Migrants Outpace Irish-Born in Employment and Education

Migrants Outpace Irish-Born in Employment and Education
New research from the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) reveals that foreign-born residents in Ireland are more likely to be employed, actively engaged in the labour market, and better educated than their Irish-born counterparts. The findings, detailed in the latest Monitoring Report on Integration, offer a comprehensive comparison of migrant and Irish-born experiences across key areas such as employment, education, social inclusion, and active citizenship. Jointly published by the ESRI, the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, and the Department of Justice, the report underscores both the contributions of migrants and the significant hurdles they continue to face.

Employment and Labour Market Trends​

The report highlights that migrants have consistently outperformed Irish-born residents in employment and labour market participation since 2022. Employment rates for foreign-born individuals have rebounded strongly since dipping to levels comparable to the Irish-born population during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021. However, despite their higher workforce engagement, migrants earn lower incomes on average and are more vulnerable to poverty and deprivation, with 14.5% affected compared to 11% of Irish-born residents.

Housing Cost Disparities​

One of the most striking findings is the disproportionate burden of housing costs on migrants. The ESRI notes that 37% of foreign-born residents spend over 30% of their income on housing, a figure that dwarfs the 9% seen among Irish-born individuals. Describing this disparity as "particularly stark," the report signals an urgent need for targeted policy interventions to address the housing crisis impacting migrant communities.

Educational Attainment​

Education, a critical indicator of integration, also shows migrants surpassing Irish-born residents. Between 2021 and 2023, 59% of working-age foreign-born individuals held tertiary education qualifications, compared to 42% of their Irish-born peers. However, educational attainment varies widely by region of origin. Migrants from eastern EU countries reported the lowest rate at 38%, while those from Asia achieved the highest at 79%.

Self-Employment and Political Engagement​

In 2024, self-employment rates (excluding agriculture) remained higher among Irish-born residents (10.3%) than foreign-born residents (8.4%). Notable exceptions include migrants from the UK (15.3%) and North America, Australia, and Oceania (15.5%), who exceeded the Irish-born rate. Politically, migrant participation is on the rise, with the number of immigrants running for and winning seats in the 2024 local elections doubling since previous cycles—though representation remains modest at 2.2% of councillors.

Opportunities and Challenges Ahead​

Evan Carron-Kee, co-author of the report, emphasized the dual nature of the findings. "Recent positive developments in migrant integration include strong growth in the African employment rate and improvements in citizenship processing times," he noted. "However, persistent challenges remain. Migrants are disproportionately impacted by the housing crisis and are far more likely to experience income poverty and deprivation. These issues require urgent policy attention."

The report, part of an ongoing series tracking migrant integration in Ireland, underscores the vital role foreign-born residents play in the nation’s economy and society while highlighting systemic barriers that continue to hinder their full inclusion. As Ireland navigates these dynamics, the ESRI’s findings provide a critical evidence base for shaping equitable and effective policy responses.

Comments

Are Migrants Really More Likely to Be Working Than Irish-Born? Unpacking the ESRI’s 2024 Integration Report​


The Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) dropped a bold claim in its "Monitoring Report on Integration 2024": migrants in Ireland are more likely to be working than their Irish-born peers. The numbers seem to back it up—76.8% of foreign-born individuals aged 15–64 were employed in Q1 2024, edging out the Irish-born at 72.7%. It’s a feel-good stat, suggesting migrants are thriving in Ireland’s job market. But peel back the layers, and this headline starts to wobble. Age differences, excluded groups, and definitional quirks reveal a picture that’s less rosy—and more skewed—than it first appears.

The Claim Under the Microscope​

The ESRI pulls this figure from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), a quarterly snapshot of private households by the Central Statistics Office (CSO). It tracks employment—defined as working at least one hour for pay in the prior week or being temporarily absent—among those aged 15–64. That 4.1 percentage point gap (76.8% vs. 72.7%) is real, and statistically significant. But is it the full story?

Age: The Hidden Booster​

Age plays a massive role. Migrants skew younger and more work-ready than the Irish-born population. The report’s Table 1.3 lays it out: 77.8% of foreign-born residents are aged 15–64, compared to 62.0% of Irish-born. Only 6.4% of migrants are over 65 (and thus excluded from the tally), while 17.2% of Irish-born are past working age. Even within the 15–64 bracket, migrants cluster in prime working years. Table 2.2 breaks it down:

  • Ages 15–24: Both groups tie at 47.8%, with many still in school.
  • Ages 25–54: Foreign-born hit 85.8%, topping Irish-born at 83.8%.
  • Ages 55–64: Foreign-born lead 66.8% to 61.8%.
That 25–54 sweet spot—where employment peaks—carries the migrant average. Meanwhile, the Irish-born spread includes more teens and near-retirees, pulling their rate down. The report controls for those over 65, but the migrant-heavy prime-age cohort still gives them an edge.

The Missing Piece: Communal Accommodation​

Here’s where it gets murkier. The LFS only surveys private households, skipping migrants in communal setups—like asylum seekers in Direct Provision or Ukrainians under temporary protection (BoTPs). These aren’t small groups. Over 20,000 international protection applications flooded in during 2023 (Figure 1.6), and Ukrainian arrivals spiked post-2022. Yet their employment rates are dismal:

  • International Protection Applicants (IPAs): Just 11% had work permissions in 2022 (page 34), with many barred from jobs for months.
  • Ukrainian BoTPs: Only 27% were employed by mid-2023, per CSO data.
These tens of thousands drag down the true migrant employment rate, but they’re invisible in the LFS’s 76.8%. The survey captures settled migrants—those already in private homes—while sidelining newer arrivals struggling to break in.

Second-Generation Shadows​

Then there’s the second-generation question: kids of migrants born in Ireland. The report counts them as Irish-born, not foreign-born, per international norms. If they’re less employed—say, due to youth or barriers—it could nudge the Irish-born rate down, making migrants look better. The report doesn’t size them up for 2024, but 2016 Census data hints they’re a small, young group, so the effect is likely minor. Still, it’s a wrinkle worth noting.

Not All Migrants Are Equal​

The headline also glosses over diversity. Table 2.1 shows the spread:

  • UK-born: 70.8%, below Irish-born.
  • African-born: 65.8%, well under the mark.
  • EU-East: 85.8%, a standout.
  • Asian-born: 81.8%, strong too.
High performers like EU-East and Asian-born prop up the average, while others lag. Bundling them all as “foreign-born” smooths out the cracks.

True, False, or Skewed?​

So, is the ESRI right? Technically, yes—within the LFS’s narrow lens (private households, 15–64), foreign-born outwork Irish-born. But it’s skewed:

  • Age Tilt: Migrants’ prime-age concentration lifts their rate.
  • Missing Migrants: Excluding IPAs and BoTPs inflates the figure, ignoring the least employed.
  • Second-Generation: A small downward nudge on Irish-born, though not a game-changer.
A truer take? “Settled migrants in private homes outpace Irish-born, but recent arrivals tank the broader average.” The report’s survey focus favors the integrated, leaving out the struggling.

The Bigger Picture​

The ESRI isn’t wrong to spotlight migrant contributions—many bring skills and hustle. But its upbeat tone sidesteps thornier realities: higher poverty, housing woes, and barriers for asylum seekers and Ukrainians (pages ix–xi). Better data—covering all migrants, not just the settled—would tell a fuller tale. For now, this headline’s a half-truth: impressive, but incomplete.

Read full report here
 
Back
Top