“Americans Think We're Criminals Who Invade the Streets:” A Qualitative Study of Undocumented Mexican Day Laborers

Purpose: Undocumented migration has become a polarizing political issue, with both immigration rights protests and anti-immigration groups mobilizing across the nation. An estimated 9.3 million undocumented workers now live in the United States (Passel, Fix & Capps, 2004), taking unskilled jobs at low wages and prompting some lawmakers to call for tougher law enforcement as well as measures to restrict access to health care and humanitarian assistance (Hancock, 2007). Though political debate has given migration a public face, less is known about how migrants perceive their daily struggles. This study seeks to answer the questions: What obstacles did migrants perceive in living and working as undocumented laborers? How did migrant laborers interpret anti-immigrant hostility?

Methods: Data were gathered in two periods of intensive fieldwork in Freehold, New Jersey: 360 hours of participant observation in summer 2005 including meeting with undocumented Mexican men at day labor sites, attending weekly migrants' meetings, and assisting immigrant rights activists with tasks. This approach reflects the ethnographic emphasis on “knowing with” participants (Tedlock, 2000). In summer 2006, semi-structured interviews were conducted in Spanish with undocumented workers (n=32). Each question was open-ended to allow respondents to explain their experiences in as much, and as rich, detail as possible and to offer interpretations (Lofland & Lofland. 1998). Sampling was purposive. Interviews were taped and transcribed verbatim by a native Spanish-speaker. Interviews were translated before consulting Spanish-speaking colleagues to verify accuracy. Coding began after each interview, with emphasis on exploring data thematically (Taylor & Bogdan, 1989). Analysis was facilitated through the use of NVivo software, which helped track codes and categories.

Findings: Each of 32 respondents described making the decision to migrate following years of frustration over poverty. Wages in Mexico ranged from $4 to $6 daily, an amount adequate for food but which left nothing for clothing, repairs or farming tools. Men vigorously disputed characterizations as illegal or criminal, and argued these labels served to limit their ability to support their families. Mexican day laborers made considerable efforts interviews to explain that they are not criminals, and to note the difference between true criminality (behavior that harms others) verses the label of “illegal immigrant.” When some migrants did engage in criminal acts, they were ostracized, with most men distancing themselves from such conduct.

Implications: This study is crucial for social work in settings in which practitioners might encounter this population. The terms, “illegal immigrant” and “illegal alien” clearly connote criminality, and thus without scrutiny, could dissuade social workers from supporting and engaging this population empathically. Understanding how members of disadvantaged groups perceive themselves, rather than accepting characterizations from popular discourse, is a critical element of culturally competent practice (Lum, 2007). Data suggest that immigration policy should be re-examined with attention given to allowing migrants legalized opportunities to work, thus alleviating undo burdens of stress and stigma.