Labor market transitions of immigrant-born, refugee-born, and Canadian-born youth.
Wilkinson, Lori
WORK IS AN IMPORTANT ACTIVITY FOR the majority of youth in Canada.
For many, employment is an integral part of their transition to
adulthood and the responsibilities associated with becoming a productive
and active citizen. Difficulties associated with transitions to the
labor market experienced by Canadian-born youth are well documented and
include problems with finding well-paid employment, high levels of
unemployment, declines in wages, and attaining a reasonable standard of
living (Betcherman and Lekie 1997). While there is recognition that the
transition processes may differ by gender (Hughes and Lowe 1993; Geller
1996), socioeconomic status (Bellamy 1993), Aboriginal status (Gabor,
Thibodeau, and Manychief 1996), and visible minority status (James 1993;
Perron 1996), there are no systematic studies of the employment
experiences or transitions of immigrant-born or refugee-born youth. This
is an important omission, especially because a prevailing assumption of
many immigration/ integration theories is that immigrant and refugee
youth tend to have greater success in the labor market than their
parents (Tsui and Sammons 1988; Hagan, Macmillan, and Wheaton 1996;
Isajiw 1999). While this assumption may be true, the extent and
characteristics of employment of immigrant and refugee youth is largely
unknown.
Are there differences between immigrants and refugees? We do know
that certain aspects of the integration experience are similar for these
two groups. Both will experience the difficulties of settling into a new
society, learning a new culture, and many will experience
discrimination. However, we do know that there are subtle differences
between the two groups. For instance, refugee youth are less likely to
know English or French before their arrival. This affects their chances
at succeeding in education and employment. The affect of trauma and past
experiences is another aspect differentiating refugees from immigrants.
Exactly how these experiences influence various aspects of resettlement is largely unknown.
This research attempts to address one gap in our knowledge by
comparing the initial labor market experiences of immigrant-born,
refugee-born, and Canadian-born youth. Two fundamental questions are
addressed. First, what are the factors influencing the participation in
employment of immigrant-born and refugee-born youth and are they similar
to the factors that have been identified for Canadian-born youth?
Second, can the traditional school-to-work transitions model adequately
explain the variance in employment status among refugee-born and
immigrant-born youth, or is the integration model better?
While much is known of the arrival experiences of immigrant and
refugee youth, little is known of their lives in Canada as adults. The
examination of initial labor market experiences is a crucial aspect in
understanding their transition from youth to adulthood. The few
researchers investigating life course transitions among immigrant,
refugee, and/or second-generation youth in the United States find that
there are extreme variations in the successful integration into school
(Zhou and Bankston 2000) and occupational aspirations (Rumbaut 1992)
among Southeast Asian youth, but their research is based on small sample
sizes, selected ethnocultural groups, and largely on youth living in
large cities. None have given a broad national perspective on labor
market experiences, unlike the research conducted on American-born and
Canadian-born youth. Furthermore, much emphasis has been placed on
second-generation youth, the children born of immigrant and refugee
parents, while very little research has directly examined the
experiences of those arriving as children or young adults (Quigley 1996;
Ahearn, Loughry, and Ager 1999) and even less research has been
conducted in Canada (Derwing et al. 1999; Wilkinson 2001; Shields, Rahi,
and Scholtz 2006).
Before proceeding, it is important to note the distinctions between
immigrant-born, refugee-born, and Canadian-born youth. In this paper,
immigrant youth are defined as young persons who were born outside of
Canada. They have arrived to the country as immigrants, either as family
class or independent immigrants. Most arrived with their parents. Like
immigrant-born youth, the refugee-born youth in this study were also
born outside the country, but their legal and migration trajectories
vary significantly. Some enter Canada as designated class refugees
(government assisted or privately assisted) or convention class refugees
(as designated by the United Nations). A small number would have arrived
to Canada as refugee claimants but are currently permanent residents.
While most arrived with their parents, there were several cases when
young people arrived here alone. Despite their relatively recent arrival
to the country, a few have even become Canadian citizens. The
Canadian-born youth in this study were born in the country. Some are the
children of immigrants and refugees (second-generation youth), but a
very large majority have families with a longer settlement history.
NEWCOMER YOUTH ARE KEY TO LABOR MARKET GROWTH
The demographic and labor market influences of immigrant and
refugee youth cannot be understated. Newcomers make up an increasingly
important proportion of the Canadian population. According to the 2001
Census, 18.4 percent of the Canadian population is foreign-born
(Statistics Canada 2003a), and this proportion is increasing.
Immigration since 2005 has reached unprecedented levels, reaching as
high as 256,000 per year, an integral contribution to Canadian
demographic growth. Furthermore, the youth, ages 15-24 years make up a
significant proportion of the Canadian population. Just over 13 percent
of the Canadian-born population is between ages 15 and 24 years, while,
15.2 percent of immigrant-born, and 16.4 percent of refugee-born are
within this age range.
Newcomers have become increasingly central to the growth of the
Canadian economy, and most immigrant and refugee youth will contribute
much of their entire adult lives to the labor force. An analysis of
demographics throughout the postwar period reveals that the immigrant
population consistently makes up one-fifth of the labor force (Li
1996:104). A more recent study reveals that the labor power and
investments made by immigrants arriving in Canada during the 1990s
accounted for over 70 percent of our economic growth during that decade
(Statistics Canada 2003b). According to former Prime Minister Jean
Chretien (2003:25), "by 2011, immigration will account for all net
labour market growth, and forecasts suggest a shortfall of nearly one
million workers within 20 years." Thus, the study of the initial
labor market experiences of newcomer youth becomes more important in
understanding the overall health of our economy.
Two literatures inform this research. The school-to-work
transitions literature focuses on the varied pathways of young people
leading from education to work. This literature emphasizes the influence
of individual choice and of structural barriers, which shape work
opportunities for young people. A second stream of literature aims to
explain the successful (mainstream adaptation) and the unsuccessful
(underclass absorption) integration of newcomers. It is focused on
explaining experiences of immigrants and refugees and identifying the
social barriers, which both enable and constrain their integration into
various social institutions, including the labor market. Unfortunately,
there are some limitations to this body of research. Many studies are
based on research conducted in the United States. While the countries
differ in terms of their economy and their reception toward newcomers,
there is merit in discussing this research given the paucity of research
conducted in Canada. As well, much of the recent focus has been on
second-generation youth rather than on those who arrive to the country
as immigrants. Here too, while the problems and barriers may differ,
there are a few similarities to warrant a discussion.
SCHOOL-TO-WORK TRANSITIONS AND INTEGRATION/ ASSIMILATION
Studies of school-to-work transitions are abundant. One issue with
these studies is that they rarely account for the immigration or refugee
status. While they are adept at explaining the situation of youth born
in Canada they are not very good at identifying variations based on
nationality, immigrant status, ethnicity, or religion (Gabor et al.
1996; Perron, 1996; Jasinskaja-Lahiti and Liebkind 2000). Much of the
American research suggests that immigrant status plays an important role
in the educational and occupational outcomes of immigrant youth and
suggests that different models of the school-to-work transition for
newcomer youth be developed. Unfortunately, Canadian research has yet to
follow this lead.
Despite its lack of attention to issues specific to immigrant and
refugee youth, its framework is useful for understanding their life
course transitions. While there is some debate about the
"average" path of school-to-work transitions among Canadian
youth, some common themes can be identified within the literature. Heinz
(1996) suggests that leaving school, first full-time job, first
marriage, and occupational career sequences are the major transitions
from youth to adulthood. Others would argue that leaving home, entering
postsecondary education, and parenthood are also crucial transitions
(Irwin 1996). There are also certain subjective aspects to this
transition including feeling like an adult, acquiring feelings of
independence, and the acceptance of certain adult obligations. For
immigrants and refugees, life course transitions for youth may also
involve additional role transitions that do not normally affect the
"average" Canadian-born youth. These include integrating into
Canadian society, taking on temporary adult roles, and learning a new
language (Tobin and Friedman 1984). These are transitions that most
Canadian youth do not traverse yet may significantly impact the
transition from school-to-work for immigrant and refugee youth.
A second stream of literature that informs this research is the
immigration and integration studies, which can be separated into two
categories: mainstream absorption and underclass absorption models. The
mainstream absorption model accentuates "patterns of inclusion, of
orderly integration and assimilation of particular racial and ethnic
groups into a core culture and society" (Feagin and Booher Feagin
1998:29) and suggests that the integration experiences of newcomer youth
are largely unproblematic. Children are likely to experience success in
integrating into various social institutions given their lack of
"cultural baggage" when compared with their parents (Feagin
and Booher Feagin 1998; Isajiw 1999). In order to become
"functional" in everyday life in Canada, newcomers must at
least superficially adopt the dominant culture. Failure to do so results
in marginalization with the accompanying repercussions of high
unemployment, low waged work and other consequences including
depression, school dropout, and delinquency (Macleod 1995; Schissel
1998). In this model, individuals attempt to maximize their success by
doing everything possible to "fit in." This includes
educational attainment, learning a new language, and adapting to the
"Canadian" culture. As a result, those who succeed in these
endeavors are more likely to experience success in school and future
employment. Thus, the hypothesis generated by this model is that
immigrant and refugee youth who are more successful in school and other
aspects of integration are likely to be more successful in the labor
market.
Researchers studying in the United States find that immigrants, for
the most part, are successfully integrating into American society,
particularly in terms of socioeconomic status and intermarriage (Waters
and Jimenez 2005). As a result, they are more likely to follow the
mainstream adaptation mode of integration. Research conducted by Alba
and Nee (2003) and Foner (2000) in the United States supports this
observation and indicates that immigrant children and the children of
immigrant parents are more likely to succeed in schooling and in the
labor market than they are to fail. And, as time in the United States increases, so do the markers of success. Thus, immigrants and children
of immigrants who have spent more time in the country are more likely to
have higher scholastic achievements and higher employment incomes than
those who have recently arrived.
A second class of integration studies disputes the successes of
newcomer youth and can be collectively considered as the underclass
absorption model. These theories focus on the persistence of ethnic and
immigration-based inequality in terms of power and resource allocation,
and document the frequent downward occupational and economic mobility of
new immigrants. Newcomers who actively reject the mainstream culture
often find themselves in the lower social strata with accompanying low
wages and high unemployment rates. Underclass absorption research also
suggests that youth who reject mainstream values are more likely to quit
school, get into trouble with the law, and practice deviant behaviors as
forms of resistance to the mainstream culture (Schissel 1998). This
rejection and subsequent educational failures leads to low educational
attainment and low skilled, low waged employment as adults. Some
immigrant and refugee youth may not have a choice in their acceptance or
rejection of the dominant Canadian culture. Their situation is hindered
in the expectation of teachers that newcomers will have trouble in
school due to the difficulties and uncertainty with the immigration
process, their past traumas, and the difficulties in learning an
official language (Henkin and Liem 1984; Ima and Rumbaut 1989; Rousseau,
Drapeau, and Corin 1996). Further evidence suggests that immigrant and
refugee students who are held back (i.e., fail a grade or placed in
grades too low for their age) are much less likely to complete high
school (Driscoll 1999). These forces combine to hinder the
school-to-work transitions of many immigrant and refugee youth and they
are likely to find unskilled and low waged employment as a result.
The findings are similar in regards to second-generation youth in
the United States where various researchers have discovered declines in
education and employment relative to migrants arriving in earlier
decades. Perlmann and Waldinger (1996) identify what they term "the
second-generation revolt" which describes the decline in
educational and economic standing among youth in relation to the
successes of those arriving to the United States as immigrant children.
The results of the second-generation revolt include high rates of
unemployment, low educational completion, and high rates of crime. This
second-generation revolt and resulting underclass absorption is
particularly prevalent among second-generation children whose parents
are poor and negatively influenced educational and economic advancement
(Gans 1992). In Canada, Jansen, Plaza, and James (2004) find that while
second-generation Caribbean youth in Toronto are generally successful,
they note that discrimination in the Canadian labor market still
prevents many youth from attaining secure employment as adults (Jansen
et al. 2004).
In short, the school-to-work transitions literature, which shows
promise in understanding the life course experiences of immigrant-born
and refugee-born youth, has not been largely used to undertake extensive
examinations of these two groups. Conversely, while the integration
literature provides some clues as to the types of problems that
immigrant-born and refugee-born youth experience, for the most part,
these models describe the experiences of adults. When children and youth
are investigated, the focus tends to be on educational experiences
(Coeyman 1999; Chow 2000), mental health (Ahearn and Athey 1991; Hodes
1998), language acquisition (Watt and Roessingh 1994; Derwing et al.
1999), or on second-generation immigrant youth (Boyd and Grieco 1998).
While these topics are extremely important in understanding certain
aspects of the integration of immigrant and refugee youth, taken
together, they tend to negatively portray them. What is needed is more
holistic studies that adequately capture the resettlement experiences of
immigrant and refugee youth so that we have a better understanding of
their life course. This research is an initial step.
DATA AND DATA SOURCES
Data for this study comes from two sources. Access to the
confidential master data file of the 1998 Survey on Labour and Income
Dynamics (SLID) cross-section individual file was granted to the
researcher through the Research Data Centre Program, Statistics Canada
(2002). Because the public use microdata file of SLID did not provide
the immigrant status, ethnic group, country of origin, and various labor
market variables crucial to differentiate immigrants from the
native-born, the master data file was required. SLID is an annual
telephone survey of a panel of 30,000 Canadians regarding their work
patterns, labor force participation, and other aspects related to income
and the economy. (1) It was selected as the comparison data set as many
of its questions were used in the refugee data set. Furthermore,
interviews for all study groups took place during the summer of 1998,
the same time in which the refugee youth were interviewed. The sample of
Canadian-born and immigrant-born youth resides in Alberta, so that the
sample is compatible to the second study. (2)
The second study, The Resettlement of Refugees to Alberta (RRA),
was conducted for Citizenship and Immigration Canada in the same year by
researchers at the Prairie Centre of Excellence for Research on
Immigration and Integration (Abu-Laban et al. 1999). Structured
interviews with 128 refugee youth aged 15-24, were conducted in seven
urban centers in Alberta from July through October 1998. Their data are
linked to information gathered from 123 of their parents. The refugees
arrived in Canada either as convention refugees or as designated
refugees. All the refugee youth in this study were permanent residents
at the time of the interview. Like their Canadian-born and
immigrant-born counterparts, most refugee youth live in the major urban
areas with 34 percent living in Calgary, 20 percent living in Edmonton,
10 percent living in Vancouver, (3) and the remainder living in
medium-sized urban centers elsewhere in Alberta.
Citizenship and Immigration Canada, the federal department in
charge of immigration and refugees, provided a sampling frame consisting
of 5,208 refugees landing in Alberta between 1992 and 1997. (4) From
this frame, a systematic random sample was selected. Given the number of
identical or similar survey questions, and the overlapping time frame,
SLID and RRA studies are ideal for compiling a portrait of the initial
labor market experiences of Canadian-born, immigrant-born, and
refugee-born youth in Canada.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE
There were 3,929 Canadian-born youth identified in the SLID data
set, with 46.8 percent between the ages of 15 and 19 years and 53.2
percent aged 20-24 years. There were nearly equal numbers of males and
females (50.3 percent and 49.7 percent, respectively). This survey
excluded the < 1 percent of all youth who failed to provide
information about their job experiences. Almost 11 percent of the
Canadian-born were visible minorities.
Of the respondents in the 1998 SLID data file, 276 were immigrants.
The immigrant youth were slightly older than the Canadian-born and
refugee-born youth. Just over 40 percent were aged 15-19 while 59.6
percent were aged 20-24. It is predicted that the employment rate of the
young adults will be greater than the employment rate for younger
teenagers. Among the immigrant youth, 49 percent were female and 51
percent were male and originate from countries around the world.
The distribution of the youth in the RRA study is very similar.
Fifty-two percent of the refugee youth were male, while 48 percent were
female. They originated from various countries including El Salvador,
Guatemala, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Vietnam, Poland, the
former Yugoslavia, Zaire, (5) and Somalia, countries that sent the
largest proportion of refugees to Canada between 1992 and 1997. The
integration experiences of these youth are unique from immigrant youths;
some have spent time in refugee camps, some have arrived in Canada with
a parent or without parents. Others could speak English before their
arrival giving them an advantage over those who could not. Just over 50
percent were aged 15-19 during the summer of 1998, while 49 percent were
aged 20-24.
Operationalization of the Model
The model is comprised of a number of different variables
identified from the school-to-work transitions and the integration
literature. The idea is to identify the variables that most influence
employment and to create a new model to adequately describe the labor
market experiences of immigrant-born and refugee-born youth. If it is
found that the school-to-work transitions variables best describe their
experiences, then it should be considered a useful model in their future
research. If the integration variables (mainstream adaptation and/or
underclass absorption) have a greater influence on employment, then
researchers are encouraged to use these as a basis for designing future
research. Alternatively, it could be found that neither literature
accurately predicts the factors influencing the employment success of
immigrant and refugee youth. In this case, we must reconsider this
literature and perhaps design alternative models of integration specific
to these youth rather than trying to force inappropriate models on the
understanding of employment.
The main dependent variable is the binary variable,
"employed." It is comprised of respondents who are employed
part-time or full-time (r = 1) or who are unemployed (6) (r = 0).
Because the interviews of the refugees took place in the summer of 1998,
the data from the respondents of SLID was adjusted accordingly.
Respondents were considered employed if they were working anytime
between May and August 1998. This may slightly overestimate the
employment rate because summer is a time when more youth have jobs as
they are free from many educational commitments. However, this was the
only way to ensure equality between the samples.
The independent variables can be separated according to whether or
not they are derived from the school-to-work or integration literatures.
Variables informed by the school-to-work transitions literature include
education attendance (were a student in 1998), total years of schooling
(continuous), parents' education (university educated), and living
with parents. These include sex, marital status, and health status.
There are a number of variables in this model that are derived from the
integration literature. These include mother tongue (or months of ESL),
visible minority status, African region of origin, Central/South
American region of origin, and Asia/Middle Eastern region of origin,
years in Canada, refugee camp experience, sponsorship status, and
urban/rural residence. These are indictors of discrimination, in varying
degrees. Other variables included in this analysis are individual
ascribed factors. Table A1 illustrates the construction of each
variable.
Logistic regression is used to examine the factors influencing the
employment experiences of immigrant-born, refugee-born, and
Canadian-born youth. It is a good model of analysis because the
dependent variable is binary. Variables with values lower than one
decrease the probability of being employed. Variables with values higher
than one increase the probability of being employed.
RESULTS
A tri-variate cross-tabulation of the dependent variable employed
by gender and immigrant status reveals important details (Table 1).
Overall, Canadian-born and immigrant-born youth had higher rates of
employment than refugee-youth, a finding similar to other Canadian
studies (see Seat 2004). For males, 72.4 percent of Canadian-born and
79.5 percent of immigrant-born were employed in the summer of 1998,
versus only 65.7 percent of refugee males. For females, 77.2 percent of
Canadian-born and 87.7 percent of immigrant-born were employed during
that time, versus only 45.9 percent of refugee-born females. The gender
differences are statistically significant for Canadian-born and
refugee-born youth. These differences in employment are not surprising
because all the refugee youth would have been in Canada for 5 years or
less, while the Canadian-born would have grown up in Canada and many of
the immigrant-born youth have been in Canada longer than 5 years.
The school-to-work transitions literature makes an important
distinction between young teens and young adults (Table 2). Youth aged
15-19 years are less likely to be active in the labor market as a
majority are in secondary education, while those aged 20-24 are more
likely to participate given that some are finished their education
and/or must use employment to finance their postsecondary studies. The
results from the present analysis should be interpreted with some
caution as the data on immigrant-born youth from SLID have been removed
due to confidentiality concerns. Among Canadian-born youth, youth aged
15-19 years are slightly more likely (79 percent) to be working than
those aged 20-24 years (73 percent). These employment rates are still
higher than for comparatively aged refugee youth. Among refugees aged
15-19, only 43 percent are employed, while 70 percent of those aged
20-24 years were employed. It appears that the prediction that older
youth are more likely to be employed holds only for refugee youth,
though their employment rates are much lower overall.
The next part of the analysis examines the influence of various
school-to-work transitions variables and integration/immigration
variables in order to construct a model that reasonably predicts the
factors influencing the employment chances of immigrant-born and
refugee-born youth, using Canadian-born youth for comparison purposes.
The model is run three times, once with all respondents (regardless of
gender or age) in SLID, once by immigrant status (Canadian-born,
immigrant-born, and refugee-born), and once by age group (15-19 years
old and 20-24 years old) as the school-to-work transitions literature
indicates that the early employment experiences differ by these groups.
Unfortunately, due to the small immigrant-born sample in the SLID and
the refugee-born sample in the RRA, separate models controlling for age
and gender simultaneously were not possible. This is a criticism that
this project cannot address, but can be considered in future research,
with larger samples of both immigrant and refugee youth.
In the basic model, the following variables were considered: (7)
sex, marital status, health status, student in 1998, years of schooling
received outside of Canada, parents' education, mother tongue, and
visible minority status (Table 3). Using logistic regression, the
following comparisons of the employment statuses of Canadian-born,
immigrant-born, and refugee-born youth can be made.
For Canadian-born youth, all variables in the model were
statistically significant except parents' education. The model
reveals that females, older youth, those who are married, have good
health, those who are students, bilingual and are members of visible
minority groups are more likely to be employed. Variables with the
greatest influence on employment are being a student in 1998 and a
member of a visible minority group. Students are nearly four times as
likely as nonstudents to be employed, while members of visible minority
groups are 1.7 times more likely to be employed. Another finding of note
is that bilingual youth, those whose mother tongue is not English, were
50 percent more likely to be employed, perhaps recognition of their dual
or multiple language ability.
For immigrant youth, the model does not fit as well. Results
indicate that only two variables from the school-to-work transitions
literature are statistically significant: being a student in 1998 and
having university-educated parents. Students are 21.5 times more likely
to be employed than nonstudents, a startling finding. This could be
indicative of two things. One, that immigrant students are more likely
to have to personally finance their own education due to their
family's economic situation, or perhaps they are less likely to be
eligible for student loans. Immigrant youth with university-educated
parents are less likely to be employed. This could be an indication that
these youth do not work because of their parents' stronger economic
standing, because of their parents' wish that they concentrate on
their studies, or because the students themselves do not wish to work.
This is not an unusual finding as some parents come to Canada to give
their children a "better life" and would not want their
child's academic success to be jeopardized by outside economic
endeavors. Regardless of the reasoning, the other variables such as
visible minority status and mother tongue, variables that were predicted
in the literature to negatively affect employment status, did not have
any statistically significant effect.
The model fit for refugee youth was not much better. Only two
variables were statistically significant: sex and years of schooling
obtained outside Canada. Refugee males were nearly three times more
likely than refugee females to be working--a finding that is rather
expected from the school-to-work transitions literature. Those who had
more years of education outside of Canada were 1.4 times more likely to
be working than those with fewer years of schooling outside Canada. (8)
These findings at this point are rather lackluster. Basically, we
can say that the integrated school-to-work and immigration models do not
help explain the variation in employment experiences of immigrant and
refugee youth. Unfortunately, this is where the analysis of the SLID
must end as the sample size was either too small for the immigrants or
the variables needed to investigate the integration model were not
available in the Statistics Canada master data file. However, the RRA
data set allows a more in-depth examination of the factors influencing
employment due to the availability of other questions in this data set.
The next part of the analysis examines the refugee youth in more detail.
This model allows for more detailed examination of both the
school-to-work transitions variables along with the
immigration/integration factors.
A MORE DETAILED MODEL FOR REFUGEE YOUTH
Males, nonstudents, those with more years of education, but fewer
years in Canada and those from regions other than Africa are more likely
to find work in Canada. Males are two times more likely to find
employment than females and likelihood of employment increases by 1.5
times for every year of education attained. When the model is separated
by gender, the findings are more significant.
The model works fairly well in describing the employment
opportunities of refugee males but not for females. For males,
nonstudents, those more educated, not living with their parents, who
have been government sponsored, having fewer months of ESL training, and
are from Asia/Middle East region are more likely to be working. In fact,
males from Asia/Middle East are 16 times more likely to find employment
than males from elsewhere. Males who are government sponsored to Canada
are also more likely to find work. The implications of these findings
are discussed in the next section.
For females, the model does not work well. In fact, only one
variable, years of education, had a statistically significant impact.
Each year of additional schooling increases their chance of employment
by 1.7 times. The indication from this analysis is that the model needs
to be greatly adjusted in order to come to any understanding of the
employment experiences of refugee females.
DISCUSSION
As the results indicate, the combined school-to-work transitions
and integration model is a better fit for Canadian-born youth than for
immigrant or refugee youth. This is probably due to the fact that the
models have been designed and tested on Canadian- (and American-) born
youth over a long period of time. At a superficial level, these findings
support calls to design less ethnocentric models to understand the labor
market transitions of immigrant and refugee youth. It is clear from this
analysis that influences such as time in Canada, region of origin, mode
of sponsorship, and ESL training indicate that youth transitions can
vary significantly. It confirms the idea that there are real differences
between immigrant and refugee youth and these should be considered in
any research on newcomers. The fact that many of the integration
variables do not predict the employment of immigrant and refugee youth
is also an indication that this model needs to be redesigned to
accommodate the experiences of youth rather than adults.
Even though the results are disappointing, the findings do provide
some insights into the labor market experiences of immigrant-born and
refugee-born youth. As the bivariate results indicate, although
immigrant youth have the highest employment rates, their unemployment
rates are nearly twice as high as the national average. Obviously, the
factors that influence the employment of immigrant and refugee youth are
different from those influencing Canadian-born youth. For immigrants,
only two variables from the school-to-work transitions literature, being
a student and parents' education, have a statistically significant
influence on employment. The fact that immigrant students are more
likely to be working could be indicative of several things. First,
immigrant youth may be more inclined to combine employment with
education to finance their schooling or assist their newly arrived
families. If this is due to personality traits or economic circumstance,
it cannot be determined from this analysis and warrants further
investigation. Second, the results may be indicative of difficulty
accessing postsecondary educational funding. Again, this ascertain
cannot be tested with the existing data but is an alternative
understanding of the situation faced by many immigrant youth.
For refugee youth, the results are equally disappointing. As a
group, they experience the highest rates of unemployment. Some of this
is mediated by the fact that none of the refugees in this study have
been in Canada longer than 5 years. However, the fact that nearly
one-third of those aged 20-24 years are unemployed is a cause of
concern. In terms of model-fit, in the initial analysis, only sex and
years of schooling in Canada have a statistically significant impact.
When a separate model for males and females is constructed, the
variations are only explained for refugee males. Obviously this means
that we must reconfigure our models of employment for all females,
regardless of their immigrant or refugee status. There may be forces
outside of our models that also influence the employment prospects of
refugee women. In particular, parents' unwillingness to allow their
children to work may also negatively influence the employment rate of
some refugee women. The findings for refugee males, however, indicate
that a combination of school-to-work transitions and integration models
could be useful in studying their employment prospects.
Are the labor market experiences of immigrant and refugee youth
similar to Canadian-born youth? In terms of unemployment rates, their
experiences are relatively similar. All three groups experience high
rates of unemployment. However, the models differ in their explanatory power. The initial model explains employment for Canadian-born youth
best and a revised model is needed to understand the labor market
experiences of refugees--but only fits males.
The finding that all students, regardless of immigrant status, are
more likely to be working than going to school is troubling. It suggests
that poor funding for postsecondary educational training may be
underlying the need for students to work to support their educational
endeavors. Until recently, access to student loans for asylum seekers
was not permitted due to their unstable resident status. A new program
launched in late 2003 would allow some asylum seekers to gain access to
some student loans while their applications for refugee status are
considered. This would alleviate some of the inconsistencies in
accessing postsecondary loans, but is not a solution for all. Many of
these students, regardless of immigrant or refugee status, are working
more than 30 hours per week. While some outside employment is beneficial
in teaching young people how to manage and organize their time, there
comes a point when work becomes distracting and begins to impede on
academic performance. In other words, students must work their way
through vocational training or university in order to make ends meet and
too much work may negatively affect their studies and in some cases, may
prevent students from completing their courses.
Several policy considerations can be drawn from these results. It
is clear that targeted youth employment strategies are still required
given the high rate of unemployment among all youth regardless of
immigrant status. However, it may be useful to target some funds or
locate some programs specifically for immigrant and refugee youth given
that the factors influencing their employment differ largely from the
Canadian-born. While many of the programs offered by the Canadian
government may be equally open to all youth, regardless of whether they
are immigrants or refugees, the programs may be inaccessible to
immigrant and refugee youth for various reasons. First, some of these
programs provide only transient or temporary employment such as the
youth employment offices that operate only in the summer. Second, many
of these programs lack a training or apprenticeship component that may
be useful for introduction to the labor market. Research from the United
States indicates that apprenticeship programs targeting newcomer youth
provide their participants good labor market success (Lucas n.d.).
Third, other studies have found that the more information immigrant and
refugee parents are provided, the more likely their children are to be
successful in both the labor market and educational endeavors (Lucas
n.d.). Similar policies could be followed and reviewed in Canada in
regards to their efficacy in helping immigrant and refugee youth adjust.
Finally, immigrant and refugee youth may feel reluctant to register for
these programs given that they are a "one size fits all"
approach, which may not take into account some of their basic needs such
as vocationally targeted language training. Programs such as these may
go a long way in helping address some of their issues related to
unemployment. For immigrants and refugees, the program may also provide
them the "Canadian" experience they needed to find other jobs.
Another approach has been suggested for helping youth enter the
labor market. In research involving Canadian-born youth, early results
suggest that financial investment and services directed at families
rather than youth individually, increases the chances of successful
entry of youth into the labor market (see McDaniel 1998). The idea
behind these programs is that healthy family units are important in
stabilizing the central aspects of these youths' lives and may
enable them to make a more seamless transition to the labor market.
Research into the resettlement of immigrants and refugees finds similar
results. Zhou and Bankston (2000) in their studies of Vietnamese youth
in the United States find that youth are more likely to excel in school
and in their early labor market endeavors if their families are given
support (both financial and social) from their communities. As a result,
programs that focus on the successful integration of the family tend to
have successfully integrated and well-adjusted children (Tomanovic
1994).
CONCLUSION
As a result of somewhat small sample sizes and some incompatibility in the two data sets, this research leaves more questions than answers.
Clearly this paper shows the need for more research on employment
patterns of immigrant and refugee youth given the problem of small
sample sizes for these two groups and the paucity of research focusing
exclusively on these groups.
The revised model did not fit well for refugee females but was
reasonably successful for predicting the employment of refugee males.
This means that we must rethink our analytical models to better
understand the characteristics of successful employment, especially for
immigrant-born youth and refugee females.
Hence unfortunately the perennial conclusion that more research
applies. Any student of immigration studies or ethnic relations will
know that in some regards, this model needs to be refined. Owing to limitations with sample size and the utilization of an ethnocentric
model design guided by the school-to-work transitions literature, we
were forced to amalgamate groups of people into seemingly
"homogenous" categories who clearly did not have similar
histories, social class, et cetera. For this reason, we cannot
adequately interpret the "meaning" behind some of the figures,
for example, the finding that refugees from Southeast Asia and the
Middle East are 16 times more likely to find employment than other
groups when this "category" contains youth from a diverse
array of countries including Vietnam, Mainland China, Hong Kong,
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Azerbaijan. Because of this, we cannot
make substantive claims about any group without a larger sample, hence
the need for more research. We do not know why, in a climate that is
considerably discriminatory toward Asian and African workers, the
employment rate for young males is significantly higher than for other
males. One way to obtain this answer is to conduct qualitative
interviews with immigrant-born and refugee-born youth so that
differences and experiences can be explored in greater detail. I leave
this for future study.
One final aspect must be highlighted. Much of the research on
immigrant and refugee youth in Canada focuses on problems concerning
their mental health in terms of adjusting to a new society, difficulties
in education which focus on low performance, and language acquisition
problems. This provides a skewed and largely negative portrayal of their
lives. Despite these negative portrayals, many of these researchers
conclude that newcomer youth are more successful than their parents (see
Tsui and Sammons 1988; Hagan et al. 1996; Isajiw 1999). The results of
this research indicate this is clearly not the case. Their success,
however, is not guaranteed, these results clearly indicate. More
research into these issues will dispel the myths that newcomer youth are
just like Canadian-born youth and are more likely to be successful than
their parents.
APPENDIX A
Table A1
Description of Variables
Variable name Variable description
Individual characteristics
Sex 1 = male, 0 = female
Marital status 1 = married
0 = not married
Health status Five-point Likert (1 =poor,
5 =very good)
School-to-work transitions features
Age/student cross-product Continuous
Years of schooling Continuous
Parents' education 1 = one or both parent
university educated
0 = neither
Living with parents 1 =yes, 0 = no
Integration/immigration features
Mother tongue 1 = English
0 = not English
Months of ESL Continuous
Visible minority status 1 =yes, 0 = no
African/Middle East origin 1 =yes, 0 = no
Central/South American 1 =yes, 0 = no
origin
Years in Canada Continuous
Refugee camp experience 1 =yes; O=no
Sponsorship status 1 = government
0 = private
Urban/rural residence 1 = urban, 0 = rural
Variable name Data set
Individual characteristics
Sex Both
Marital status SLID only
Health status Both
School-to-work transitions features
Age/student cross-product Both
Years of schooling Both
Parents' education Both
Living with parents Both
Integration/immigration features
Mother tongue SLID only
Months of ESL RRA only
Visible minority status Both
African/Middle East origin RRA only
Central/South American RRA only
origin
Years in Canada RRA only
Refugee camp experience RRA only
Sponsorship status RRA only
Urban/rural residence RRA only
APPENDIX B
Table B1
Weighted Correlation Matrix for Canadian Youth
Marital
Sex Age status
Sex 1.000
Age .007 1.000
Marital status -.061 .297 1.000
Health status .079 -.089 -.061
Student in 1998 -.024 -.142 -.289
Parents' education -.024 -.023 -.078
Years of schooling .002 .573 .033
Visible minority status -.009 .005 -.075
Health Student Parents'
status in 1998 education
Sex
Age
Marital status
Health status 1.000
Student in 1998 .172 1.000
Parents' education .092 .150 1.000
Years of schooling .061 .284 .018
Visible minority status .009 .078 .044
Years of Visible
schooling minority
Sex
Age
Marital status
Health status
Student in 1998
Parents' education
Years of schooling 1.000
Visible minority status .037 1.000
APPENDIX C
Table C1
Weighted Correlation Matrix for Immigrant Youth
Marital Health
Sex Age status status
Sex 1.000
Age -.046 1.000
Marital status -.177 .318 1.000
Health status .190 -.052 -.052 1.000
Student in 1998 .086 -.140 -.363 .074
Parents' education .043 -.123 -.133 .209
Years of schooling .007 .193 .018 .004
Mother tongue -.023 -.078 -.004 .017
Visible minority status -.032 -.007 -.023 -.170
Student Parents' Years of Mother
in 1998 education schooling tongue
Sex
Age
Marital status
Health status
Student in 1998 1.000
Parents' education .282 1.000
Years of schooling .179 -.022 1.000
Mother tongue .063 .214 -.221 1.000
Visible minority status -.062 -.210 .064 -.286
Visible
minority
Sex
Age
Marital status
Health status
Student in 1998
Parents' education
Years of schooling
Mother tongue
Visible minority status 1.000
APPENDIX D
Table D1
Weighted Correlation Matrix for Refugee Youth
Marital Health Student
Sex status status age/c.p.
Sex 1.000
Marital status -.285 1.000
Health .000 -.109 1.000
Student/age -.278 -.278 .039 1.000
xprod.
Parents' -.062 -.104 .048 .069
education
Years of -.121 -.007 -.149 .141
schooling
Live with -.018 -.447 .023 .355
parents
Refugee camp .016 .152 -.022 -.051
Years in -.130 -.130 -.149 .212
Canada
Sponsorship .020 .071 .258 .019
status
Months in ESL .079 -.094 .072 .103
C/S American .212 -.096 .061 -.091
region
Asia/Middle .048 .048 -.306 .021
East region
Africa region -.130 .165 -.024 -.135
Years Live
Parents' of with Refugee
education school parents camp
Sex
Marital status
Health
Student/age
xprod.
Parents' 1.000
education
Years of .085 1.000
schooling
Live with .167 .050 1.000
parents
Refugee camp -.287 -.008 -.082 1.000
Years in -.132 .090 .095 -.094
Canada
Sponsorship -.250 .090 -.105 .191
status
Months in ESL -.148 -.214 -.009 .040
C/S American -.027 -.079 -.166 -.315
region
Asia/Middle -.093 -.099 .030 .036
East region
Africa region -.101 -.087 -.158 .286
Years
in Sponsor Months C/S
Canada status ESL America
Sex
Marital status
Health
Student/age
xprod.
Parents'
education
Years of
schooling
Live with
parents
Refugee camp
Years in 1.000
Canada
Sponsorship -.133 1.000
status
Months in ESL .212 .184 1.000
C/S American .365 .058 .365 1.000
region
Asia/Middle .066 -.372 .024 -.245
East region
Africa region -.243 .207 .057 -.129
Asia/ME Africa
region region
Sex
Marital status
Health
Student/age
xprod.
Parents'
education
Years of
schooling
Live with
parents
Refugee camp
Years in
Canada
Sponsorship
status
Months in ESL
C/S American
region
Asia/Middle 1.000
East region
Africa region -.161 1.000
REFERENCES
Abu-Laban, Baha, Tracey Derwing, Harvey Krahn, Marlene Mulder, and
Lori Wilkinson. 1999. The Resettlement of Refugees in Alberta,
1992-1997. Edmonton: Prairie Centre of Excellence for Research on
Immigration and Integration and the Population Research Laboratory,
University of Alberta.
Ahearn, F.L. and J.L. Athey. 1991. "The Mental Health of
Refugee Children: An Overview." Pp. 3-19 in Refugee Children:
Theory Research and Services, edited by F. Ahearn and J. Athey.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ahearn, Fred, Maryanne Loughry, and Alastair Ager. 1999. "The
Experience of Refugee Children." Pp. 215-36 in Refugees:
Perspectives on the Experience of Forced Migration, edited by Alastair
Ager. London and New York: Pinter.
Alba, R. and V. Nee. 2003. Remaking the American Mainstream:
Assimilation and Contemporary Immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Betcherman, Gordon and Norm Lekie. 1997. "Youth Employment and
Education Trends in the 1980s and 1990s." Working Paper No. W-03,
Canadian Policy Research Networks, Ottawa.
Bellamy, Lesley Andres. 1993. "Life Trajectories, Action and
Negotiating the Transition from High School." Pp. 137-57 in
Transitions: Schooling and Employment in Canada, edited by Paul Anisef
and Paul Axelrod. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.
Boyd, Monica and Elizabeth Grieco. 1998. "Triumphant
Transitions: Socioeconomic Achievements of the Second Generation in
Canada." International Migration Review 32:853-76.
Chow, H. 2000. "The Determinants of Academic Performance: Hong
Kong Immigrant Students in Canadian Schools." Canadian Ethnic
Studies 32:105-10.
Chretien, Jean. 2003. "Immigration and Multiculturalism:
Lessons from Canada." Progressive Politics 2:22-9.
Coeyman, M. 1999. "New Home, New School." Christian
Science Monitor 91:14-20.
Derwing, Tracey, Emily Decorby, J. Ichikawa, and K. Jamieson. 1999.
"Some Factors that Affect the Success of ESL High School
Students." Canadian Modern Language Review 55:531-47.
Driscoll, A. 1999. "Risk of High School Dropout among
Immigrant and Native Hispanic Youth." International Migration
Review 33:857-75.
Feagin, Joe R. and Clairece Booher Feagin. 1998. "Theoretical
Perspectives in Race and Ethnic Relations." Pp. 29-48 in Race and
Ethnic Conflict: Contending Views on Prejudice, Discrimination and
Ethnoviolence, edited by Fred L. Pincus and Howard Ehrlich. San
Francisco, CA: Westview Press.
Foner, N. 2000. From Ellis Island to JFK: New York's Two Great
Waves of Immigration. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Gabor, Peter, Steven Thibodeau, and Santanita Manychief. 1996.
"Taking Flight? The Transition Experience of Native Youth."
Pp. 79-89 in Youth in Transition: Perspectives on Research and Policy,
edited by Burt Galaway and Joe Hudson. Toronto: Thompson Educational
Publishing.
Gans, H. 1992. "Second Generation Decline: Scenarios for the
Economic and Ethnic Futures of the Post 1965 American Immigrants."
Ethnic and Racial Studies 15:173-92.
Geller, Gloria. 1996. "Educational, Occupational and Family
Aspirations of Women, A Longitudinal Study." Pp. 107-17 in Youth in
Transition: Perspectives on Research and Policy, edited by Butt Galaway
and Joe Hudson. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishers.
Hagan, John, Ross Macmillan, and Blair Wheaton. 1996. "New Kid
in Town: Social Capital and the Life Course Effects of Family Migration
on Children." American Sociological Review 61:368-85.
Heinz, Walter R. 1996. "Youth Transitions in Cross-Cultural
Perspective: School to Work in Germany." Pp. 2-13 in Youth in
Transition: Perspectives on Research and Policy, edited by Burt Galaway
and Joe Hudson. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.
Henkin, A. and T. Liem. 1984. "Development of Self-Concept
among Indochinese Refugee Students." International Review of Modern
Sociology 14:23-34.
Hodes, M. 1998. "Refugee Children May Need a Lot of
Psychiatric Help." British Medical Journal 316:793-5.
Hughes, Karen and Graham Lowe. 1993. "Unequal Returns: Gender
Differences in Initial Employment among University Graduates."
Canadian Journal of Higher Education 23:37-55.
Ima, K. and R. Rumbaut. 1989. "Southeast Asian Refugees in
American Schools: A Comparison of Fluent English-Proficient and
Limited-English-Proficient Students." Topics in Language Disorders
9:54-75.
Irwin, Sarah. 1996. Rights of Passage: Social Change and the
Transition from Youth to Adulthood. London: UCL Press.
Isajiw, Wsevolod. 1999. Understanding Diversity: Ethnicity and Race
in the Canadian Context. Toronto: Thomson Educational Press.
James, Carl E. 1993. "Getting There and Staying There:
Blacks' Employment Experience." Pp. 3-20 in Schooling and
Employment in Canada, edited by Paul Anisef and Paul Axelrod. Toronto:
Thompson Educational Publishing.
Jansen, C., D. Plaza, and C. James. 2004. "Upward Mobility among Second Generation Caribbean Living in Toronto." CERIS Working
Paper Series, Toronto.
Jasinskaja-Lahiti, I. and K. Liebkind. 2000. "Predictors of
the Actual Degree of Acculturation of Russian-Speaking Immigrant
Adolescents in Finland." International Journal of Intercultural
Relations 24:503-18.
Li, Peter S. 1996. Post War Canada. Toronto: Oxford University
Press.
Lucas, Tamara. N.d. "Promoting Secondary School Transitions
for Immigrant Adolescents." Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Centre for
Applied Linguistics.
MacLeod, Jay. 1995. Ain't No Makin' It: Aspirations and
Attainment in a Low-Income Neighborhood. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
McDaniel, Susan A. 1998. "Intergenerational Equity: Policy and
Data Implications." Pp. 171-5 in Labour Markets, Social
Institutions and the Future of Canada's Children, edited by Miles
Corak. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
Perlmann, J. and R. Waldinger. 1996. "Second Generation
Decline? Children of Immigrants, Past and Present-A
Reconsideration." International Migration Review 31:893-922.
Perron, Jacques. 1996. "Ethnicity and Educational Aspirations
of High School Students." Pp. 127-34 in Youth in Transition:
Perspectives on Research and Policy, edited by Burt Galaway and Joe
Hudson. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishers.
Quigley, Denise. 1996. "Native and Immigrant School-to-Work
Transitions: Refocusing Policy Concerns." Ph.D. dissertation, The
RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, CA.
Rousseau, C., A. Drapeau and E. Corin. 1996. "School
Performance and Emotional Problems in Refugee Children." American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry 6:239-51.
Rumbaut, Ruben G. 1992. "The Adaptation of Southeast Asian
Refugee Youth: A Comparative Perspective." Paper presented at the
Refugee Studies Centre, March 5, 2004.
Schissel, Bernard. 1998. Blaming Children: Youth, Media and Moral
Panics. Halifax: Fernwood.
Seat, Ratko. 2004. "Factors Affecting the Settlement and
Adaptation Process of Canadian Adolescent Newcomers 16-19 Years of
Age." CERIS Working Paper Series, Toronto.
Shields, J., K. Rahi, and A. Scholtz. 2006. "Voices from the
Margins: Visible Minority Immigrant and Refugee Youth Experience with
Employment Exclusion in Toronto." CERIS Working Paper Series,
Toronto.
Statistics Canada. 2002. Survey on Labour and Income Dynamics,
Master Data File. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
Statistics Canada. 2003a. The 2001 Census of Canada. Ottawa:
Statistics Canada.
Statistics Canada. 2003b. Annual Labour Force Survey Statistics.
Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services.
Tobin, Joseph Jay and Joan Friedman. 1984. "Intercultural and
Developmental Stresses Confronting Southeast Asian Refugee
Adolescents." Journal of Operational Psychiatry 15:39-45.
Tomanovic, Smiljka. 1994. "Socialization of' the Child
under Conditions of a Changed Everyday Life of the Family."
Sociolgija 36:483-93.
Tsui, Alice M. and Morgan T. Sammons. 1988. "Group
Intervention with Adolescent Vietnamese Refugees." Journal for
Specialists in Group Work 13:90-5.
Waters, M.C. and T.R. Jimenez. 2005. "Assessing Immigrant
Assimilation: New Empirical and Theoretical Challenges." Annual
Review of Sociology 31:105-25.
Watt, D. and H. Roessingh. 1994. "ESL Dropout: The Myth of
Educational Equality." Alberta Journal of Educational Research
3:283-96.
Wilkinson, Lori. 2001. "The Integration of Refugee Youth in
Canada." Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of
Alberta, Alberta, Canada.
Zhou, Min and Carl L. Bankston III. 2000. Straddling Two Social
Worlds: The Experience of Vietnamese Refugee Children in the United
States. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse.
(1.) Labor market information was not available for approximately 1
percent of all youth in the SLID 1998 sample, so they were excluded from
the study.
(2.) It was not possible to release the data on city of residence
for Canadian- and immigrant-born youth in the SLID sample given concerns
over confidentiality. The city of residence distribution is relatively
similar to that reported for the RRA study.
(3.) Some families had moved in the 3 months between the time they
were identified and contacted for the interview. We had an opportunity
to track and interview these families, which we did. One of the major
objectives of the study was to track the secondary migration of refugee
families destined to Alberta.
(4.) Refugee claimants, dependents sponsored by family members, and
refugees without available addresses were not included in the sample
frame.
(5.) Known now as the Democratic Republic of Congo,
"Zaire" is used throughout this paper as this is the
self-reported label given by the respondents to the survey.
(6.) Not being "active in the labor force" is very
different from being employed or unemployed. Very few immigrant,
refugee, and Canadian-born youth reported that they were not looking for
employment and were thus excluded from the analysis.
(7.) Note that the variables entered were the same for both the
SLID and RRA data sets. Owing to differences across both surveys, it was
not possible to compare other important variables influencing employment
experiences. However, a fuller model addresses this problem in the
refugee sample in Table 5.
(8.) It should be noted that age and years of schooling outside
Canada are not correlated for refugee youth. Furthermore, all refugees
in the RRA sample reported having at least some education before their
arrival to Canada.
LORI WILKINSON University of Manitoba
Lori Wilkinson, Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba,
331 Isbister Building, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3T 2N2. E-mail:
[email protected]. Funding from the Prairie Centre of
Excellence for Research on Immigration and Integration made this work
possible. The Research Data Centre of Statistics Canada provided
invaluable advice relating to the statistical analysis and access to the
confidential data from the 1998 Survey on Labour and Income Dynamics.
All errors and omissions are the responsibility of the author. Parts of
the research and analysis are based on confidential microdata received
from Statistics Canada and the opinions expressed do not represent the
views of Statistics Canada.
Table 1
Employment Status by Gender and Immigration
Status, 1998
Canadian-born youth
Males Females
N % N %
Employed 1,513 72.4 1,421 77.2
Unemployed 576 27.6 419 22.8
Total 2,089 100.0 1,840 100.0
Immigrant-born youth
Males Females
N % N %
Employed 116 79.5 114 87.7
Unemployed 30 20.5 16 12.3
Total 146 100.0 130 100.0
Refugee-born youth
Males Females
N % N %
Employed 44 65.7 28 45.9
Unemployed 23 34.3 33 54.1
Total 67 100.0 61 100.0
Note: Chi-square is significant at p < .01 for Canadian-born youth
and p<.05 for refugee youth.
Sources: Statistics Canada (1998) Survey on Labour and Income
Dynamics, special tabulations, microdata file. Ottawa: Minister of
Public Works and Government Services; Abu-Laban et al. (1999) The
Resettlement of Refugees to Alberta Study. Edmonton and Ottawa:
Prairie Centre of Excellence for Research on Immigration and
Integration and Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Edmonton
Office.
Table 2
Employment Status by Age Group and
Immigration Status, 1998
Canadian-born youth
Ages 15-19 years Ages 20-24 years
N %n N %n
Employed 891 79.2 2,043 72.8
Unemployed 234 20.8 762 27.2
Total 1,125 100.0 2,805 100.0
Immigrant-born youth
Ages 15-19 years Ages 20-24 years
N %n N %
Employed 68 N/A 162 N/A
Unemployed N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total N/A 100.0 162 N/A
Refugee-born youth
Ages 15-19 years Ages 20-24 years
N % N
Employed 28 43.1 44 69.8
Unemployed 37 56.9 19 30.2
Total 65 100.0 63 100.0
Note: Chi-square is significant at p<.01 for Canadian-born youth
and p<.05 for refugee youth.
Sources: Statistics Canada (1998) Survey on Labour and Income
Dynamics, special tabulations, microdata file. Ottawa: Minister of
Public Works and Government Services; Abu-Laban et al. (1999) The
Resettlement of Refugees to Alberta Study. Edmonton and Ottawa:
Prairie Centre of Excellence for Research on Immigration and
Integration and Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Edmonton
Office.
Table 3
Basic SWT/Integration Model, Canadian-, Immigrant-, and
Refugee-Born Youth Compared, 1998
Canadian born Immigrant born
Logged odds SE Logged odds SE
Sex .837 * .080 .439 .695
Age (a) 1.083 ** .020 1.010 .191
Marital status 1.287 * .118 1.042 .988
Health status 1.271 ** .047 1.276 .389
Student in 1998 (a) 3.995 ** .097 21.582 ** .931
Parents' Education 1.069 .039 .523 * .289
Years of schooling N/A N/A 1.064 .063
Mother tongue (b) .599 ** .196 .674 .789
Visible minority status 1.659 * .216 .329 .761
Constant .173 ** 5.336
Refugee born
Logged odds SE
Sex 2.992 ** .425
Age (a) .942 .029
Marital status .774 .676
Health status 1.158 .130
Student in 1998 (a) N/A N/A
Parents' Education .555 .428
Years of schooling 1.392 ** .104
Mother tongue (b) N/A
Visible minority status .950 .420
Constant .086
Notes:
* <.05;
** p<.01.
(a) Due to the high correlation between age and student in the RRA,
a cross-product was created for refugee youth.
(b) Because all refugee youth reported mother tongues other than
English, this variable was omitted from the analysis of refugee
youth.
Sources: Statistics Canada (1998) SLID special tabulations;
Abu-Laban et al. (1999) RRA Study.
Table 4
Revised Model: Factors Influencing the Employment
of Refugees in Canada, 1998
All refugees Females
Logged odds SE Logged odds SE
Sex 2.613 * .455 N/A
Health 1.190 .149 1.338 .269
Student/age xprod. .938 * .033 .939 .054
Years of education 1.541 ** .147 1.731 ** .214
Parents' education .510 .477 .531 .789
Live with parents .663 .654 1.959 1.033
Refugee camp 1.262 .538 1.568 .903
Years in Canada .737 .164 .710 .260
Sponsorship status 1.464 .504 .670 .815
Months in ESL .969 .025 1.010 .039
C/S American region 2.431 .804 2.657 1.667
Asia/Middle East region 1.262 .580 .374 .827
Africa region .140 * 1.002 .108 1.495
Constant .030 .001
Males
Logged odds SE
Sex N/A
Health 1.098 .26
Student/age xprod. .884 * .06
Years of education 1.899 * .293
Parents' education .399 .795
Live with parents .047 * 1.479
Refugee camp 2.570 .977
Years in Canada .660 .277
Sponsorship status 10.195 * 1.026
Months in ESL .872 ** .053
C/S American region 11.776 * 1.262
Asia/Middle East region 17.318 * 1.287
Africa region .057 2.649
Constant .643
Notes:
* p <.05;
** p <.01.
Sources: Abu-Laban et al. (1998) RRA Study.