Fee-free migration is possible

‘Malaysia NPR 400,000. Dubai, Qatar NPR 200,000-250,000.’ These are prevailing under-the-table market rates listed for Nepalis to secure overseas jobs.

Low paid workers pay high recruitment fees equivalent to months of wages, while higher paid professionals get relocation and other benefits.

Yet, ongoing research by Migration Lab and International Manpower Recruitment (IMR) with ethically hired workers shows that aspirants and their communities still regard the employer-pays recruitment model with deep skepticism and disbelief.

And why would they believe it? Even when workers pay hefty fees, it is never guaranteed that they will land the promised job, or not be stranded abroad. Jobs that require zero payment are even considered scams, with concerns about the quality of the job, wage deductions or about being duped.

Some workers do not apply for jobs at all, or are dissuaded by their families. The good news is that perceptions change.

And all it takes is one successful migrant worker in a village to change perceptions. One worker who did not have to pay recruitment fees told us: “People from my village do not believe me.” Another said: “Four or five from my village have already migrated for free, so people believe it.”

Some workers passed up job offers requiring fees, waiting instead for ethical employers from whom close friends or family members had benefited.

Because not all aspirants know about workers who did not have to pay recruitment fees, social media messaging is critical. Online testimonies from workers who got jobs through ethical channels are helpful, but are also met with skepticism because it is widely known that workers are frequently coerced by fraudulent recruiters into speaking on camera about not paying fees despite having paid significant amounts.

Ethical recruiters like IMR conduct village campaigns to screen workers. This reduces the reliance on middlemen, and broadens the understanding of how ethical recruitment drives work.

Prior to departure, IMR wins the trust of workers and creates a safe space to admit if they have paid anyone fees. Middlemen can often mislead workers to believe that they have a say in influencing interview outcomes and charge workers.

The biggest obstacle is to assure workers that admitting they have paid will not cost them their job and that the recruiter will work with concerned authorities to ensure the agent returns the money and does not harass them or their families. Although Nepal’s laws consider such subagents illegal, ‘agents’ are often family members, villagers and friends.

These practical home-grown innovations in recruitment are products of testing to address years of exploitation and distrust in the system and the labour mobility industry. They also bring a nuanced understanding of the often complex aspects of the employer-pays principle.

Research shows that when workers do not have to pay recruitment fees, it has positive impact on their productivity and well-being. Responsible recruitment also allows innovation to make migration a transformational development tool to uplift the poorest.

Ethical Examples

IMR and Migration Lab recently connected 70 youth from the Musahar community in Mahottari and survivors of the Jajarkot earthquake last year with factory jobs in Malaysia for which they did not have to pay anything.

Accessing overseas jobs, including those with high fees, is a challenge in these communities. Finding responsible recruitment opportunities is even more difficult. Good migration has the power to push families out of intergenerational poverty and discrimination as seen in the case of many migrant workers in the Diaspora Diaries series (overleaf).

For Jajarkot earthquake survivors, fee-free recruitment can also complement patchy post-disaster recovery efforts by the government. Even without an earthquake, emigration from far-flung areas like Jajarkot is complex because of financial, information and network access issues.

It takes at least two days to travel to Kathmandu, costs are high, and workers may not even pass employer interviews after all the time and money invested.

The earthquake made overseas migration even more difficult in Jajarkot, further affecting access to informal loans, yet increasing the desire to migrate. Many were ready to borrow at 60% interest, while others said they would have migrated to India, a cheaper, less-risky alternative with lower returns.

The Musahar community also faced multiple challenges including passport confiscation by middlemen for months without any job placement. Moneylenders also do not trust them to pay back, and are wary of recent restrictions on meter interest lending.

Labour middlemen are strategic about snaring the vulnerable to manipulate and cheat. There are anecdotes about them identifying the most desperate women, including those that are victims of domestic violence or extreme poverty, to send them as domestic workers through irregular channels.

New York University Professor Natasha Iskander’s research documents how companies in Qatar reported targeting candidates from regions experiencing climate breakdown because the educated but newly poor make ideal recruits as they are now willing to accept lower wages.

This narrative can be flipped by good actors through ethical interventions. Sourcing areas can be redefined: not as preying grounds for fraudulent middlemen but where responsible recruiters can reach that last mile with transformative overseas opportunities.

The Musahar and Jajarkot candidates have modest goals: paying for their children’s education, household and medical expenses, buying land, rebuilding houses, and saving to start a small business.

To be sure, migration outcomes are determined by more than just recruitment fees and it will take time to see how they fare. But the likelihood of achieving any goal is certainly higher under debt-free responsible recruitment schemes.

Beyond no costs, workers hired under ethical drives know exactly what jobs they have signed up for and employment terms from the onset, unlike traditional recruitment that is often characterised by false promises and exaggerated benefits.

Workers paying exorbitant fees for jobs will hopefully be an outdated concept one day, but for now the number of ethical recruitment drives is insignificant.

Workers interviewed said their peers paid up to Rs400,000 for comparable jobs, and they too would have been compelled to take the same route if the ethical option was not available. Repeat workers had paid up to $2,259 in fees in earlier migrations.

Highly marginalised communities need even more support to overcome information, finance and networking barriers to connect them with rewarding and safe overseas opportunities.

Systemic disadvantages in education or skills training also limit their ability to secure worthwhile jobs abroad that have wages and better labour protection but higher barriers to entry such as language or skills.

Making ethical migration accessible to the most marginalised Nepalis would have the best impact. Perhaps these issues would come to the fore if we also saw emigration as people chasing their dreams and aspirations, and not just as a compulsion “afWotf” that is entrenched in Nepal’s public narrative.

But forced immobility also merits attention. It is an unfulfilled dream for many to also take social media photos at Kathmandu airport with teary-eyed relatives before departing.

Upasana Khadka heads Migration Lab, a social enterprise aimed at making migration outcomes better for workers and their families. Labour Mobility is her fortnightly column in Nepali Times.