Neither settling nor conforming: expectations and reactions to low quality jobs of migrant-origin workers in the Netherlands

Abstract

Migrant-origin workers in Western European countries are more likely to hold low-quality jobs compared to native-origin workers. According to adaptation-level and relative deprivation theories and theories of immigrant socioeconomic integration, this difference may result from migrant-origin workers having lower job quality expectations and weaker reactions to low-quality jobs, due to their awareness of structural labour market disadvantages and lower employability. However, these assumptions have rarely been tested empirically. We provide a direct test using longitudinal, high-quality survey data from the Netherlands (2008-2024) and comparing native-origin workers and first- and second-generation migrants (N = 3744-9671, across model specifications). We hypothesize that migrant-origin workers have lower job quality expectations, experience less job dissatisfaction when those expectations are unmet, and are less likely to translate job dissatisfaction into turnover intentions and subsequent job changes. Based on random- and fixed-effects regression models, we find that migrant-origin workers have similar wage and working hours expectations as native-origin workers. They also report similar or even higher levels of job dissatisfaction when their job quality expectations are unmet. When dissatisfied with their jobs, migrant-origin workers are as likely as native-origin workers to express turnover intentions. Despite their intentions being similar, migrant-origin workers are generally less likely to change jobs in the following year. Overall, our findings indicate that migrant-origin workers neither settle for nor conform to low-quality jobs, and that their structural disadvantage may be better explained by demand-side constraints.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Social Science Research, 2026 · DOI ↗