Romas on the labour market

Before we move onto the questions of the nature of labour discrimination and legal regulation, we would like to give a brief overview of the situation of the Roma society on the labour market in the past decades.

By the time of the Second World War, the Roma population of Hungary, whose members amounted to approximately 200 thousand people, has mostly settled down and in other aspects also was leading a lifestyle that was different from the traditional Roma way of living. According to the Report of Public Foundation for European Comparative Minority Research published in 2000 the traditional Roma crafts have started to diminish, slowly wither and die during the time of the Dualism. However, due to the quick economic growth and liberalism in those times, the Romas that have lost their trade could successfully find a means of living. The disappearance of the old professions began to increase between the two World Wars, and the Romas found it increasingly difficult to keep up with the crisis-ridden technical and social development. The situation worsened with the heavy immigration of Romas from the neighbouring countries and there were more and more Romas for an ever-decreasing number of job opportunities. Thus their financial, social and cultural breaking away from the majority society increased rapidly.

Their situation became significantly worse during the 1944 regime, when the authorities tried to solve the “Roma-problem” by radical means (re-education, domestication), which ended in a holocaust.  „For the Romas the end of the war primarily meant survival, and the escape from annihilation. The democratic era of 1947-1948 substantially changed the relation of the Romas and the whole of society. The authoritarian system of pre-1944 did not consider the Romas as equals, but democracy announced the principle of equality. Although the newly established police that took over the role of rural gendarmerie became an instrument of the political struggle, racial and ethnical discrimination was forbidden for them, and due to its personnel it was socially basically on the side of the poor.”[1] Besides the above mentioned, clearly positive effects of the changes occurred, Romas experienced serious economic losses. As a result of the social changes the consumer layers that were once the market for traditional Roma occupations (i.e. music, different handicrafts, trade) disappeared. Thus the historical capital that the Romas have fought for so hard was also destroyed in a – as we will see later on – not so unique manner in the 20^th century.

According to the quoted report of the PFECMR the land distribution of spring 1945 – which finalised the destruction of the landowning class’s economic and political power and gave land to the peasants and the agriculturally poverty-stricken – also did not favour the Romas. As the Romas have been left out of the distribution of land. The majority never even claimed land, but apart from a small exception, even the ones who did, did not receive any. Land was scarce and although more than a third of the Roma population made their living out of agricultural seasonal labour, they did not become landowners after the land distribution. The distribution of land that was supposed to benefit the poor living out of agriculture did not only rid the Romas of these benefits but put them at a significant disadvantage, as they lost those opportunities of work that the middle and large estates provided them with.

At the end of the 40’s, beginning of the 50’s a reverse process began, which brought about a significant economic improvement for the Romas. The forced industrialisation that lasted until the middle of the 80’s resulted in complete occupation, moreover overfull-employment and a shortage of labour in the Budapest industrial area, in the Northern region and the larger part of Transdanubia. In the Eastern region and the Great Plains the result was almost complete occupation.[2] The newly established workplaces required vast numbers of mostly unskilled labour, thus masses of Romas were able to work.

 According to the findings of the 1971 Romaresearch 85% of the male Roma working population (ages 15-59) were active earners. This number – despite public belief – is only slightly lower than the rate of employment in the whole male working population (87%). The difference is more significant in the case of women. Only 30% of the female Roma working population were active earners, whilst that rate was 64% amongst the whole female working population.[3] This difference was basically the result of the traditional Roam family model (primarily men are the earners in the family, the women’s role is to keep house and bring up the children).

The employment of male Romas was the most prevalent in the industrialised regions and the least common in the agricultural regions. As it can be seen, the regional differences – that are also characteristic of Hungary today in a different distribution – have developed in this era.

As a result of the industrialisation that started in the 50’s and took on an increasing swing in the following decades, the Romas streamed from agriculture into the industry. This process was enhanced by the fact that from the agricultural seasonal labour, Romas could only scarcely make a decent living. As a result of industrialisation, thanks to the numerous working opportunities with regular payment, the financial situation of the Romas became stable and they could successfully fit in with the socialist workers.

The above mentioned factors did not, however mean that agricultural seasonal labour did not play a large role in the living of Romas. In several cases, whilst the men in the family worked in socialist factories, plants, smelting-works, or mines, women casual jobs in agriculture. Frequently the whole family took part in the seasonal work, thus, in order to better make ends meet, the Roma families took work in both the industry and agriculture. This also satisfied the economy’s large demand for cheap, unskilled labour force.

The situation of Romas was not problemfree in this era either. Significant differences could be seen between the Roma and the non-Roma population. The majority of Roma employees were doing work characteristic of lower social classes that did not really pay well.[4] One explanation for this is that Romas were significantly lagging behind in terms of education,[5] which is one of the major causes of Roma unemployment up to this very day.

The situation did not significantly change after the research of 1971, forced privatisation continued for somewhat more than another decade and a half. Shortage of labour not only remained but increased, even in regions which, in 1971, were still far from complete occupation and more workplaces were available for women. Accordingly, Roma women began to undertake work with regular payment. The percentage of female earners already approached 50% in the 70’s (in contrast to the 30% of 1971) and surpassed this rate in the beginning of the 80’s.[6]

The economic and political changes of the second half of the 80’s induced destructive changes. The clearer it became that this degree of artificially generated industrial development cannot be upheld, the more people were laid off. The changing of regime had a shocking effect on the labour market. People employed in the socialist heavy industry, those with low level education, the unskilled workers, etc, were laid off in masses. The Roma society suffered from these changes far more than any other social group.

According to Gábor Kertesi’s essay, Roma employment and unemployment before and after the change of regime[7] with the change of regime the Roma society lost its financial basis for the second time in its 100 year history. However – he believes –, that whilst the disintegration of the traditional Roma communities, the disappearance of the markets for traditional Roma trades was the result of the slow developments of the first half of the century that lasted for several decades, to which Romas could more or less adjust themselves to, the mass unemployment that appeared after the change in regime over just a few years, swiftly destroyed almost all the results of the slow modernisation process. There is no doubt that – he goes – the integration of the Roma society was only illusory: the (work)opportunities offered by the twisted modernisation of socialism did not prove to last. Social uprising was real though: people outside society were admitted into society in masses, even if only into its lower layers.

The wave of unemployment after the change in regime first effected the Romas, they were forced out of the labour market in biggest numbers and it was (and still is) for them the hardest to adapt to the new conditions on the market. All this is related to the fact that above all those workplaces diminished, that could be filled with low levels of education and unskilled labour, where previously the majority of the Romas worked.

From the data collected during the 1993 Roma investigation it can be established that whilst by the end of the year the rate of employment in the whole population was 65%, this number was only 24% amongst Romas. From the whole working male population 64% were employed, whilst this number was only 29% by the Romas. This difference was even larger in the case of women. In the whole country 66% of women aged 15-54 were employed, but this was only 15% in the case of Roma women.[8]

At the time of the 2003 national Romareasearch 21% of the Roma population aged 15-74 was employed in contrast to the 22% of 1993. The rate of employment among the male population was 28% in comparison with the 28,5% of 1993. 15% of women were employed, just as in 1993. On national level, in the first quarter of 2003 49,98% of the whole population was employed, this number 56,5% among men and 43,7% among women. As we can see the difference between these conditions and those of 10 years previously is not at all that significant.[9]

There are several reasons why the Roma population was unsuccessful on the labour market. The most important factor is the low level of education and skilled training. Today it is a cliché that the level of education is one of the main channels of mobility, which plays an increasingly important role in the distribution of workplaces and wages. Although the rate of those completing primary school has increased, this does little to help the situation of Romas on the labour market. According to the review of the Delphoi Consulting published in 2000 under the title The employment of Hungarian Romas, if a certain level of education is achieved by almost everone, then this result will have no effect on those social differences, that appear in the population later on.[10] This means that school certificates loose their importance. To this day there has been no significant improvement in the situation of Romas in the field of higher education. The distance between Romas and non-Romas has increased with respect to further education and admittance into secondary schools. Out of the 3 possible institutions of secondary schools only vocational secondary schools are open for Romas, which, as we all know, is a dead-end in the Hungarian system of education.

Besides the level of education, regional inequalities are also a further problem. The Roma population is concentrated in the crisis-regions of Hungary, where the rate of unemployment is the highest. The study of István Kemény and Béla Janky based on the 2003 Romaresearch reveals that, according to 1993 data, few Romas live in Fejér, Komárom-Esztergom, Vas, Veszprém and Győr-Moson-Sopron counties, and it is in these particular counties where the rate of unemployment is the lowest. On the other hand, they write, the Roma population is significant in Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg, Nógrád, Heves, Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok, Hajdú-Bihar, Baranya and Sopron counties. Experience shows that these areas are more or less the most struggling on the labour market. Upon inspecting the above list, it becomes clear that it is in these counties that the forced industrialisation of the socialist system had the most effect, here were the most heavy industrial factories established, and quickly went bankrupt after the change in regime. The rate of unemployment in the building industry on 1993 was almost double the national rate.

However, the problem of regional inequalities does not only appear on a county level. Almost a third of the Roma population lives on settlements that most lack the opportunities for employment, thus they are more smitten by the inequalities between the different types of settlements. „Furthermore migration from these underprivileged villages is almost impossible. Due to the hopeless situation of the region real estate prices are extremely low, and for the majority of those wishing to move, the real estate that they live in is the only asset they have. The market value of these is nowhere near the prices of better developed settlements, thus the inhabitants of small settlements in crisis-regions are bound to their land and since there is no other opportunity stay prisoners of poverty forever. The higher the proportion of Romas in a settlement, the more non-Romas leave. This basically can be attributed to 2 factors: first, the higher level of education increases the possibilities of migration, as chances of finding suitable work at a settlement that is better off are greater; and second, migration is more characteristic of young and single people. The majority of Romas have a large family, and as we know, they are at a great disadvantage in respect of the level of their education. The situation is worsened by the fact that the low real estate prices are appealing to unemployed Romas, this they migrate into the lesser developed areas by the masses.”[11] Because of this, the proportion of Romas in the crisis-regions constantly increases, which, in turn increases the lagging behind of the Roma population.