To be fair, the irony of this whole notion is twofold and the
two groups must be considered separately to have any sensible
discussion (regardless of your stance on this issue). It surely is
no rocket science that one realizes skilled labour and unskilled
labour are two completely separate entities belonging to two
different worlds.
Skilled labour that is widely coveted (ie. athletes, entertainers,
senior management, professionals, executives) very often possess
certain expertise and skills which you can't find in an average
Joe. Fair enough, these people - who are incidentally also the
greatest beneficiaries of globalization - should be commensurated
competitively for the expertise they offer which is in short supply
in a labour pool. In addition, it certainly makes sense to pay them
wages befitting their skill sets. More importantly, it's certainly
not this group of foreigners whom the worldwide hordes of
anti-globalization protestors are aggrieved with.
Unskilled labour, on the other hand, very often provides a source
of labour that is widely available that the plane Janes are well
capable of undertaking. While even the most developed countries
implement legislations and policies to facilitate the hiring of
such workers, they are often limited to doing so after exhausting
its local supply of unskilled labour (as a matter of fact, most of
those from the former Eastern bloc working in the developed EU
countries are hired on short-term basis). In
addition, by enacting minimum wage legislations,
such countries often seek to deter the extensive hiring of foreign
unskilled labour to ensure that employers, even if given a choice,
see no economic sense to do so at the expense of its local
labourers. That, in essence, is the crux of the issue
surrounding the whole notion of hiring foreign unskilled labour (it
is worth noting unskilled here does not necessarily refer to
illiterates; rather, it's more a matter of whether the local labour
pool available is capable of performing the same task). Without
sensible policies in place to protect the interests of the locals,
why should any commercial entity - whose sole existence conforms
with and adheres to economic principles - increase its labour
expenses by hiring locals over their cheaper foreign counterparts?
This issue is grossly compounded by this regime through its
extensively generous legislations and policies that actually
support (instead of limit) the hiring of such cheap unskilled
labour.
There are actually some economic dissertations on such issues
suggesting models like those adopted by this regime, while
beneficial in the short term, is unsustainable in the long run.
Obviously, the fact most residents and citizens of this regime
(especially the unskilled labour force) are unaware and completely
nonchalant about issues like minimum wage or the role of active
trade unions with regard to safeguarding their interests would only
serve to further advance the interests of this fascist regime.
