Conditions for migrants in Europe: what does irregularity have to do with it?

A recent Yougov poll found that attitudes towards incoming migrants are hardening in Europe. Legal status is at the heart of the debate, with the strongest opposition being towards migrants who are described as irregular. In contrast, a recent PRIME study observed that the public may have more nuanced views on migration policy than what it is usually credited for. This discrepancy can be due to a lack of knowledge. But how much do we actually know about everyday life for migrants with irregular status? And how is life different for them than for regular migrants?

A lack of knowledge about everyday realities for irregular migrants

It is difficult to build a picture of the realities of everyday life for migrants with irregular status in Europe, because it’s a population made up of people from diverse backgrounds who become irregular in different ways, and who deliberately avoid drawing attention for fear of removal. Irregularity can also mean different things, as rights vary across Europe, and those rights change in line with frequently changing migration policies. These obstacles have led to a body of knowledge that tends to focus on the legal and political context, with studies on experiences among irregular migrants limited to specific subgroups and geographic locations. In some countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, which have until recently been considered countries of origin and countries of transit rather than countries of immigration, research is particularly scarce. And in the absence of knowledge, misinformation about life for people with irregular status is rife.

Exploring work, housing and health across five EU ‘gateway’ countries

Our recent research across five EU states sought to contribute to our understanding of conditions for migrants with irregular status in Europe, and the role their status plays, through survey interviews. In 2024, our team carried out 1,527 in-depth surveys across Croatia, Greece, Italy, Poland, and Spain, with a mix of regular and irregular migrants from outside the EU. We asked people about the information they had obtained about their rights and access to services in their country of interview, their access to employment and services, experience of discrimination, and future intentions.

We found that status matters, but so do many other factors. In Croatia, for example, respondents indicated a lack of concern about holding irregular status, despite irregularity providing almost no access to services. This suggests that other factors –individual agency, perhaps, and informal mechanisms– are likely to be at play, enabling them to access services and resources. Our findings from across all five countries suggest that, beyond status, the following factors can affect conditions:

• Access to information around rights and services is the gateway to accessing those services, and information access can be independent of status. However, we also found that a legal obligation to provide information to people who arrive by irregular means seem to work. Access to information was higher among irregular migrants in countries where authorities are legally obliged to share information about rights and asylum procedures. This measure brings conditions back to status, however, since the provision of information is tied to irregularity, there is an obligation to share information with people who arrive irregularly. At the same time, there is a question around the quality and type of information. Access to information among irregular migrants interviewed in Italy was higher than among their peers with documentation, but they also most frequently reported a lack of information as an obstacle to accessing services.
• The structure of the labour market seems to shape conditions for irregular migrants alongside status, which appears to be strongly linked to employment opportunities. Respondents who held irregular status more often worked in lower-skilled jobs, in a more limited range of sectors, and more often reported piecework rather than hourly, daily, or monthly pay. At the same time, we found that in Greece, Italy and Spain, migrants of all statuses were working in the unregulated, informal sector. Holding irregular status increases the risks, but holding regular status does not prevent informal and precarious working conditions either.
• The market also seems to have an influence regarding housing. We found that variations in housing situations reflected the housing market conditions in each country, more than they reflected a difference in status. Housing situations are worse where the housing market is worse: where there is more overcrowding, housing is in a worse state of repair, and/or costs are higher. Although, again, status appears to be an aggravating factor, with homelessness being more prevalent among respondents with irregular status.
• Discrimination and fear. In Greece and Poland, our results generally found less variation between migrants holding regular and irregular status. In Greece, both groups frequently reported both discrimination and poor conditions, suggesting that discrimination around being a migrant is linked to poor conditions; however, respondents with irregular status reported an extra burden of fear. Poland saw less variation: both groups generally reported better conditions than respondents in other countries, while discrimination and language barriers were more often reported as obstacles to decent living and working conditions.

Results around healthcare raised concerns that fear, or lack of knowledge, are preventing people from seeking the services they need. Despite having the legal right to emergency care, a considerable proportion of respondents in Croatia, Greece, Italy, and Poland reported having had no need for health services, particularly those with irregular status. In contrast, respondents in Spain – who have the same rights to health services as citizens – rarely said they had no need of healthcare, suggesting that respondents in the other countries were exercising a form of ‘self-censorship’.

Irregular status, conditions and onward movement within the EU

A fairly small proportion of respondents intended to move onward within the EU. Some patterns were observed: in Croatia and Poland, respondents with irregular status more often said they were considering moving to another country than those with regular status, and in both cases a sizeable group remained undecided.

Staying in place seems to be linked to a sense of stability. Respondents frequently said they were remaining where “their needs are met”, or because they had exhausted realistic options for moving elsewhere. In a similar vein, the intention to leave was more associated with difficulties in gaining that stability, with people reporting challenges regarding regularisation and general precarity as motivations for leaving, rather than with any specific problems regarding employment or safety, for example.

Status is an important factor, but not the only factor, determining everyday realities for people with irregular status. Our research complements existing qualitative studies by providing larger-scale insights about conditions for irregular migrants in Europe. We have found that conditions vary considerably, but are often tough, and status is extremely important, especially for accessing decent work and health services. However, we have also found that it is not the only factor, suggesting that other institutions and interests have a role in determining outcomes for irregular migrants. Discrimination, lack of information, and prevailing market conditions all play a role in determining whether de jure rights can be exercised in real life, and whether migrants can access work or services beyond their de jure rights.

Access the full report ‘Irregular migrants’ access to work, healthcare and housing in the European Union: is it all about status?‘.

Jane Linekar is an independent researcher and learning consultant, specialising in migration. This blog reflects on some of the key findings of research undertaken as part of the Horizon Europe project ‘Protecting Irregular Migrants in Europe’.