Mexicans in California: Transformations and Challenges

2. Working Day Labor: Informal and Contingent Employment

2. Working Day Labor Informal and Contingent Employment Abel Valenzuela Jr. Introduction A review of all articles related to day labor1 appearing in the Los Angeles Times between 1986 and 2006 overwhelmingly portrays this type of employment as unstable, illegal, underpaid, and fraught with employer abuses (Reyes, 1991; Mozingo, 1997; Rosenblatt, 1997; Aubry, 1993). Light and Roach (1996) present day laborers as part of the informal employment growth of Los Angeles, with street-corner labor markets as a form of marginal self-employment. Parker (1994:63) describes day labor as bottom rung for wage earners in pay, with no benefits and inadequate to provide workers with enough income to afford housing, thereby concluding that the majority of day laborers are homeless. In their study of Chicago’s temporary employment industry, Peck and Theodore (1998:658) describe the hiring halls and the day labor contractor as typical of the “bottom end of the temporary industry . . .” Media and academic accounts of day labor in part reflect the dramatic growth of this market, where large concentrations of recent arrivals, predominantly men, partake in this burgeoning labor exchange. Even though the growth of temporary or contingent jobs paid informally or “under the table,” or with large concentrations of unauthorized immigrants, is not adequately captured by the census and Department of Labor Statistics, other evidence suggests that in recent years, paid temporary day labor has increased (GAO, 2000; Valenzuela, 1999, Valenzuela et al., 2006). As a result of the modest academic attention to day labor and the mostly negative media coverage on this job market niche, we have little empirical evidence about this growing market, the workers who participate, and the Working Day Labor 37 employers who seek this type of labor. In fact, with the exception of a few studies (see Valenzuela, 2003, for a review of the literature), scholars have neglected to empirically investigate this urban labor market, and as a result, it remains understudied and undertheorized. Drawing on participant observation, in-depth interviews, and a survey of day laborers in metropolitan Los Angeles, I explore the utility of informal and contingent labor-market theory to explain participation in day labor. These two frameworks drive explanations for understanding participation in day labor work. I pose this question: Why, given the boom in Los Angeles’s economy and the abusive and difficult nature of day labor, would so many workers participate in this economic exchange? Using informal and contingent employment as a conceptual framework, I contextualize day labor and argue that even though this occupation is unregulated, unstable, and prone to workplace abuses, the characteristics of the day laborers, their limited job experience and skills, their development of friendships and networks, their ability to negotiate a fair wage with their employers, and the structural and other barriers to the formal market allow a sizable number to earn a modest living. As a result of these and other factors, I conclude that informalization falls short of an adequate explanation, while contingent employment, particularly when analyzed in concert with immigrant labor-market disadvantage, provides a better framework of worker participation in day labor. Empirically analyzing the unique characteristics of the day labor force and the day-to-day experiences of this occupation provides additional information on this topic and contributes to our understanding ofday labor, informality, contingentemployment , and the motivations for participating in this employment niche. Day Labor: Bottom of the Barrel? Gathering every morning in a public open-air venue to secure work is, on the face of it, a desperate attempt at employment. Day labor is unstable, the potential for employer abuse is great, and for most, securing a job is similar to winning a $75 lottery ticket; the adrenaline is high, the payoff relatively low. Serious threats at hiring sites, such as harassment from police, residents, and merchants, and the possibility of ICE (formerly the INS—Immigration and Naturalization Service) sweeps seem to always exist as a result of the market’s attraction to recent arrivals, the majority of whom are undocumented . Securing work on a street corner is frantic and can be physically dangerous, as moving cars come to a halt and men eagerly surround them, aggressively drawing attention to themselves in the hopes of being selected for a day of hard work. 38 abel valenzuela jr. For employers, hiring day labor is also not without risks. Unclear are the legal sanctions for hiring an illegal worker from the street...