residential and birthplace communities, and pursuing economic
reintegration activities7. Since the Philippines has that organized
migration bureaucracy, part of the work of government agencies is to
determine labor market opportunities in host countries. Determining
becomes a
crucial duty for a migrant-origin country’s government that still feels the
contraction of a domestic labor market and the desires of returnees to
repeat their overseas migration. The Philippines even continues feeling
out the pulse of destination countries should they re-open doors to
foreign labor.
3 Department of Labor and Employment, Returned OFWs hit 800K mark – Bello, 2021,
www.dole.gov.ph/news/returned-ofws-hit-800k-mark-bello/
4 OPINIANO, Jeremaiah, A Reset for Overseas Migration? op. cit.
5 ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work (eighth edition), 2021, www.ilo.org/
wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/documents/briefingnote/wcms_824092.pdf
6 IOM, World Migration Report 2005, Geneva, IOM, 2005.
7 ASIS, Maruja Milagros, Repatriating Filipino migrant workers in the time of the
pandemic, Geneva, IOM, 2020 (Migration Research Series no. 63); OPINIANO,
Jeremaiah, A Reset for Overseas Migration? op. cit.
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic
121
In this scenario, what processes occur when host countries seek (the
return of) foreign workers while trying to recover from this running
pandemic? Answering the question will expectedly yield different country-
level contexts, but the running Covid-19 pandemic sees destination
countries trying out different policies and measures to accommodate
foreign labor. This documentary analysis will present three cases of
processes along migration corridors (with the Philippines as labor
supplier) on how foreign workers seek jobs and (try to) return to a
destination country. The aim of the paper is to surface the dynamics of
these pandemic-affected labor migration processes between the
Philippines and some destination countries. Eventually, while other origin
countries of migrants may learn from this running experience from the
Philippines, lessons from this policy paper will provide preliminary
understandings of ad hoc labor migration processes beside the running
Covid-19 pandemic.
Disruptions in overseas labor markets
As the pandemic drags on, countries are banking on increasing
vaccination uptake to hopefully stabilize business cycles and labor
markets. Vaccination had thus been an impetus for the recovery of labor
markets. Meanwhile, countries have experienced “unequal employment
impacts” given the Covid-19 crisis; these impacts even reveal “fragile,
often diverging” recovery trends during the first half of 2021. What
labor markets continue to reel from is the fewer number of people
employed and participating in the labor force. Given the deleterious
impact of the pandemic on businesses and on workers, countries have
rolled out various economic stimulus packages to keep affected workers
employed and salaries and incomes shielded from being wiped out8.
Those projections by the International Labor Organization (ILO) are
anchored by the efforts of countries to reach population protection (i.e.,
75 percent) in terms of vaccination. However, the later part of 2020 and
the entire 2021 saw the emergence of Covid-19 variants that have
8 ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work (eighth edition), op. cit.
MONDO
122
spurred on-and-off lockdowns once again. End-2020 saw the Alpha and
Beta variants spread; in the middle of 2021, the Delta variant proved to
be the most contagious and harmful variant. The year 2021 ended with
the Omicron variant (with its features and observations currently under
study) now becoming the world’s dominant variant.
Because of these on-and-off lockdowns, labor markets felt the
difficulties of normalizing their situations, of increasing labor
participation, and of having sustained business operations. Stringent
public health protocols have become the norm in workplaces to bring the
labor market back to a sense of normalcy. In fact, as the Delta variant faded
in some countries, some developed countries have begun re-opening their
economies and labor markets (to even cover migrant workers).
If countries have felt the negative impacts of Covid-19 on workers,
international migrant workers were not spared on these impacts. Migrant
workers lost their jobs, and estimates are even difficult to project
especially given on-and-off area lockdowns. Those job losses happened in
both formal and household-situated workplaces (the latter to cover
domestic and care workers, with their salaries dependent on the incomes
of employers who work in the formal economy). For some foreign
workers, job displacements have led to large-scale return migrations to
origin countries9.
To keep jobs, employers have slashed workers’ salaries (including
those by foreign workers)10. The concomitant impact here would be
lower levels of remittances from international migrants (although
surprisingly, 2020 remittances to developing countries saw minimal
deductions from 2019 figures —better than initially projected higher
losses11). If migrant workers are in irregular situations or possess
undocumented statuses, they get sidelined from unemployment
9 JONES, Katharine; MUDALIAR, Sanushka; PIPER, Nicola, Locked down and in limbo: The
global impact of COVID-19 on migrant worker rights and recruitment, Geneva, ILO, 2021.
10 IBIDEM.
11 WORLD BANK, Resilience: COVID-19 Crisis through a Migration Lens, Washington D.C.,
World Bank, 2021 (Migration and Development Brief 34).
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic
123
insurance benefits by some host countries12. This means irregular
migrants face financial impoverishment when businesses close (even if
countries have allowed them to receive vaccines).
These pandemic-induced situations create labor market pressures to
both origin and destination countries. Destination countries already
experiencing (chronic) labor shortages either within employment
sectors or country-
pronounced need for (foreign) lower skilled labor that have provided
the essential support to higher value native workers in the form of
cleaners, farmers, retail service workers, health care assistants, logistics
drivers and movers, among others. These skills continue to be in
demand as they are not easily replaceable by automation and cannot be
transitioned to working from home. They are also essential in dealing
with the pandemic. Origin countries, for their part, not only contend
with their own labor market pressures. The droves of return migrations,
especially for countries sending thousands of migrant workers, added
pressure to a homeland labor market that is trying to bring back as
many local workers to the domestic labor force. As for migrant
returnees, they either engage in self-employment or seek opportunities
to return to overseas work when countries’ travel regulations allow13.
Running lessons
Prevailing situations reveal running lessons about how migrant workers
and countries try to move forward from this pandemic. One lesson is that
labor market assessments have become fleeting because of the disruptions
that lockdowns and the new Covid-19 variants have caused. The emergence
of newer Covid-19 variants, regardless of the vaccination statuses of
countries, almost puts job prospects (and their projected numbers) into
waste. Another lesson is that labor markets employ wait-and-see
dispositions when the spread of the virus dissipates, thus giving them
12 KANLUNGAN FILIPINO CONSORTIUM, Essential and Invisible: Filipino Irregular
Migrants in the UK’s Ongoing COVID-19 Crisis, London, KFC, 2021.
13 IOM, COVID-19 Impact Assessment on Returned Overseas Filipino Workers, Makati City,
IOM, 2021.
MONDO
124
windows of opportunity to re-open businesses and work opportunities. A
third major important lesson is that workers’ (and migrant workers’)
health emerged as a major element of overall labor market recovery. This
lesson has seen individual workers, particular businesses, employment
sectors and entire labor markets now becoming dependent on vaccination
and on a worker’s overall health condition – some of these could lead to
higher transaction costs. If all of these are taken into consideration, the
costs of getting migrant workers will increase significantly. This could lead
to sound economic cost benefit question – is it better to retrain and refill
native workers to fill up the jobs being given to migrants?
How can we make sense then of these labor market lessons given
disruptions caused by Covid-19? This exploratory documentary-cum-
case study research will describe and analyze how an individual
migrant-origin country responds to developments in the labor markets
of identified destination countries. For purposes of this paper, the case
of the Philippines and its ongoing dealings with Germany, Korea, Taiwan
will be illustrated. Documents (e.g., newspaper reports, official
government pronouncements and policy issuances, external analytic
reports, some statistical data) coming from the Philippines and from
those countries were used here as data14.
Case 1: Germany
Germany has long been struggling from a chronic shortage of nursing
manpower, projected to be some 40,000 to 50,000 big. Some observers
think Germany has a “complex” health system that sees the federal
government setting policies and states handling localized public health
services (including financially). These states, however, may have
neglected investing funds for not just hospital equipment but also for
gainful salaries to health workers.
With nursing becoming a less-attractive type of work for locals,
Germany’s health system has continually recruited foreign nurses. In a
previous statistic, Germany is third in Europe in terms of staff density
14 TIGHT, Malcolm, Documentary Research in the Social Sciences, London, SAGE, 2019.
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic
125
(i.e., nurse per patient) but is among Europe’s lowest in terms of nursing
staff per in-patient case. The situation has led nurses to endure
significantly higher workloads while receiving a “low” gross pay of
about €2,300 monthly (or around €1,900 net of taxes).
To address the nurses’ shortage, Germany (in 2004) launched a
Triple Win Project “in cooperation” with Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Tunisia and the Philippines which will bring some of their nurses to
Germany. Triple Win is a government-to-government recruitment
system that sees the International Placement Service of the Federal
Employment Agency (ZAV/BA) deal with counterpart agencies in
partner-countries. In the case of the Philippines, ZAV/BA deals with the
Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). Note also that
Germany recently passed the New German Skilled Workers Immigration
Act that mandates the Federal Employment Agency to arrange worker
placement agreements with Third World countries.
Even during the pandemic, Triple Win recruited Filipino nurses. As
required, accepted Filipino nurses must possess a B1 or B2 German
language proficiency level. Meanwhile, employers pay visa fees, shoulder
airfare expenses, and assist the foreign nurses in finding a suitable
accommodation (to which the nurses’ salaries will be used as payment).
As for the four partner countries of Triple Win, the Philippines sent the
most number of nurses (N=1,122, citing 2017 data). In terms of foreign
nurses’ work tenure, some 81.5 percent stayed with their first employer
after two years. Data also show almost every foreign nurse recruited under
Triple Win passes qualification recognition examinations.
Triple Win became pronounced as Germany’s hospital system
continues to feel the crunch of limited nursing manpower. Earlier this
year, a group called Hessische Krankenhaugessellschaft (the Hessian
Hospital Society, based in Eschborn) was quoted in a news report saying
it has been «granted a special permit» to fly in 75 Filipino nurses.
However, public backlash in the Philippines followed and this “special
permit” was then put on hold until further notice. The Philippines also
halted supposed deployments of nurses to the United Kingdom.
MONDO
126
POEA has set a 6,500-deployment cap for nurses worldwide. This
year (from January 1 to November 16), some 507 nurses were deployed
to Germany under Triple Win. Apart from Triple Win, another 1,178
nurses went to German private hospitals while another 355 “repeat
migrant workers” returned to Germany. Some 2,040 Filipino nurses
went to Germany.
Case 2: Taiwan
Taiwan was an “early winner” during the initial months of the
pandemic for containing a widespread transmission. As early as
December 2019, Taiwan employed early action, rolled out a national
plan, used technology, and got help from a cooperative public. From
2020 up to March this year, Taiwan even experienced positive economic
growth. It was only last May 11 that community spread occurred (the
period being the rise of the Delta variant in Asia). The rise of cases in
Taiwan eased late July.
Taiwan’s border restrictions became one of the world’s strictest, to
include 14-day hotel quarantines (even 21 days for travelers from Hong
Kong SAR and China). Because of the community transmission last May,
officials closed the border to non-nationals and to those with no alien
residency certificates. Foreign workers with job offer had encountered
difficulties returning to Taiwan, including some 5,000 Filipinos.
Last November, however, Taiwan re-opened its borders to foreign
workers (as well as students, academics and professionals) over a one-
month window period. This development though required foreign
workers to undergo multiple RT-PCR tests and mandatory self-health
monitoring. Foreign workers also underwent quarantine in
government-designated facilities, carrying 600 beds (further putting
restrictions on the return of foreign workers). The window period lasted
from November 14 to December 13, and borders were closed from
December 14, 2021, to February 14, 2022 in anticipation of large
numbers of returning overseas Taiwanese for the Lunar New Year.
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic
127
Meanwhile, reforms in Taiwan’s regulations for foreign workers were
put forward. The Ministry of Labor’s new regulations have limited migrant
workers’ ability to work in an economic sector different from the sector that
secured their work visas. Such measure responds to employers’ complaints
that foreign workers move to newer jobs (such as the 1,715 care givers who
left for factory jobs, from January to May 2021). If workers want to change
jobs, they must first get their employers’ consent and register for a transfer
with help from a government employment service center.
MOL also instituted a points-based system that allows foreign
workers to return. Criteria for this system include a migrant worker’s
vaccination situation and the plan of employers to shield their
workplaces and their workers from infection.
Case 3: Korea
Korea nears the second decade of implementing its flagship temporary
labor migration program, the Employment Permit System (EPS). The EPS
is also a government-to-government arrangement between Korea and
some 16 partner-countries, including the Philippines. EPS can be classified
as a non-seasonal guest worker program for low-skilled workers, even as
the Korean government does not promote the EPS as a program that
allows migrant workers to settle permanently. EPS workers may be found
in Korea’s manufacturing sector.
Workers hired through the EPS must undergo the test in proficiency
in Korean language (TOPIK). Once accepted, a migrant worker can work
in Korea for four years and ten months under a minimum wage of at
least W6,500 (US$5.70) an hour.
Through the EPS, Korea’s Ministry of Employment and Labor has laid
out a well-structured labor migration system that covers job matching,
pre-departure requirements, requirements during settlement (e.g., a 20-
hour mandatory training on labor relations and Korean culture), and
post-migration. The over-half a million EPS workers are even covered
by universal health insurance and occupational accident insurance, not
to mention being granted access to social services and counseling.
MONDO
128
Last November, MOEL re-opened the EPS to Myanmar, Pakistan,
Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and the Philippines. For re-entering workers to get
work visas, they must present a vaccination certificate, a tuberculosis
certificate, a police clearance, and a signed consent for to be quarantined
upon arrival. Meanwhile, an amendment of Korea’s Act of Employment for
Foreign Workers mandated a shorter restriction period for returning EPS
workers. The amendments to the Act of Employment for Foreign Workers
also gave returning EPS workers a chance at working in Korea for another
four years and ten months. With these developments, the POEA had
processed EPS workers’ applications. Some 209 Filipino EPS workers
returned to Korea on December 10 and 13, 2021.
Figure 1. Deployment of overseas Filipino workers, 1984 to 2020
Source: Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (2021)
Notes:
1. These annual flows of overseas workers cover both new hires and rehires.
2. Year 2020 data show that the Philippines deployed 16,113 workers to Taiwan, 3,121
to Korea, and 1,467 to Germany. In 2019, Taiwan received 71,132 OFWs, Korea got
14,221 workers, and Germany welcomed 2,399 Filipino workers.
The labor market disruptions in host countries led to a significant drop
-hired and rehired Filipino overseas
0
500.000
1.000.000
1.500.000
2.000.000
2.500.000
Total overseas workers Land-based Sea-based
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic
129
workers (covering land- and sea-based workers): from a historic high of
2,156,742 OFWs deployed in 2019, to 549,841 in 2020 (see Figure 1).
POEA data show that OFW deployments to Taiwan, Korea and Germany
dropped by 77, 78 and 38 percent, respectively (refer to footnote in Figure 1).
Discussion and conclusion
This paper has presented running labor market developments in
some destination countries where Filipinos go for work. The pandemic
continues to disrupt labor markets, with affected migrant workers
feeling negative impacts on their incomes, work tenure and their
migration statuses. The Philippines’ responses to developments in three
migration corridors (Germany, Taiwan and Korea) reveal contextualized
situations depending on a country’s prevailing labor and immigration
regulations, labor needs, Covid-19 caseload and vaccination rates, and
eventually that country’s long-running disposition towards foreigners.
As the featured cases show, destination countries’ handling of the
pandemic reveal country nuances even if the pandemic has affected all
countries. This trend therefore brings forth a crucial question: will there be
standardized ways for countries to handle current-day public health and
labor market needs? This question arises because countries need to preserve
and protect -being and social
protection, but also their skills. The pandemic gave negative impacts to
specific employment sectors, such as tourism, travel and services. And once
employment in these economic sectors gets shut, (foreign) workers are left
with little or nil options to try out other jobs whose skill requirements they
may not entirely possess. What destination countries do is preserve the jobs
their economies need, but not necessarily provide further skills training to
(foreign) workers. Note here that prior to the pandemic, digitalization (e.g.,
artificial intelligence) is already affecting work. Now with the pandemic, and
with technology emerging as a more pronounced need, both the pandemic
and digitalization pose threats to the future workforce15.
15 ANG, Alvin, Processes to maximize the future of work, Tokyo, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung -
Japan office, 2022 (forthcoming).
MONDO
130
Labor markets remain feeble beside the pandemic. Meanwhile, countries
tussle with their labor requirements. On the overall, and notwithstanding
border controls, destination countries try to get as many possible migrant
workers. The situation puts migrant origin countries at a disadvantage, with
them trying to collar jobs abroad to ease homeland unemployment
pressures. Countries of origin and destination may have to realize that their
labor markets may not return to pre-
pandemic, digitalization, population ageing, and climate change all pose
challenges to the future16. If developed countries continue resorting to
individualized migrant recruitment measures, in response to their felt need
for more workers, only a few countries will benefit in this mad rush for
(foreign) labor.
Because of newer SARS-CoV-2 variants, measures to move forward get
stalled and countries return to containing the virus. Countries then impose
ad hoc measures related to accommodating foreign workers. Under these
ad hoc measures, the monetary costs of working overseas rose given health
requirements upon entry —whether shouldered by government, private
recruitment agencies or by (would-be) migrant workers. These
governments may not realize immediately that the transaction costs of re-
opening their labor markets to foreign workers has become more
expensive. Government-to-government labor arrangements may have also
Omicron) lead to another round of changes in accommodating migrant
workers.
Countries returning to containment entraps them into a vicious cycle
that becomes economically costly for these countries. Glaringly missing,
however, are efforts from countries to discuss and collaborate on
instituting efforts to move forward from this running pandemic, and to
design labor market strategies that benefit both developed and developing
countries.
16 IBIDEM.
Developments surrounding Filipinos’ return to overseas jobs beside a pandemic
131
Table 1. Complete Process Framework for labor market recovery, with
policy options at each stage
Source: ANG, Alvin, Processes to maximize the future of work, op. cit.
The desire here is for countries to move from containing the virus
(immediate term) to recovering (short-to-medium-term), rebalancing
(medium term) to finally relaunching (long term) their economies. For
labor markets to move to (at least) the recovery stage, they may have to
contain and manage SARS-CoV-2, calibrate economic measures, and
protect human capital (see Table 1).
MONDO
132
These measures run in a coordinated manner, not in isolation. These
measures also carry the aim of further upgrading the skills of workers (not
just migrant workers). This is an economic decision considering that the
costs of hiring migrants have become more expensive. However, as aging
and other global pressures affect primarily the destination countries, there
is certainly a need to get migrant workers now and in the future.
Countries may even have to employ bilateral channels to jointly
identify needed skills so that these countries help set reasonable limits
in sending and receiving workers. Both origin and receiving countries
may also have to maximize regional and multilateral channels so that
new labor market arrangements may be forged, in recognition of
countries shared human capital needs. The current situation calls on
countries to operationalize the 2018 Global Compact on Migration, as
well as for the ILO and the IOM to jumpstart multilateral and regional
dialogues that should lead to agreements on labor market needs. The
Philippines, a global leader in migration-related discussions, can
instigate countries’ use of the GCM to formulate labor market
arrangements and human capital protection measures —beyond simply
allowing global market forces to dictate labor markets.
Approaches by individual countries provide ad hoc responses to a
pandemic that continues to affect an entire planet. Migrant origin
countries may continue to await developments in destination countries
which, for their part, implement ad hoc policies once viral transmissions
reach favorable levels. Labor markets however get entrapped when
countries remain stuck into containing Covid-19. Unless multilateral,
regional and bilateral labor market arrangements are discussed and
executed, migrant workers will continue to feel the economic impacts of
Covid-19 even when the world reaches an endemic.
