The article "Why Americans Won’t Do Dirty Jobs" by Elizabeth Dwoskin
The article "Why Americans Won’t Do Dirty Jobs" was written by Elizabeth Dwoskin and published in the year 2011. In her writing, the author demonstrates an instance where the immigration law took effect. According to Dwoskin, the law was enacted to discourage foreigners from working various jobs for the Americans to take over, who in turn claim not to be interested in doing dirty jobs.
The American Reasoning
The article demonstrates the American reasoning through the Alabaman official that every job in their land belonged to them through the passage of HB56, requiring questioning and deployment of illegal as well as undocumented immigrants. Additionally, the officials implemented a law which intended to punish all the employers who defied the rules directed not to hire them. There is a justification that the outlawed job left vacant positions which were not yet filled by the unemployed American origins estimated to be more than eighteen percent. According to the author, the primary motive of introducing the immigration law was to free up the jobs stolen from the Americans as argued by the Republican governor Robert Bentley.
Americans Neglecting Dirty Work
The article provides a picture and indications of Americans neglecting dirty work. According to the author, there is no specific group identified but addresses Americans as a whole. Some of the officials are quoted saying that the immigrants took away their jobs and the implementation of the immigration law would be effective in ensuring the Americans get back their jobs. On the other hand, Dwoskin demonstrates how the Alabamans embrace dirty work and become contented with the minimum wages as well as unfavorable benefits. According to Lussier and Hendon (n.p), almost every organization offers those kinds of jobs that are considered to be dirty, but it depends on whether recruits have other options or not. Rhodes is an employer who tries to convince some of his workers to get back to work with a narrative of friendship and intentions to help. According to the author, many employers tried every means of getting back their employees due to desperation and massive losses since the law became effective.
Reasons for American Resistance
The author provides various approaches to the cause of Americans' resistance to these kinds of jobs. There is a group of employers who feel that the federal government implemented this law to free up job vacancies for recession-battered Americans from the illegal immigrants. According to Kibria, Bowman, and O'Leary (82), the dual labor theory explains that employers have a competitive advantage of hiring immigrants due to minimum pay for low-end jobs. In the case of Dwoskin, the immigrant leaves the employers with no option but to quit out of their business or else improve the level job satisfaction through provisions of good pay and favorable working conditions. On the other hand, employers view the law as unrealistic since the Alabamians are not willing to fill the liberated vacancies. The primary motive of employing foreigners is due to the unwillingness of American natives to work in such jobs claiming they were tedious and dirty for them.
Working Conditions and Pay
The author provides another notion provided by other contributors in the article. For a long time, industries in Alabama have benefited from foreign workers who are willing to work regardless of their immigration status, working conditions, and wages. Castro is one of the immigrants who crossed the border illegally and testifies that the only reason he stands such conditions is for the sake of his children. According to Dwoskin, foreign employees experience a lot of hardships while working on these farms as well as industries which might have contributed to Americans shying away from such unfavorable jobs. Smith is one of the employers who is recorded saying how his efforts in hiring Americans have been unsuccessful as many of them show up for sometimes but later quit. The author provides a clear picture of both the encounters of immigrants working in these jobs and their experiences as well as the employers testifying on the resistance of American natives to the same jobs. Dwoskin demonstrates how the two scenarios contend the argument of poor working conditions along with low pay as the reason behind the resistance of Alabamians and employers opting to hire immigrants.
Exploitation and Decent Jobs
Additionally, the author uses other contributors such as Tom Surtees who believes the employers are exploiting the immigrants to suppress the interests of reasonable Americans. In his argument, Tom justifies the resistance of Alabamians to these jobs pointing out numerous companies such as steel mills and factories which offer better pay and the majority of the workers are American natives. He fails to understand why these employees never complain of working in manual jobs which are exposed to intense and hot conditions. The main argument of the author is that Americans would consider a decent job as the one which offers substantial satisfaction through considerable pay and a healthy working environment. Maldonado is an employee who grew up in Guatemala and works as a fish processor. He claims to be satisfied with his job but the insufficient pay and long working hours are starting to demoralize him, although, with an increment of his salary, he is willing to push on, and if that doesn't happen, he will quit his job. The article provides a clear implication of low pay and harsh working conditions as the primary consideration of these jobs as dirty jobs for Americans.
Works Cited
Kibria, Nazli, et al. Race and Immigration. Polity, 2014.
Lussier, Robert N., Hendon, R. Human Resource Management: Functions, Applications, Skill Development. SAGE Publications Inc, 2013.
Dwoskin, Elizabeth. “Why Americans won’t do dirty jobs in the wake of an immigrant exodus, Alabama has jobs. Trouble is, Americans don’t want them.” Visa Journey, http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/338352-why-americans-wont-do-dirty-jobs/. Accessed 5 Feb. 2018.
