Ho nung, Ma ia; S u olino, Emanuela; Zagel, Hannah
A icle — Published Ve sion
Po e y among mig an , mixed, and non-mig an
households: he ole o non- elewo kabili y and single-
ea ne ship in Ge many
Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Ho nung, Ma ia; S u olino, Emanuela; Zagel, Hannah (2025) : Po e y among
mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households: he ole o non- elewo kabili y and single-ea ne ship
in Ge many, Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies, ISSN 1469-9451, Taylo & F ancis, London, Vol.
51, Iss. 5, pp. 1294-1321,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.2024.2404219
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/310920.2
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Po e y among mig an , mixed, and non-mig an
households: he ole o non- elewo kabili y and single-
ea ne ship in Ge many
Ma ia Ho nung
a
, Emanuela S u olino
b
and Hannah Zagel
c
a
Depa men o Social Sciences, Humbold Uni e si ä zu Be lin, Be lin, Ge many;
b
Dipa imen o di Scienze
Sociali e Poli iche, Uni e si a degli S udi di Milano, Milan, I aly;
c
Wissenscha szen um Be lin ü
Sozial o schung (WZB), Be lin, Ge many
ABSTRACT
Mig an and mixed households ha e highe po e y han non-
mig an households. This is pa ly because single-ea ne wo-
adul households a e mo e p e alen in mig an and mixed
households and because such households ha e di e en job
cha ac e is ics. One c ucial job cha ac e is ic is elewo kabili y.
Whe he o no indi iduals can wo k om home has become a
di iding ac o in he labou ma ke . While much esea ch has
ocused on how elewo kabili y a ec s po e y in he majo i y
popula ion, less a en ion has been de o ed o mig an and
mixed wo-adul households. Using he Ge man Mic ocensus
(2019), we cons uc wo k a angemen s based on he numbe o
ea ne s in he household and hei job‘s elewo kabili y o p edic
po e y o non-mig an (N = 49,507), mixed (N = 6,818), and
mig an households (N = 8,922). Desc ip i e s a is ics show ha ,
in Ge many, mig an and mixed households ha e mo e single-
ea ne and non- elewo kable wo k a angemen s. Resul s om
logis ic eg essions epo highe po e y o non- elewo kable
and single-ea ne wo k a angemen s, pu ing mixed and mig an
households a an inc eased disad an age. Fu he mo e, we ind
ha mig an (and mixed) households no only ha e a highe
p e alence o high-po e y wo k a angemen s bu also highe
po e y han non-mig an and mixed households wi hin he same
wo k a angemen s.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Recei ed 18 Sep embe 2023
Accep ed 9 Sep embe 2024
KEYWORDS
Telewo kabili y; labou
ma ke ; po e y; mixed
households; mig a ion
In oduc ion
Mig an s, de ined he e as indi iduals who lea e hei coun y o bi h o li e elsewhe e,
a e an economically ulne able g oup and ace highe po e y han non-mig an s in
Eu ope (Giesecke e al. 2017; Kesle 2015). As po e y is an impo an obs acle o in e-
g a ion in o socie y and he labou ma ke (Ba nes e al. 2002), high po e y le els a e
pa icula ly p oblema ic o mig an s who lack he coun y-speci ic capi al ha would
© 2024 The Au ho (s). Published by In o ma UK Limi ed, ading as Taylo & F ancis G oup
CONTACT Ma ia Ho nung [email p o ec ed]
Supplemen al da a o his a icle can be accessed online a h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.2024.2404219.
This is an Open Access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License (h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/
licenses/by/4.0/), which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly
ci ed. The e ms on which his a icle has been published allow he pos ing o he Accep ed Manusc ip in a eposi o y by he au ho (s)
o wi h hei consen .
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES
2025, VOL. 51, NO. 5, 1294–1321
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.2024.2404219
acili a e hei pa icipa ion in wide socie y. While employmen is impo an in p o ec -
ing indi iduals agains po e y, mig an s’ po e y exceeds ha o non-mig an s, e en
when hey a e employed (C e az 2018; Lohmann 2009). In-wo k po e y has inc eased
in ecen decades, due o wo sening labou -ma ke condi ions ela ed o he inc ease o
a ypical o ms o employmen such as pa - ime, empo a y, and sel -employmen
(Filand i and S u olino 2019). One o his s udy’s key mo i a ions is o ind ou how
his plays ou o mig an s’ po e y.
Fu he mo e, digi alisa ion and echnological ad ances ha e made elewo kabili y a
new po en ial sou ce o inequali y in he labou ma ke . This has become mo e isible
since he Co id-19 pandemic. Jobs can be conside ed elewo kable i hey do no
equi e he wo ke o p ima ily wo k on he employe ’s p emises – examples include
insu ance agen s o business analys s. In con as , non- elewo kable jobs – like shop
assis an o manu ac u ing wo ke posi ions – a e mainly ied o a speci ic wo kplace.
Di e ences in he deg ee o elewo kabili y ha e implica ions o skill equi emen s
and employmen demand (Bihagen e al. 2021). P e ious esea ch has shown ha
mig an s a e less likely o hold o ob ain a elewo kable job han non-mig an s (Fasani
and Mazza 2020), sugges ing ha non- elewo kabili y is one d i e o di e ences in
po e y be ween mig an s and non-mig an s. Labou ma ke inequali ies s emming
om digi alisa ion and echnological ad ances o en c ea e a ‘digi al di ide’ (Messenge
e al. 2017), and he ques ion o how his di ide a ec s mig an s in e ms o po e y ou -
comes is an open one.
Po e y is ypically measu ed on he household le el, on he assump ion ha membe s
pool hei incomes. The e o e, household composi ion, especially ega ding he numbe
o ea ne s, is impo an in assessing a household’s economic si ua ion (Biege and
Ebbinghaus 2022; B ady, Finnigan, and Hübgen 2017). As he dual-ea ne model has
become mo e common, single-ea ne wo-adul households a e inc easingly exposed
o highe po e y (Nieuwenhuis e al. 2020; Tamayo and Popo a 2020). This s udy dis-
cusses ha ing a non- elewo kable job and being in a single-ea ne wo-adul household as
po e y isks and conside s hei in e ac ion in de ining he di e en exposu e o po e y
o non-mig an , mixed, and mig an households. We examined he associa ion be ween
po e y and households’ wo king a angemen s, as de ined by he numbe o ea ne s in
he households alongside he elewo kabili y o he ea ne s‘ jobs join ly. I one o wo
ea ne s held a elewo kable job, his may a e po e y a he household le el. On he
o he hand, po e y isks accumula e i he sole ea ne holds a non- elewo kable job.
Mig an s’ po e y isks can accumula e in households o easons ha go beyond job
s a us and job cha ac e is ics. P e ious esea ch epo s ha households wi h one
mig an and a non-mig an (hence o h e e ed o as mixed households) a e less
exposed o po e y han households wi h wo mig an s (Giesecke e al. 2017; Kesle
2015). Mixed households’ economic ad an ages may be linked o he non-mig an
pa ne compensa ing o he mig an pa ne ’s po e y isk o o a posi i e selec ion
o mig an s in o mixed households. The e o e, ou di e en ia ion o household ypes
conside s ha , in couple households, mig an s can be ei he pa ne ed wi h ano he
mig an o wi h a non-mig an . In es iga ing di e ences be ween mig an , mixed, and
non-mig an households, we con ibu e o esea ch on he economic consequences o el-
ewo kable o non- elewo kable jobs, which a ely conside s household con ex and
mig an s a us beyond con ol a iables.
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1295
The con ex o ou s udy is Ge many, which has one o he la ges immig an popu-
la ions in Eu ope (Des a is 2023) and is he la ges economy in he Eu opean Union
(Eu os a 2024). This means we can p o ide insigh s in o a signi ican sha e o he Eu o-
pean wo k o ce. In ligh o he his o ical low-skilled immig a ion pa e ns o Ge many
om Sou he n Eu ope, Tu key, and No he n A ica pos -WWII and gi en he subs an-
ial p esence o mig an wo ke s in manu ac u ing, he Ge man labou ma ke is an
excellen con ex o moni o pe sis en economic di e ences be ween mig an s and
non-mig an s. This is because digi alisa ion and ad ances in in o ma ion and communi-
ca ion echnologies (ICT) ha e educed he need o ou ine manual wo ke s and nega-
i ely impac ed low-skilled p oduc ion and manu ac u ing wo ke s’ labou ma ke
oppo uni ies (Hö e, Some s, and Theodo akopoulos 2023; Wiedne and Giesecke
2022). In 2019, Ge many’s deg ee o elewo kabili y, measu ed as he sha e o employees
who usually o some imes pe o m elewo k, was close o he EU a e age (Sos e o e al.
2020). In his anking, Sweden has he highes p e alence o elewo kabili y and Bulga ia
he lowes .
Using la ge-scale ep esen a i e da a om he Ge man Mic ocensus (2019), we con-
s uc household-le el wo k a angemen s by including he numbe o ea ne s and he
elewo kabili y o he ea ne s’ jobs. We measu e elewo kabili y using a no el index o
he elewo kabili y o occupa ions (Gädecke e al. 2021) based on a ask- ocused
employee su ey in Ge many. The ques ions guiding his a icle a e: a.) How a e wo k
a angemen s dis ibu ed among mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households? and
b.) How does po e y a y by wo k a angemen o mig an , mixed, and non-mig an
households? The analysis consis s o h ee pa s. Fi s , we map di e ences in wo k
a angemen s be ween mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households. Second, we es i-
ma e po e y o mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households. Finally, we in es iga e
how po e y a ies o mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households by wo k a ange-
men s ha accoun o elewo kabili y and he numbe o ea ne s in he household.
Mig an s’ po e y isk
In Eu opean coun ies, mig an s a e exposed o highe po e y han non-mig an s
(Kesle 2015). Al hough po e y di e en ials be ween mig an s and non-mig an s a e
pa ially d i en by highe unemploymen a es, employed mig an s also ha e highe
po e y le els han non-mig an s (C e az 2018; Lohmann 2009). Mig an s’ in-wo k
po e y is d i en by hei weak posi ion in he labou ma ke , which is o en asc ibed
o indi idual-le el ac o s, such as human capi al cha ac e is ics and disc imina ion, o
o aspec s o he labou ma ke s uc u e.
Indi idual-le el ac o s
One o en-men ioned ac o is ha , on a e age, mig an s ha e lowe educa ional a ain-
men han non-mig an s. P e ious s udies ha e ound ha mig an s’ alloca ion o low-
wage employmen can o en be explained when con olling o educa ional a ainmen
(G ana o and Kal e 2001). Mo e ecen da a, howe e , ha e shown an inc ease in he
numbe o mig an s wi h medium and high educa ion le els h oughou he las
decades, which has al e ed he his o ical p e alence o low-skilled mig an s in
1296 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
Ge many. Al hough his end in educa ional a ainmen poin s o po en ial imp o e-
men s in mig an s’ economic si ua ion, human capi al is no easily ans e able ac oss
coun ies, and mig an s ace di icul ies in ge ing hei quali ica ions ecognised
(Somme 2021). Mig an s o en lack coun y-speci ic human capi al, such as language
skills o cul u al knowledge, which means ha hei educa ional and oca ional a ain-
men is less alued (Konie zka and K eyen eld 2002). This con ibu es o hei placemen
in he lowe s a a o he labou ma ke . In addi ion, mig an s may employ di e en
human capi al in es men s a egies han non-mig an s. As mig an s may plan o
e u n o hei coun ies o o igin and p e e p omp inancial e u ns o e long- e m
inancial gains, hey could selec low-s a us o p eca ious employmen and no in es
in ecei ing coun y-speci ic human capi al ).
Second, employe disc imina ion is a ba ie o mig an s in accessing (s ong) labou
ma ke posi ions. Field expe imen s ha in ol e sending applica ions o eal jobs ha e
iden i ied e hnic, eligious, and acial disc imina ion dynamics. Indi iduals om
coun ies wi h subs an ial Muslim popula ions (Di S asio e al. 2021), eiled women
(Weichselbaume 2016), o eign-bo n mino i ies, and mino i ies om cul u ally e y
dis an coun ies (Vei and Thijsen 2021) ge lowe call-back a es om employe s
han he majo i y popula ion in Ge many. Howe e , disc imina ion a ies be ween
coun ies and g oups. Fo example, people om Tu kish mig a ion backg ounds ace
less hi ing disc imina ion in Ge many han in he Ne he lands (Thijssen e al. 2021).
Labou ma ke s uc u e
Labou ma ke s uc u es a e a u he ac o explaining mig an s’ economically poo
posi ion. The Ge man labou ma ke has a dual s uc u e, meaning i di e en ia es
be ween labou ma ke inside s and ou side s. Inside employmen is s able, well-paid,
and o e s oppo uni ies o p o essional de elopmen , while ou side employmen is
casual, empo a y, poo ly paid, and associa ed wi h highe po e y le els. These wo
labou ma ke s a e no pe meable, and seg ega ion can be obse ed ac oss and wi hin
indus ies and i ms. P e ious s udies epo high occupa ional seg ega ion o mig an s
in Ge many. Mig an s a e: i) o e ep esen ed among labou ma ke ou side s (Cons an
and Massey 2005); ii) mo e likely o wo k in blue-colla occupa ions and in he hospi al-
i y and es au an indus ies (D e e and Ho meis e 2008); and iii) mo e likely o be
employed in mo e ola ile sec o s wi h less secu e seasonal and empo a y employmen
(Bogoeski 2022).
As he labou ma ke s uc u e has changed due o deindus ialisa ion, e ia isa ion,
and dec easing labou ma ke egula ion, so-called a ypical jobs ha e become mo e
p e alen , and he low-wage sec o has expanded. This de elopmen has u he esul ed
in an inc ease in empo a y con ac s, pa - ime wo k, i egula wo king hou s, and
poo ly p o ec ed employmen . Since low wo k in ensi y and low pay a e he main
d i e s o po e y, employmen has pa ly los i s p o ec i e e ec . In addi ion, he eme -
gence o ICT has p o oked new discussions on labou ma ke seg ega ion along a digi al
di ide (Bihagen e al. 2021; Messenge e al. 2017). Mo e emphasis is being pu on skilled
labou , meaning ha low– and medium-skilled wo ke s a e being assigned less alue
(Acemoglu and Au o 2011). A s udy on Ge many con i ms ha mig an s om
Tu key ha e been disad an aged by Ge many’s educa ional expansion and s uc u al
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1297
labou ma ke changes and expe ienced wo sening labou ma ke posi ions due o hei
low skill se s and his o ically high employmen in manu ac u ing posi ions (Wiedne and
Giesecke 2022). And in he Co id-19 pandemic and he associa ed lockdowns, wo ke s in
a non- elewo kable job we e a isk o po e y as non- elewo kable jobs had highe u -
lough a es (Adams-P assl e al. 2020; Fasani and Mazza 2020).
P e ious s udies ha e sugges ed ha elewo kabili y is no e enly dis ibu ed in he
labou ma ke ; mig an s less equen ly wo k in elewo kable jobs (Alipou e al. 2021;
Fasani and Mazza 2020). Fo Ge many, esea ch has shown ha being a mig an is nega-
i ely associa ed wi h always o equen ly wo king om home (Alipou e al. 2021). In
he pandemic, a discussion eme ged o e whe he wo king om home p ima ily e lec s
exis ing labou ma ke inequali ies o c ea es a new di ide among wo ke s (Sos e o e al.
2020).
Telewo kabili y e lec s p e ious labou ma ke ad an ages, in ha indi iduals who
can wo k om home end o be highly educa ed, o ha e mo e wo k expe ience, o
wo k in highe -paid and highe -le el occupa ions, o ha e pe manen wo k con ac s,
o wo k ull- ime, and o be mo e au onomous (Alipou e al. 2021; B usse ich,
Dabla-No is, and Khalid 2020; Sos e o e al. 2020). Fu he ac o s associa ed wi h ele-
wo kabili y include ac o s ela ed o he wo k o ganisa ion, i m size, he le el o
employe ’s us , and he ime spen commu ing o wo k (Sos e o e al. 2020). In he pan-
demic, he e ogenei y in e ms o a ious jobs elewo kabili y po en ial became especially
isible (Fasang, S u olino, and Zagel 2023; Fasani and Mazza 2020).
In households wi h wo adul s, po e y declines conside ably i bo h a e employed
(Tamayo and Popo a 2020). The e o e, he ise in emale employmen in OECD
coun ies in ecen decades has a enua ed inc easing po e y le els by p o iding house-
holds wi h a second ea ne (Nieuwenhuis e al. 2020). Ne e heless, he second ea ne is
ypically employed in less secu e, less ypical, and lowe -paid jobs, minimising he poss-
ible e ec s o po e y educ ion. Fu he mo e, he g ow h in emale employmen is selec-
i e and mainly occu s in households which al eady engage in employmen .
Consequen ly, pa ne s’ homogamy in employmen p e en s subs an ial po e y
educ ions be ween households h ough women’s labou o ce pa icipa ion, which
inc eases pola isa ion be ween employmen -in ense and jobless households (G egg and
Wadswo h 2008).
A heo e ical explana ion o employmen in ensi y in mig an households is he
amily in es men hypo hesis, which assumes ha newly a i ed mig an s mus in es
in ecei ing-coun y-speci ic human capi al, inanced by he amily. Acco dingly, one
pa ne (in di e en -sex couples, his is mos ly he man) in es s in educa ion o job ain-
ing while he o he pa ne wo ks in dead-end jobs. Fo Ge many, Basilio, Baue , and
Sinning (2009) ha e no ound e idence suppo ing he amily in es men hypo hesis,
as pa ne s’ wages inc eased a simila a es wi h ime spen in he des ina ion
coun y. Howe e , o he s udies in Ge many ha e epo ed gende di e ences in
mig an employmen as mig an women a e, on a e age, less o en employed han
mig an men and non-mig an women (Fleischmann and Höhne 2013; Saliku luk, Gie-
secke, and K oh 2020). Fu he mo e, mig an women a e o en unde employed o do no
ind adequa e employmen , especially when hey ha e small child en (Rubin e al. 2008).
Taken oge he , hese ac o s indica e ha mig an households exhibi lowe labou
ma ke a achmen , pa ly d i en by women’s lowe employmen a es.
1298 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
To summa ise heo e ical conside a ions and p e ious empi ical indings, we could
expec di e ences in po e y be ween mig an and non-mig an households o be
d i en by mig an s’ lowe likelihood o ha ing a elewo kable job and hei highe p e a-
lence o single-ea ne wo k a angemen s.
Mixed households’ po e y isk
Compa ed o mig an couples, mixed households whe e one pe son is a mig an and he
o he is a non-mig an ha e lowe po e y a es (Giesecke e al. 2017; Kesle 2015); some-
imes, hey e en ha e lowe po e y a es han non-mig an households (Bos ic and Hyde
2023). The in luence o he non-mig an pa ne explains some o he economic ad an ages
o mig an s in mixed households. A non-mig an pa ne acili a es access o non-mig an
social ne wo ks and enables as e economic in eg a ion in o he ecei ing coun y. Fo
Sweden, D ibe and Lundh (2008) ha e ound ha , o mig an s, being ma ied o a
non-mig an is posi i ely associa ed wi h highe employmen a es and highe indi idual
and household income. Using Danish longi udinal da a and dis ibu ed ixed e ec s,
Elwe and Tegunima aka (2016) showed ha cohabi ing wi h a na i e Dane posi i ely
a ec s mig an s’ incomes. Meng and Meu s (2009) and Meng and G ego y (2005) ha e
ound in e ma iage p emiums o mig an s who in e ma y in F ance and Aus alia.
To some ex en , he be e labou ma ke ou comes o mig an s in mixed unions ha e
been a ibu ed o selec ion (Kan a e ic 2004), which means mig an s wi h speci ic
cha ac e is ics a e pa icula ly likely o pa ne wi h non-mig an s. Fu he mo e,
mig an s in mixed unions may di e om mig an s in mig an unions in e ms o
bo h hei pa ne ship s a us when mig a ing and he leng h o he ela ionship a he
momen o he in e iew. In Ge many, gende , coun y o bi h, and eligious a ilia ion
explain selec ion pa e ns in o mixed pa ne ships (Haug 2010; Sch oed e 2013).
Mig an s in mixed unions ha e, on a e age, highe educa ional le els, be e coun y-
speci ic language skills, and longe esidence in he ecei ing coun y (Haug 2010;
Sch oed e 2013). Some s udies ha e ound ha he posi i e e ec o in e ma iage dis-
appea s when accoun ing o selec ion (No meye 2011), while o he s epo a posi i e
e ec o in e ma iage on labou ma ke ou comes, e en when conside ing selec ion
(Elwe and Tegunima aka 2016).
F om a household pe spec i e, s udies in Ge many ha e shown a lowe p e alence o
dual-ea ne s among mixed households compa ed o non-mig an ones (B aack, Mile-
wski, and T appe 2022; No meye 2011), bu dual ea ne s a e s ill mo e common in
mixed han in mig an households (No meye 2011). One explana ion o his is
human capi al di e ences. Fo ins ance, in Ge many, he mig an and he non-
mig an pa ne in mixed households ha e mo e simila le els o educa ion han
mig an households (No meye 2011). As mos s udies ake an indi idual app oach
when examining mig an s in mixed unions, hey dis ega d he ole o he non-mig an
pa ne in compensa ing o po e y. Ne e heless, non-mig an s who in e ma y
seem o be selec i e. E idence om Spain has shown ha non-mig an men a e mo e
likely o in e ma y i hey a e unemployed and low-skilled, sugges ing a nega i e selec-
ion o non-mig an men in o mixed households; his canno be ound o non-mig an
women (González-Fe e e al. 2018). Howe e , non-mig an s o en a e sole ea ne s in
mixed households (B aack, Milewski, and T appe 2022). The e o e, we migh expec
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1299
ha , al hough non-mig an s in mixed households (especially men) will be nega i ely
selec ed, hey will no ace he same labou ma ke ba ie s as hei mig an pa ne s.
Hypo heses
In he i s s ep o he p esen s udy, we will iden i y he dis ibu ion o wo k a ange-
men s, accoun ing o elewo kabili y and he numbe o ea ne s o mig an , mixed,
and non-mig an households. We expec he p e alence o dual-ea ne households o
be he highes among non-mig an households, in he middle among mixed households,
and lowes among mig an households (Hypo hesis 1a). Fu he , we expec o ind he
lowes sha e o wo k a angemen s wi h elewo kable jobs o mig an households, ol-
lowed by mixed households (Hypo hesis 1b). These hypo heses a e based on wo insigh s
om he exis ing li e a u e discussed abo e. Fi s , mig an s a e mo e likely han non-
mig an s o ha e jobs in he lowe s a a o he labou ma ke and, consequen ly, a e
less likely o hold a elewo kable job. Second, mig an s in mixed households a e posi i ely
selec ed and display highe educa ional homogamy han mig an households, sugges ing
highe labou o ce pa icipa ion and highe le els o elewo kabili y.
In he second s ep, o examine di e ences in po e y, we will map p edic ed po e y
p obabili ies o mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households. In line wi h p e ious
s udies, we expec mig an households o expe ience he highes po e y, ollowed by
mixed households and non-mig an households (Hypo hesis 2). We will in es iga e
how di e en ials in po e y o mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households a e associ-
a ed wi h di e en wo k a angemen s, ne o obse ed human capi al and household
and job cha ac e is ics. As non- elewo kabili y and single-ea ne ship ha e commonly
been iden i ied as po e y isks (Fasang, S u olino, and Zagel 2023; Fasani and
Mazza 2020), we expec household a angemen s wi h single ea ne s o wo ke s in
non- elewo kable jobs o ha e a highe po e y isk. Consequen ly, we expec he
highe p e alence o mig an and mixed households in wo k a angemen s wi h
highe po e y isks o explain po e y di e en ials by household ype (Hypo hesis 3).
Finally, we expec o ind highe po e y o mig an and mixed households han o
non-mig an households wi hin he same wo k a angemen (Hypo hesis 4). This may be
explained by unobse ed he e ogenei y in a iables no con ained in ou da a, such as
sala ies, di e ences wi hin elewo kable and non- elewo kable jobs, o u he disad an-
ages aced by mig an s, such as employe disc imina ion (see discussion abo e).
Da a and me hods
Da a and sample
We used da a om he Ge man Mic ocensus 2019 (RDC o he Fede al S a is ical O ice
and S a is ical O ices o he Fede al S a es o Ge many 2022, DOI: 10.21242/
12211.2019.00.00.3.1.0), an annually conduc ed ep esen a i e household su ey admi-
nis e ed by he Fede al S a is ical O ice. The Mic ocensus co e s app oxima ely 1% o
he Ge man popula ion, and pa icipa ion is manda o y o he selec ed households.
The anonymised scien i ic use ile o esea che s comp ises 70% o he da a.
1
Following
common Ge man po e y measu emen s, households a e selec ed a hei main
1300 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
esidence, wi h communal accommoda ion being excluded (Boehle 2015). We es ic ed
he sample o di e en -sex, wo-adul couple households consis ing o indi iduals o
wo king age (19–65) and (i p esen ) child en below 18. Households wi h adul child en
a e he e o e excluded in ou analyses. Fo he households o be u he included in he
sample, a leas one pe son in he household had o be employed. Employmen was
de ined as pu suing a p o essional ac i i y o a leas one hou pe week. We excluded
1,747 non-mig an , 269 mixed, and 1,062 mig an households in which none o he
wo adul household membe s was employed.
2
Va iables and models
The dependen a iable was a household’s p obabili y o being poo . A household was
conside ed poo i he equalised ne disposable household income was below 60% o
he median household income in a gi en con ex . The Mic ocensus epo s ne
mon hly household income in he mon h p eceding he su ey be o e ax and social
insu ance paymen s. This income can come om a ious sou ces, such as unemploy-
men bene i s (A bei slosengeld I, A bei slosengeld II), child and accommoda ion allow-
ance, in es men income, and e i emen bene i s, al hough employmen , on a e age,
con ibu ed he mos (Hochgü el 2019). We calcula ed he median mon hly income
a he coun y le el o he o al Mic ocensus scien i ic use ile and no only ou analy ical
sample. As he Mic ocensus uses income classes o measu e household income, we used a
p ocedu e de eloped by S aude and Hüning (2004) and edi ed by Boehle (2015) o
impu e he mon hly household income wi hin each income class. This p ocedu e
assumes ha income is e enly dis ibu ed wi hin each income class and asc ibes each
indi idual in he indica ed income class a di e en possible income alue ha depends
on he o al numbe o indi iduals in he class and he wid h o he income class.
Household ype was ou co e independen a iable. We di e en ia ed be ween h ee
ypes o households: mig an households wi h wo mig an s, mixed households wi h one
mig an , and non-mig an households wi h wo non-mig an s. A mig an was de ined as
a pe son who mig a ed hemsel es, i.e. a i s -gene a ion mig an . The second indepen-
den a iable was wo k a angemen : i combines in o ma ion on whe he he house-
holds consis o one o wo ea ne (s) and whe he he ea ne (s)’ job was elewo kable.
This di e en ia ion yielded eigh di e en wo k a angemen s o di e en -sex couple
households (Table 1), anging om wo k a angemen s wi h low expec ed po e y isk
( wo ea ne s wi h a elewo kable job) o wo k a angemen s wi h high expec ed
po e y isk (one ea ne wi h a non- elewo kable job).
Table 1. Typology o wo k a angemen s in di e en -sex households.
Highes isk ←− Lowes isk
N o ea ne s Man Woman
2 elewo kable elewo kable
2 elewo kable non- elewo kable
2 non- elewo kable elewo kable
2 non- elewo kable non- elewo kable
1 elewo kable no employed
1 no employed elewo kable
1 non- elewo kable no employed
1 no employed non- elewo kable
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1301
pa ne s wi h mig a ion expe ience (asso a i e ma ing) may inc ease economic inequal-
i ies be ween mig an s and non-mig an s. Ou s udy shows ha i , howe e , a mig an is
pa ne ed wi h a non-mig an , hese mixed unions ha e a lowe equency o non- ele-
wo kable wo k a angemen s and somewha lowe po e y han mig an households.
The e o e, i is i al o conside pa ne ship o ma ion beha iou and he numbe o
mig an s in a household when discussing he economic si ua ion o households. Speci i-
cally, he ole o non-mig an pa ne s in a e ing po e y in mixed unions is an unde -
explo ed and impo an a enue o u u e esea ch. Fu he mo e, esea ch should
explo e o wha ex en mixed households impac p ocesses o economic in eg a ion o
mig an s and pola isa ion be ween mig an s conce ning po e y in he long e m.
Obse ing he economic si ua ion o non-mig an , mixed, and mig an households
o e ime is also ele an , as child en o mixed pa ne ships a e mo e likely o pa ne
wi h indi iduals wi h a mig an backg ound han child en wi h non-mig an pa en s
(I as o za and Elwe 2021).
Ou indings u he emphasise s ong he e ogenei y wi hin non- elewo kable jobs,
wi h mig an s in non- elewo kable jobs being especially p one o high po e y. The
high he e ogenei y in non- elewo kable jobs alludes o labou ma ke seg ega ion
beyond elewo kabili y. In ou models, we con olled o ype o con ac , employmen
ype, leade ship esponsibili y, and shi wo k, bu o he job cha ac e is ics, like he
indus y o he le el o unionisa ion, may be impo an mechanisms in explaining
di e ences be ween mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households. Th oughou he
pandemic, employmen in essen ial in as uc u e jobs played a p o ec i e ole.
Resea ch on such occupa ions in Ge many indica es high a ia ion wi hin hese jobs,
wi h mig an s being o e ep esen ed in jobs wi h bad wo king condi ions (Ni o ozh-
kin and Poeschel 2022).
Gi en ha he impac o echnological change on households di e s by ins i u ional
con ex (Mina di e al. 2023), ou indings o Ge many ha e o be conside ed in ligh
o he coun y’s pa icula se ing. Howe e , we a gue ha Ge many is an exempla y
case o he s udy o po e y gaps be ween mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households
depending on he access o elewo kable jobs, because he coun y has he la ges EU
economy and has a long his o y o immig a ion, enabling us o de ine labou ma ke in e-
g a ion s a egies o e ime. The e o e, ou esul s may di e subs an ially in coun ies
wi h less powe ul economies, less occupa ional seg ega ion, mo e ecen immig a ion
his o ies and di e ences in he selec ion o mig an s.
By using da a om 2019, he p esen s udy se s he baseline o u u e analyses on
how he new economic scena io du ing he Co id-19 pandemic migh ha e al e ed
he pa e ns we iden i ied. Recen s udies sugges an expansion in elewo kabili y
abo e wha was a ailable du ing he pandemic (Sos e o e al. 2020). The e o e,
ou measu e o elewo kabili y is conse a i e. I may be pa icula ly wo hwhile
o examine whe he he expansion o elewo kable asks inc eased inequali ies
be ween mig an s and non-mig an s, since mig an s ace highe isks o unemploy-
men in economic ecessions (Kogan 2004). Wi h mobile in o ma ion and com-
munica ion echnology (ICT) becoming mo e impo an in he wo king
en i onmen , elewo kabili y is p esumably no only a sa e occupa ional ea u e
in a pandemic like he Co id-19 one; indeed, li e acy in ICT will become mo e
impo an in he u u e labou ma ke . Moni o ing wo ke s’ skill se s and o e ing
1308 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
u he ICT li e acy aining o mig an s may be impo an o dec ease labou
ma ke inequali ies and po e y.
This s udy does no come wi hou limi a ions. Ou da a do no enable us o disen an-
gle he in e nal-household mechanisms used o decide he numbe o ea ne s. Whe he
ha ing mo e single-ea ne households is due o cul u al no ms o s uc u al di icul ies in
accessing employmen is an a enue o u u e esea ch. Al hough esea ch in Ge many
has e u ed he heo y o amily in es men among mig an s (Basilio, Baue , and Sinning
2009), households’ decisions o op o a single-ea ne model could be linked o labou
ma ke disad an ages. The ac ha single-ea ne wo k a angemen s wi h a man in a el-
ewo kable job a e e y common among hi d-coun y na ionals may allude o speci ic
mig a ion pa e ns and wo k a angemen s o mig an main ea ne s om hese
egions. Fu he , he obse a ion ha in mixed households, he non-mig an pa ne is
mo e likely o be he single ea ne (B aack, Milewski, and T appe 2022) may hin a
mig an s’ labou ma ke disad an ages and a decision o p e en economic isks wi h
he non-mig an pa ne aking o e (sole) employmen . We canno ule ou selec ion
in o di e en household ypes. Fo example, s udies show ha single-ea ne couples
a e mo e likely o mig a e han dual-ea ne couples (Vidal e al. 2017).
Fu he mo e, ce ain mig an g oups seem o be o e ep esen ed in ce ain wo k
a angemen s, aising ques ions abou economic di e ences be ween mig an s. These
selec ion e ec s may be isible wi hin mixed households as well. Fo ins ance, he
numbe o ea ne s in mixed households may di e by egion o bi h and o he
mig a ion-speci ic cha ac e is ics (Sch oed e 2013). This s udy de ines non-mig an s
as indi iduals wi hou mig a ion expe ience o Ge many. The de ini ion o a non-
mig an includes indi iduals who ha e a leas one pa en who mig a ed, ha is,
mig an s’ descendan s. Al hough esea ch shows ha second-gene a ion mig an s
di e in hei labou ma ke ou comes (G ana o and Kal e 2001) and ha e di e en
ma ing beha iou han i s -gene a ion mig an s and he majo i y popula ion (Sch oed-
e 2013), we ha e no dis inguished be ween mig an s and hei descendan s because
his would ha e added oo much complexi y o he analysis.
Finally, we ha e ocused on wo-adul households and households wi h indi iduals o
wo king age (19–65). Consequen ly, ou conclusions a e con ined o his speci ic g oup.
Economic disad an ages ha olde mig an s (S einbach 2018) o single households may
ace due o low pension en i lemen s and less isk-sha ing by a pa ne a e no conside ed
in his s udy. Gi en he ageing mig an popula ion in Ge many and he inc easing p e a-
lence o single households, s udies ha look a hese households will p o ide a mo e com-
p ehensi e unde s anding o he speci ic economic challenges. We u he excluded
households wi h adul child en. In Ge many, mul igene a ional households a e mo e
common among mig an s (Flake 2012), and, o ins ance, child en o mig an s om
Tu key lea e he pa en al home la e han child en wi h non-mig an pa en s
(Windzio and Aybek 2015). The e o e, in es iga ing households wi h adul child en is
an impo an a enue o u u e esea ch, pa icula ly because o ming mul igene a ional
households can help mi iga e economic disad an ages.
Despi e hese limi a ions, his s udy unde lines he impo ance o aking a household
pe spec i e o gauge po e y o mig an , mixed, and non-mig an households. By ocus-
ing on wo-adul households whe e one adul is employed, we ha e concep ualised and
empi ically subs an ia ed non- elewo kabili y and single-ea ne wo k a angemen s as
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1309
po e y isks, especially o mig an households. As he highe p e alence o single-ea ne
households among mig an and mixed households is one d i e o hei po e y, incen i-
ising dual-ea ne ship among hese households may dec ease po e y in he long e m.
Rega ding elewo kabili y, imp o ing mig an s’ skill le els, especially in ICT, is an impo -
an policy ecommenda ion. I he aim is o educe di e ences be ween mig an and non-
mig an households, me ely a ge ing households by elewo kabili y/non- elewo kabili y
migh no su ice. Pa icula ly because mig an households gene ally seem o bene i
less om social policies (Bos ic and Hyde 2023), such policies should be mo e a uned
o mig a ion expe ience as a labou -ma ke disad an age. The esul s showed ha
mig an households in non- elewo kable (single-ea ne ) wo k a angemen s displayed
highe po e y in 2019. The pandemic migh ha e exace ba ed hese economic ulne abil-
i ies. By looking a households whe e a leas one indi idual was employed, we ha e likely
unde epo ed he se e i y o he po e y di e en ial be ween mig an and non-mig an
households. Ou esul s can he e o e be conside ed conse a i e ega ding he ac ual
economic disad an age o mixed and mig an households in Ge many. P omo ing
employmen , especially among hese households, is he i s impo an s ep owa ds
imp o ing mig an s’ economic well-being. Howe e , especially since he Co id-19 pan-
demic accele a ed he use o ICT, i is impo an o moni o o wha ex en di e en
skill se s and less adap a ion o a (mo e) digi alised labou ma ke migh u he uel
di e ences be ween mig an s and non-mig an s in po e y o e ime.
No es
1. The Mic ocensus scien i ic use ile (SUF) includes a 70% sample o he comple e Mic ocen-
sus. Due o anonymisa ion equi emen s, he Ge man S a is ical O ices p o ide only a 70%
sample o use ou side hei p emises. The selec ion p ocess o he 70% subsample ollows
he sampling design o he Mic ocensus closely. The subsample is solely al e ed o easons
o enla ging ea u e g oups o main ain ac ual anonymisa ion (S a is isches Bundesam
2022). The Fede al S a is ical O ice u he p o ides weigh s o p ese e ep esen a i eness.
2. Ou main ocus is on di e ences in job cha ac e is ics be ween household ypes and no he
selec ion in o employmen . Howe e , we acknowledge ha by excluding households wi h no
ea ne s om ou analysis, we unde es ima e he o e all po e y o mig an households in
Ge many. We p esen he subs an i e po e y gap o mig an households wi h no ea ne s
in Table S1 o he Supplemen a y Ma e ials.
3. Fo de ailed in o ma ion on he dis ibu ion o he elewo kabili y index be ween household
ypes see Figu e S1 in he Supplemen a y Ma e ials.
4. FLC include: I aly, Spain, G eece, Tu key, Mo occo, Po ugal, Mon eneg o, Se bia, Macedo-
nia, Bosnia and He zego ina and C oa ia, EU-15 include: Iceland, Liech ens ein, No way,
Swi ze land, Denma k, Finland, Sweden, F ance, Swi ze land, I eland, Uni ed Kingdom,
Belgium, Luxembu g, Ne he lands, Aus ia. EU-enla gemen include: Bulga ia, Romania,
Li huania, La ia, Czech Republic, Hunga y, Poland. FSU include: A menia, Aze baijan,
Geo gia, Kazakhs an, Ky gyzs an, Moldo a (San Ma ino, Ando a, Va ican), Russian Fed-
e a ion, Ky gyzs an, Tajikis an, Tu kmenis an, Uzbekis an, Uk aine. Some alloca ions a e
due o he ca ego isa ion o coun ies in he SUF o he Mic ocensus 2019. Fo mo e in o -
ma ion on he egion o bi h and he yea o mig a ion, see Figu e S2 o he Supplemen a y
Ma e ial.
5. Following deHaan e al. (2023), we es ima e a model whe e we in e ac ed all con ols (excep
egion o bi h) and household ypes. The esul s p esen ed in Figu e 3 a e obus o his
speci ica ion. This inding also holds i we conside in e ac ed con ols (see Model 6,
Table A4 in he Appendix). Resul s a e a ailable upon eques .
1310 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
Acknowledgemen s
This esea ch was unded by he Suppo Ne wo k o In e disciplina y Social Policy Resea ch
(FIS) by he Ge man Fede al Minis y o Social and Labou A ai s (BMAS) as pa o he esea ch
p ojec “Household s uc u es and economic isks du ing he COVID-19 pandemic in Eas and
Wes Ge many: Compensa ion o accumula ion? (KOMPAKK)”, PIs: Ane e Fasang, Emanuela
S u olino, and Hannah Zagel. We hank Ma in Gädecke and Jonas B aun o excellen esea ch
assis ance, and he edi o as well as wo anonymous e iewe s o hei help ul commen s.
Disclosu e s a emen
No po en ial con lic o in e es was epo ed by he au ho (s).
Da a a ailabili y s a emen
The eplica ion code o all analysis is a ailable he e: h ps://os .io/n47 q/. The da a suppo ing his
s udy’s indings de i e om he Scien i ic Use Files (SUF) o he Ge man Mic ocensus 2019 (DOI:
10.21242/12211.2019.00.00.3.1.0), a ailable om he Resea ch Da a Cen e o he Fede al S a is i-
cal O ice. Mo e in o ma ion on access and es ic ions o he a ailabili y o hese da a, see: h ps://
www. o schungsda enzen um.de/en/access.
ORCID
Ma ia Ho nung h p://o cid.o g/0000-0002-2905-2707
Emanuela S u olino h p://o cid.o g/0000-0002-6635-8748
Hannah Zagel h p://o cid.o g/0000-0002-5307-3380
Re e ences
Acemoglu, D., and D. Au o . 2011. “Chap e 12 – Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implica ions o
Employmen and Ea nings.” In Bd. 4 o Handbook o Labo Economics, 1043–1171, edi ed by D.
Ca d, and O. Ashen el e . Ams e dam: Else ie .
Adams-P assl, A., T. Bone a, M. Golin, and C. Rauh. 2020. “Inequali y in he Impac o he
Co ona i us Shock: E idence om Real Time Su eys.” Jou nal o Public Economics
189:104245. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104245.
Alipou , J., O. Falck, S. Schülle , H. Fadinge , J. Schymik, O. Falck, A. Peichl, and S. Saue . 2021.
“My Home is My Cas le – The Bene i s o Wo king om Home Du ing a Pandemic C isis.”
Jou nal o Public Economics 196 (13152): 104373. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.
104373.
A n z, M., S. Ben Yahmed, and F. Be lingie i. 2020. “Wo king om Home and COVID-19: The
Chances and Risks o Gende Gaps.” In e economics 55 (6): 381–386. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1007/s10272-020-0938-5.
Ba nes, M., C. Heady, S. Middle on, J. Milla , F. Papadopoulos, G. Room, and P. Tsakloglou. 2002.
Po e y and Social Exclusion in Eu ope. Chel enham, UK/No hamp on, MA: Edwa d Elga
Publishing. h ps://www.elga online.com/display/1840643757.xml.
Basilio, L., T. K. Baue , and M. Sinning. 2009. “Analyzing he Labo Ma ke Ac i i y o Immig an
Families in Ge many.” Labou Economics 16 (5): 510–520. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.labeco.
2009.03.002.
Biege , T., and B. Ebbinghaus. 2022. “Accumula ion o Abso p ion? Changing Dispa i ies o
Household non-Employmen in Eu ope Du ing he G ea Recession.” Socio-Economic Re iew
20 (1): 141–168. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/se /mwaa003.
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1311
Bihagen, E., A. Dicks, M. Ehle , J. Hä könen, T. Ko pi, A. Künn-Nelen, L. Menze, R. Mon izaan,
and H. Pöyilö. 2021. “Skills, Au oma ion, and Ea nings: Employmen on Technology
D i enlabo Ma ke s (Ve sion 3.0).” Maas ich , Maas ich Uni e si y, School o Business
and Economics, ROA.
Boehle, M. 2015. A mu smessung mi dem Mik ozensus: Me hodische Aspek e und Umse zung
ü Que schni s- und T endanalysen. GESIS Pape s, 16.
Bogoeski, V. 2022. “Con inui ies o Exploi a ion: Seasonal Mig an Wo ke s in Ge man
Ag icul u e Du ing he COVID-19 Pandemic.” Jou nal o Law and Socie y 49 (4): 681–702.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/jols.12389.
Bos ic, A., and A. Hyde. 2023. “Social Spending, Po e y, and Immig a ion: A Sys ema ic Analysis
o Wel a e S a e E ec i eness and Na i i y in 24 Uppe - and Middle-Income Democ acies.”
Social Cu en s 10, h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/23294965231169253.
B aack, M. K., N. Milewski, and H. T appe. 2022. “C ossing Social Bounda ies in an Immig a ion
Con ex : Exogamy and Gende ed Employmen Pa e ns in Unions in Ge many.” Gende Issues
39 (2): 142–176. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12147-021-09281-8.
B ady, D. J., R. Finnigan, and S. Hübgen. 2017. “Re hinking he Risks o Po e y: A F amewo k o
Analyzing P e alences and Penal ies.” Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology 123 (3): 740–786. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1086/693678.
B usse ich, M., E. Dabla-No is, and S. Khalid. 2020. “Who Will Bea he B un o Lockdown
Policies? E idence om Tele-Wo kabili y Measu es Ac oss Coun ies.” IMF Wo king Pape s
20 (88), h ps://doi.o g/10.5089/9781513546285.001.
Cons an , A., and D. S. Massey. 2005. “Labo Ma ke Segmen a ion and he Ea nings o Ge man
Gues wo ke s.” Popula ion Resea ch and Policy Re iew 24 (5): 489–512. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/
s11113-005-4675-z.
C e az, E. 2018. “In-wo k Po e y among Mig an s.” In Handbook on In-Wo k Po e y, edi ed by
H. Lohmann, and I. Ma x, 89–106. Chel enham, UK/No hamp on, MA: Edwa d Elga
Publishing.
deHaan, E., J. Moon, J. E. Shipman, Q. T. Swanquis , and R. L. Whi ed. 2023. Con ol Va iables in
In e ac i e Models (SSRN Schola ly Pape No. 3959861).
Des a is. 2023. 17.3% o Ge many’s Popula ion has Immig a ed Since 1950. Fede al S a is ical
O ice. h ps://www.des a is.de/EN/P ess/2023/03/PE23_080_12.h ml.
Di S asio, V., B. Lancee, S. Vei , and R. Yemane. 2021. “Muslim by De aul o Religious
Disc imina ion? Resul s om a C oss-Na ional Field Expe imen on Hi ing Disc imina ion.”
Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 47 (6): 1305–1326. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.
2019.1622826.
D e e , A. I., and O. Ho meis e . 2008. “Immig an s and Social Ne wo ks in a Job-Sca ce
En i onmen : The Case o Ge many.” In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew 42 (2): 425–448.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2008.00130.x.
D ibe, M., and C. Lundh. 2008. “In e ma iage and Immig an In eg a ion in Sweden: An
Explo a o y Analysis.” Ac a Sociologica 51 (4): 329–354. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/
0001699308097377.
Elwe , A., and A. Tegunima aka. 2016. “Cohabi a ion P emiums in Denma k: Income E ec s in
Immig an –Na i e Pa ne ships.” Eu opean Sociological Re iew 32 (3): 383–402. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1093/es /jcw018.
Eu os a . 2024. G oss Domes ic P oduc a Ma ke P ices [Da ase ]. Eu os a .
Fasang, A. E., E. S u olino, and H. Zagel. 2023. “Household-le el P e alence and Po e y
Penal ies o Wo king in Non-Telewo kable and Non-Essen ial Occupa ions: E idence om
Eas and Wes Ge many in 2019.” Zei sch i Fü Sozial e o m 69 (2): 85–117. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1515/zs -2022-0107.
Fasani, F., and J. Mazza. 2020. “Being on he F on line? Immig an Wo ke s in Eu ope and
he COVID-19 Pandemic.” SSRN Elec onic Jou nal 13963, h ps://doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.3755380.
Filand i, M., and E. S u olino. 2019. “Indi idual and Household in-Wo k Po e y in Eu ope:
Unde s anding he Role o Labo Ma ke Cha ac e is ics.” Eu opean Socie ies 21 (1): 130–
157. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14616696.2018.1536800.
1312 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
Flake, R. 2012. “Mul igene a ional Li ing A angemen s Among Mig an s.” SSRN Elec onic
Jou nal, h ps://doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.2159706.
Fleischmann, F., and J. Höhne. 2013. “Gende and Mig a ion on he Labou Ma ke : Addi i e o
In e ac ing Disad an ages in Ge many?” Social Science Resea ch 42 (5): 1325–1345. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.ss esea ch.2013.05.006.
Gädecke, M., E. S u olino, H. Zagel, and A. Fasang. 2021. KOMPAKK Index o Occupa ions’
Telewo kabili y in Ge many. SowiDa aNe |da o ium -GESIS Da a A chi e, Cologne. Ve sion
1.0.0. Da ase . h ps://doi.o g/10.7802/2263.
Giesecke, J., M. K oh, I. Tucci, A.-L. Baumann, and N. El-Kayed. 2017. “A mu sge äh dung bei
Pe sonen mi Mig a ionshin e g und – Ve ie ende Analysen au Basis on SOEP und
Mik ozensus.” SOEPpape s 907:67.
González-Fe e , A., O. Obućina, C. Co ina, and T. Cas o-Ma ín. 2018. “Mixed Ma iages
Be ween Immig an s and Na i es in Spain: The Gende ed E ec o Ma iage Ma ke
Cons ain s.” Demog aphic Resea ch 39:1–32. h ps://doi.o g/10.4054/DemRes.2018.39.1.
G ana o, N., and F. Kal e . 2001. “Die Pe sis enz e hnische Ungleichhei au dem deu schen
A bei sma k .” KZ SS Kölne Zei sch i ü Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 53 (3): 497–520.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11577-001-0076-4.
G egg, P., and J. Wadswo h. 2008. “Two Sides o E e y S o y: Measu ing Pola iza ion and
Inequali y in he Dis ibu ion o Wo k.” Jou nal o he Royal S a is ical Socie y Se ies A:
S a is ics in Socie y 171 (4): 857–875. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2008.00542.x.
Haug, S. 2010. In e e hnische Kon ak e, F eundscha en, Pa ne scha en und Ehen on Mig an en
in Deu schland. Nü nbe g: Bundesam ü Mig a ion und Flüch linge (BAMF)
Fo schungszen um Mig a ion, In eg a ion und Asyl (FZ).
Hochgü el, T. 2019. Einkommensanalysen mi dem Mik ozensus. Wiesbaden: S a is isches Bundesam .
Hö e, K., M. Some s, and A. Theodo akopoulos. 2023. “Technology and Jobs: A Sys ema ic
Li e a u e Re iew.” Technological Fo ecas ing and Social Change 194:122750. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1016/j. ech o e.2023.122750.
I as o za, N., and A. Elwe . 2021. “Like Pa en s, Like Child en? The Impac o Pa en al Endogamy
and Exogamy on Thei Child en’s Pa ne Choices in Sweden.” Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion
S udies 47 (4): 895–915. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1654160.
Kan a e ic, J. 2004. “In e e hnic Ma iages and Economic Assimila ion o Immig an s.” IZA
Discussion Pape , 1142.
Kesle , C. 2015. “Wel a e S a es and Immig an Po e y: Ge many, Sweden, and he Uni ed
Kingdom in Compa a i e Pe spec i e.” Ac a Sociologica 58 (1): 39–61. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1177/0001699314560238.
Kogan, I. 2004. “Las Hi ed, Fi s Fi ed? The Unemploymen Dynamics o Male Immig an s in
Ge many.” Eu opean Sociological Re iew 20 (5): 445–461. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/es /jch037.
Konie zka, D., and M. K eyen eld. 2002. “The Pe o mance o Mig an s in Occupa ional Labou
Ma ke s.” Eu opean Socie ies 4 (1): 53–78. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14616690220130991
Lohmann, H. 2009. “Wel a e S a es, Labou Ma ke Ins i u ions and he Wo king Poo :
A Compa a i e Analysis o 20 Eu opean Coun ies.” Eu opean Sociological Re iew 25 (4):
489–504. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/es /jcn064.
Meng, X., and R. G. G ego y. 2005. “In e ma iage and he Economic Assimila ion o
Immig an s.” Jou nal o Labo Economics 23 (1): 135–174. h ps://doi.o g/10.1086/425436.
Meng, X., and D. Meu s. 2009. “In e ma iage, Language, and Economic Assimila ion P ocess: A
Case S udy o F ance.” In e na ional Jou nal o Manpowe 30 (1/2): 127–144. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1108/01437720910948447.
Messenge , J., O. Lla e Va gas, L. Gschwind, S. Böhme , G. Ve meylen, M. Wilkens, and (wi h
In e na ionales A bei sam , & Eu opean Founda ion o he Imp o emen o Li ing and
Wo king Condi ions). 2017. Wo king Any ime, Anywhe e: The E ec s on he Wo ld o Wo k.
Luxembou g: Publica ions O ice o he Eu opean Union.
Mina di, S., C. Ho nbe g, P. Ba bie i, and H. Solga. 2023. “The Link Be ween Compu e use and
job Sa is ac ion: The Media ing Role o job Tasks and Task Disc e ion.” B i ish Jou nal o
Indus ial Rela ions 61 (4): 796–831. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/bji .12738.
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1313
Nieuwenhuis, R., W. Van Lancke , D. Collado, and B. Can illon. 2020. “T ends in Women’s
Employmen and Po e y Ra es in OECD Coun ies: A Ki agawa–Blinde –Oaxaca
Decomposi ion.” I alian Economic Jou nal 6 (1): 37–61. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s40797-019-
00115-x.
Ni o ozhkin, A., and F. Poeschel. 2022. “Wo king Condi ions in Essen ial Occupa ions and he
Role o Mig an s.” Economic Analysis and Policy 74:250–261. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.eap.
2022.02.002.
No meye , O. 2011. “Couple’s Rela i e Labo Supply in In e ma iage.” SSRN Elec onic Jou nal,
h ps://doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.1790678.
RDC o he Fede al S a is ical O ice and S a is ical O ices o he Fede al S a es o Ge many. 2022.
Mik ozensus 2019, SUF, Ve sion 0 (Ve sion 0) [Da ase ]. RDC o he Fede al S a is ical O ice
and he s a is ical o ices o he Lände (RDC).
Roh bach-Schmid , D., and A. Hall. 2020. BIBB/BAuA-E we bs ä igenbe agung 2018. BIBB-FDZ
Da en- und Me hodenbe ich 1/2020. u n:nbn:de:0035-0818-6.
Rubin, J., M. S. Rendall, L. Rabino ich, F. Tsang, C. an O anje-Nassau, and B. Jan a. 2008.
Mig an Women in he Eu opean Labou Fo ce: Cu en Si ua ion and Fu u e P ospec s. San a
Monica, CA: RAND Co po a ion. h ps://www. and.o g/pubs/ echnical_ epo s/TR591.h ml.
Saliku luk, Z., J. Giesecke, and M. K oh. 2020. The Si ua ion o Female Immig an s on he Ge man
Labou Ma ke : A Mul i-Pe spec i e App oach. SOEPpape s on Mul idisciplina y Panel Da a
Resea ch, 1072.
Sch oed e , J. H. 2013. Ehemus e on Mig an en in Wes deu schland. Wiesbaden: Sp inge
Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Somme , I. 2021. “Recogni ion o Fo eign Quali ica ions in Ge many: Selec i i y and Powe in e-
Making P o essionals.” In e na ional Mig a ion 59 (4): 26–41. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/imig.
12831.
Sos e o, M., S. Milasi, J. Hu ley, E. Fe nandez-Macías, and Ma ina Bisello. 2020. Telewo kabili y
and he COVID-19 C isis: A New Digi al Di ide?. Se ille, Spain: EU Science Hub.
S a is isches Bundesam . 2022. Da enhandbuch zum Mik ozensus Scien i ic Use File 2019. h ps://
www.gesis.o g/missy/ iles/documen s/MZ/DHB_2020.pd .
S aude , J., and W. Hüning. 2004. “Die Messung on Äqui alenzeinkommen und A mu squo en
au de Basis des Mik ozensus.” S a is ische Analysen und S udien {NRW} 13:9–31.
S einbach, A. 2018. “Olde Mig an s in Ge many.” Jou nal o Popula ion Ageing 11 (3): 285–306.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12062-017-9183-5.
Tamayo, H. X. J., and D. Popo a. 2020. “Second Ea ne s and In-Wo k Po e y in Eu ope.” Jou nal
o Social Policy 50 (3): 470–492. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S0047279420000227.
Thijssen, L., B. Lancee, S. Vei , and R. Yemane. 2021. “Disc imina ion Agains Tu kish Mino i ies
in Ge many and he Ne he lands: Field Expe imen al E idence on he E ec o Diagnos ic
In o ma ion on Labou Ma ke Ou comes.” Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 47 (6):
1222–1239. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1622793.
Vei , S., and L. Thijsen. 2021. “Almos Iden ical bu S ill T ea ed Di e en ly: Hi ing
Disc imina ion Agains Fo eign-Bo n and Domes ic-Bo n Mino i ies.” Jou nal o E hnic and
Mig a ion S udies 47 (6): 1285–1304. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1622825.
Vidal, S., F. Pe ales, P. M. Le sch, and M. B andén. 2017. “Family Mig a ion in a C oss-Na ional
Pe spec i e: The Impo ance o Ins i u ional and Cul u al Con ex .” Demog aphic Resea ch
36:307–338. h ps://doi.o g/10.4054/DemRes.2017.36.10.
Weichselbaume , D. 2016. Disc imina ion Agains Female Mig an s Wea ing Headsca es (SSRN
Schola ly Pape No. 2842960).
Wiedne , J., and J. Giesecke. 2022. “Immig an Men’s Economic Adap a ion in Changing Labo
Ma ke s: Why Gaps Be ween Tu kish and Ge man Men Expanded, 1976–2015.”
In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew 56 (1): 176–205. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/01979183211029903.
Windzio, M., and C. M. Aybek. 2015. “Ma iage, No m O ien a ion and Lea ing he Pa en al
Home: Tu kish Immig an and Na i e Families in Ge many.” Compa a i e Popula ion
S udies 40 (2), h ps://doi.o g/10.12765/CPoS-2015-07.
1314 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
Appendix
Table A1. Desc ip i e s a is ics ( o al n = 65,247).
Non-mig an Mixed Mig an
(N = 49,507) (N = 6,818) (N = 8,922)
Household Composi ion
Dual Ea ne 89 83 73
Single Ea ne 11 17 27
To al 100 100 100
Wo k A angemen
Dual ea ne bo h elewo kable 22 20 7
man elewo kable 12 12 5
woman elewo kable 22 20 11
bo h non- elewo kable 32 31 49
Single ea ne man elewo kable 3 5 4
woman elewo kable 1 2 1
man non- elewo kable 5 8 19
woman non- elewo kable 2 3 4
Sou ce: Ge man Mic ocensus Scien i ic Use File 2019, weigh ed column pe cen ages, o al numbe s a e no weigh ed. I
he pa ne is no men ioned, he/she is ei he in a non- elewo kable job (dual-ea ne households) o no employed
(single-ea ne households). Due o ounding, he pe cen ages p esen ed in he ables and igu es may no add up
o exac ly 100%.
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1315
Table A2. Cha ac e is ics o he main ea ne by wo k a angemen s: dual-ea ne households.
Bo h elewo kable Man elewo kable Woman elewo kable Bo h non- elewo kable
Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s
Woman 19% 22% 21% 14% 16% 14% 26% 31% 24% 17% 19% 14%
A e age Age 44,56 41,92 40,19 44,67 41,75 42,45 44,70 42,02 41,16 44,47 42,23 43,96
Educa ion
Low 1 2 4 2 5 11 3 7 10 6 15 28
Medium 35 26 24 47 43 35 56 50 53 71 63 56
High 64 72 72 51 52 54 41 43 37 24 23 16
Type o con ac
No applicable 14 19 19 12 12 17 10 13 14 7 9 7
Fixed- e m 3 5 8 4 5 7 3 5 4 4 8 9
Pe manen 82 76 73 85 82 76 87 82 82 88 84 84
Employmen ype
Sel -employmen 14 19 18 12 12 17 10 13 14 7 9 7
PT-A ypical employmen 1 2 2 2 2 4 2 3 1 3 3 4
FT-A ypical employmen 3 4 8 4 5 7 3 6 6 5 9 12
PT-Employmen 5 4 4 5 5 2 5 5 3 4 5 3
Full- ime employmen 76 71 68 78 75 70 79 74 75 80 75 74
Leade ship esponsibili y
No 50 53 62 54 59 62 60 62 72 67 70 86
Supe iso 20 20 16 21 20 21 21 19 14 21 19 9
Manage 30 27 22 24 21 17 19 19 13 12 11 5
Shi wo k
E e y day 1 1 1 4 5 4 10 9 15 19 21 22
>= hal o he days 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 4 4 4 5
< hal o he days 0 1 0 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2
No 98 98 99 95 93 92 87 87 79 76 73 70
Regions o coun ies o bi h
Ge many 100 64 0 100 62 0 100 55 0 100 57 0
FLC 0 7 16 0 7 19 0 14 16 0 15 22
EU-15 0 9 11 0 8 5 0 6 4 0 5 1
EU-enla gemen 0 9 23 0 9 29 0 11 29 0 10 34
Fo me So ie Union Coun ies 0 4 25 0 5 27 0 7 39 0 6 29
O he 0 7 25 0 8 19 0 8 13 0 7 14
Row pe cen ages 25 24 9 14 15 8 24 22 14 36 39 68
N10,454 1,199 518 5,687 756 431 9,930 1,115 790 14,976 1,976 3,761
Sou ce: Ge man Mic ocensus Scien i ic Use File 2019, own calcula ions, pe cen ages weigh ed, o al numbe s and ow pe cen ages a e no weigh ed. FLC: o me labou ec ui men coun ies. I
he pa ne is no men ioned, he/she is in a non- elewo kable job.
1316 M. HORNUNG ET AL.
Table A3. Cha ac e is ics o he main ea ne by wo k a angemen s: single-ea ne households.
Man elewo kable Woman elewo kable Man non- elewo kable Woman non- elewo kable
Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s Non-mig an Mixed Mig an s
Woman 3% 1% 1% 100% 100% 100% 4% 5% 2% 100% 100% 100%
A e age Age 46,15 42,61 39,25 48,75 41,62 40,28 45,81 41,76 40,54 48,01 42,59 45,60
Educa ion
Low 2 3 9 3 4 7 9 22 37 11 23 29
Medium 39 34 19 56 42 32 68 54 45 70 51 50
High 59 64 71 41 54 61 23 24 18 19 26 21
Type o con ac
No applicable 11 14 15 4 7 11 5 7 6 5 3 2
Fixed- e m 4 5 11 6 11 16 6 8 14 8 9 11
Pe manen 84 81 75 90 81 74 89 85 81 87 88 86
Employmen ype
Sel -employmen 11 14 14 4 7 10 5 7 6 5 3 2
PT-A ypical employmen 2 1 3 6 8 8 3 4 9 14 16 21
FT-A ypical employmen 4 5 10 4 9 11 7 11 15 5 5 8
PT-Employmen 2 4 2 18 12 10 3 3 3 23 23 14
Full- ime employmen 81 76 71 68 64 61 82 76 67 53 53 55
Leade ship esponsibili y
No 51 55 65 74 71 76 70 73 88 79 86 89
Supe iso 21 21 18 17 21 16 19 17 8 14 8 10
Manage 28 23 17 9 8 7 11 10 4 7 7 1
Shi wo k
E e y day 2 2 2 1 3 3 18 21 20 20 18 21
>= hal o he days 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 6 5 5 4 8
< hal o he days 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 3 0 1
No 97 97 97 98 96 96 77 70 74 72 78 71
Regions o coun ies o bi h
Ge many 100 72 0 100 71 0 100 52 0 100 61 0
FLC 0 5 19 0 5 14 0 25 27 0 11 21
EU-15 0 6 7 0 3 6 0 4 1 0 4 2
EU-enla gemen 0 6 14 0 12 27 0 4 23 0 8 25
Fo me So ie Union Coun ies 0 3 18 0 6 13 0 5 15 0 8 34
O he 0 7 43 0 3 39 0 10 34 0 8 19
Row pe cen ages 28 31 16 10 8 2 51 54 74 11 7 8
N 2,388 546 535 839 141 76 4,318 960 2,549 915 125 262
Sou ce: Ge man Mic ocensus Scien i ic Use File 2019, own calcula ions, pe cen ages weigh ed, o al numbe s and ow pe cen ages a e no weigh ed. FLC: o me labou ec ui men coun ies. I
he pa ne is no men ioned, he/she is no employed.
JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES 1317
