Kamu Yönetiminin Yeni Sorun Alanı: Geçici İşçi Göçü ve Hak-Güvenlik İkilemine Karşı Tutum

Öz

Küresel işgücü piyasalarının esnek emek talebi ile ulus-devletlerin egemenlik kaygıları arasında şekillenen geçici işgücü göçü politikalarını (GİGP), Kamu Yönetimi disiplinine özgü “Hak-Güvenlik İkilemi” bağlamında incelemektedir. Araştırmanın temel amacı, ekonomik verimlilik ve ulusal güvenlik gerekçelerinin, göçmen işçilerin sosyal haklara erişimini nasıl kısıtladığını ve yapısal kırılganlığı (prekarite) nasıl kurumsallaştırdığını ortaya koymaktır. Nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden “en çok farklılaşan sistemler tasarımı” kullanılarak, İtalya, İspanya, Norveç, Japonya ve Türkiye’nin yasal ve politik çerçeveleri, T.H. Marshall’ın sosyal vatandaşlık kuramı ışığında karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulguları, vatandaşlık statüsü eksikliğinin göçmen işçilerin pazarlık gücünü kıran temel mekanizma olduğunu ve güvenliğin, hakları kısıtlayan bir araç olarak kullanıldığını göstermektedir. İtalya ve İspanya, düzenleme mekanizmalarıyla (Arraigo vb.) “hak temelli entegrasyon” modeli sunarken; Norveç ve Japonya, katı yasal statü şartlarıyla “statü temelli dışlama” modelini benimsemektedir. Türkiye ise hizmet temelli haklar sunan ancak yasal statüde geçicilikte ısrar eden “karma/kriz yönetimi” modeliyle ayrışmaktadır. Çalışma sonucunda, Kamu Yönetiminin sosyal hakları bir maliyet veya güvenlik tehdidi olarak değil, toplumsal dayanıklılığı ve ekonomik bütünleşmeyi sağlayan bir yatırım olarak görmesi gerektiği, aksi takdirde hak-güvenlik ikileminin sürdürülebilir olmadığı vurgulanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Geçici İşgücü Göçü
• Hak-Güvenlik İkilemi
• Sosyal Vatandaşlık
• Kamu Yönetimi
• Prekarite.

A New Problem Area in Public Administration: Temporary Labor Migration and the Approach to the Rights-Security Dilemma

Öz

The study analyses Temporary Labor Migration Policies (TLMPs), which are shaped by the flexible labor demands of global markets and the sovereignty concerns of nation-states, through the lens of the “Rights-Security Dilemma” in Public Administration. The study aims to demonstrate how economic efficiency and national security rationales limit migrant workers' access to social rights and institutionalize structural precarity. Employing a “most different systems design” qualitative approach, the research comparatively examines the legal and political frameworks of Italy, Spain, Norway, Japan, and Turkey in relation to T.H. Marshall's social citizenship theory. The findings suggest that the absence of citizenship status is the primary factor undermining migrant workers' bargaining power, and that security considerations are employed to restrict rights. Italy and Spain exemplify a “rights-based integration” model through regularization mechanisms such as Arraigo, whereas Norway and Japan implement a “status-based exclusion” model characterized by stringent legal status requirements. Turkey is distinguished by a “hybrid/crisis management” model, which provides service-based rights while maintaining temporary legal status. The study concludes that Public Administration should regard social rights as an investment in social resilience and economic integration, rather than as a cost or security threat. Failure to do so renders the rights-security dilemma unsustainable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Temporary Labor Migration
• Rights-Security Dilemma
• Social Citizenship
• Public Administration
• Precarity.

Kaynakça

1. Aksu, E., Erzan, R., & Kırdar, M. G. (2022). The impact of mass migration of Syrians on the Turkish labor market. Labour Economics, 76, 102183.
2. Alpar, M. B. (2000). Göçmen işçilere ilişkin 97 sayılı ve 143 sayılı ILO Sözleşmeleri ile ilgili çalışma mevzuatı. Kamu-İş, 6(1), 123-141.
3. Anckar, C. (2008). On the Applicability of the Most Similar Systems Design and the Most Different Systems Design in Comparative Research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(5), 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401552
4. Ataç, İ., & Rosenberger, S. (2019). Social Policies as a Tool of Migration Control. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 17(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2018.1539802
5. Badalič, V. (2023). Trapped in the underground economy: Syrian refugees in the informal labour market in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 44(5), 967-984.
6. Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2016). Rethinking case study research: A comparative approach. Routledge.
7. Bartlett, L., & Vavrus, F. (2017). Comparative Case Studies: An Innovative Approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 1(1). https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.1929
8. Basok, T., & López-Sala, A. (2016). Rights and Restrictions: Temporary Agricultural Migrants and Trade Unions’ Activism in Canada and Spain. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 17(4), 1271-1287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-015-0465-6

9. Black, R., Engbersen, G., & Okólski, M. (Ed.). (2010). A continent moving west?: EU enlargement and labour migration from Central and Eastern Europe. Amsterdam University Press.
10. Bommes, M., & Sciortino, G. (Ed.). (2011). Foggy social structures: Irregular migration, European labour markets and the welfare state. Amsterdam University Press.
11. Cholewinski, R. (2007). The Rights of Migrant Workers. İçinde W. Peeters & P. Schoukens (Ed.), The Legal Status of Migrant Workers in Europe (ss. 407-427). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789067044691.314-358
12. Cohen, R. (2006). Migration and its enemies: Global capital migrant labour and the nation-state. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
13. Crépeau, F., Nakache, D., & Atak, I. (2007). International Migration: Security Concerns and Human Rights Standards. Transcultural Psychiatry, 44(3), 311-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461507081634
14. Danış, D., & Dikmen, H. (2022). Türkiye’de göçmen ve mülteci entegrasyonu: Politikalar, uygulamalar ve zorluklar. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(Özel Sayı), 24-45.
15. De Graauw, E., & Bloemraad, I. (2017). Working Together: Building Successful Policy and Program Partnerships for Immigrant Integration 1. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 5(1), 105-123. https://doi.org/10.14240/jmhs.v5i1.76
16. De Guchteneire, P., Pecoud, A., & Cholewinski, R. (2009). Introduction: The UN convention on migrant workers’ rights. İçinde R. I. Cholewinski & A. Pécoud (Ed.), Migration and Human Rights: The United Nations Convention on Migrant Workers’ Rights (ss. 1-44). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511811272.001
17. Degani, P. (2022). Domestic/Care Work and Severe Exploitation. The Limits of Italian Migrant Regularization Schemes. Frontiers in Human Dynamics, 4, 818351. https://doi.org/10.3389/fhumd.2022.818351
18. Devadoss, S., & Luckstead, J. (2011). Implications of immigration policies for the us farm sector and workforce. Economic Inquiry, 49(3), 857-875. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2010.00300.x
19. Ducanes, G., Engblom, A., & Ramos, V. (2023). Informal employment and irregular migration status: A double whammy for migrant workers in Thailand. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 32(2), 234-262. https://doi.org/10.1177/01171968231188135
20. Elias, F., Monras, J., & Vázquez-Grenno, J. (2024). Understanding the Effects of Granting Work Permits to Undocumented Immigrants. Journal of Labor Economics, 43(3), 763-802. https://doi.org/10.1086/730122
21. Ersin, İ., & Tanrıkulu, F. (2024). Informal Employment Areas for Syrian Asylum Seekers in Türkiye: A Fuzzy TOPSIS Analysis. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 115, 191-206.
22. Filipov, I. (2024). Migration—İnherent process of social resilience at the level of local public administration. Civil Resilience and Security, 14(2), 127-134. https://doi.org/10.59295/crs2024.14
23. Fiorio, C., Frattini, T., Riganti, A., & Christl, M. (2023). Migration and public finances in the EU. International Tax and Public Finance, 31(3), 635-684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-023-09787-9
24. Fudge, J. (2022). Squaring the circle: The ILO, temporary labour migration programmes and decent work. Global Social Policy, 22(2), 374-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181221094946
25. Fuentes, M., & Javier, F. (2005). The regularisation of undocumented migrants as a mechanism for the ‘emerging’ of the Spanish underground economy. International Migration Review, 39(3), 594-617. http://hdl.handle.net/10261/1637
26. Gibárti, S. (2021). Aiding Syrian refugees in Turkey: International approaches and domestic policies. Security and Defence Quarterly, 33(1), 57-72.
27. Gifra, L. (2024). Securitizing migration in times of crisis: Private actors and the provision of (in)security. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2296601
28. Güney, G. Ö., & Cengiz, S. (2023). Göç, göçmen politikaları ve Türkiye’de işgücü piyasalarında prekaryalaşma. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(20), 236-249.
29. Herbert, W. (2010). Foreign workers and law enforcement in Japan. Routledge.
30. Hughes, S. (2019). With Liberty and Equality for All. Oxford University Press.
31. Huseynova, I. (2024). Precarious work in the integration of foreigners into the labour market: The precarity as a result of structural restrictions. Polis, 23(2), 30-52.
32. İşleyen, B., & Karadağ, S. (2023). Engineered migration at the Greek–Turkish border: A spectacle of violence and humanitarian space. Security Dialogue, 54(5), 475-492.
33. Karataş, M., & Duyan, V. (2021). Kitlesel Göç, Sosyal Kabullenme ve Uyum Bağlamında Türkmen İşçilerin Deneyimleri. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 18(42), 5480-5515. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.932531
34. Kayaoglu, A. Y. (2020). Labour market impact of Syrian refugees in Turkey: The view of employers in informal textile sector in Istanbul. Migration Letters, 17(5), 583-595.
35. Koca, B. T. (2024). Bordering processes through the use of technology: The Turkish case. İçinde The Digital Empowerment-Control Nexus (ss. 89-106). Routledge.
36. Lenard, P. T. (2014). Injustice and high-skilled “temporary” labour migration. GRITIM-UPF Working Paper Series n. 19.
37. Lenard, P. T., & Straehle, C. (2012). Temporary labour migration, global redistribution, and democratic justice. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 11(2), 206-230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X10392338
38. Lori, N., & Schilde, K. (2021). A Political Economy of Global Security Approach to Migration and Border Control. Journal of Global Security Studies, 6(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1093/JOGSS/OGAA011
39. Lund, F. (2012). Work‐related social protection for informal workers. International Social Security Review, 65(4), 9-30.
40. Mai, N., Macioti, P., Bennachie, C., Fehrenbacher, A., Giametta, C., Hoefinger, H., & Musto, J. (2021). Migration, sex work and trafficking: The racialized bordering politics of sexual humanitarianism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 44(9), 1607-1628. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2021.1892790
41. Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class and other essays. Cambridge University Press.
42. Misje, T. (2020). Social work and welfare bordering: The case of homeless EU migrants in Norway. European Journal of Social Work, 23(3), 401-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2019.1682975
43. Mix, P. R., & Piper, N. (2003). Does Marriage “Liberate”. Women from Sex Work? İçinde N. Piper & M. Roces (Ed.), Wife or worker? Asian women and migration (ss. 53-72). Rowman and Lettlefield.
44. Molinero-Gerbeau, Y. (2025). State Thought and Migration: Analysing the Ideological Underpinnings of Temporary Migration Programmes. Genealogy, 9(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/genealogy9010028
45. Moreno-Fuentes, F. J. (2020). Migrants’ access to social protection in Spain. İçinde JM. Lafleur & D. Vintila (Ed.), Migration and Social Protection in Europe and Beyond (Volume 1) Comparing Access to Welfare Entitlements (ss. 405-420). Springer International Publishing.
46. Morris-Suzuki, T. (2006). Changing border control regimes and their impact on migration in Asia. İçinde A. Kaur & I. Metcalfe (Ed.), Mobility, Labour Migration and Border Controls in Asia (ss. 8-22). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
47. OECD. (2004). Trade and Migration: Building Bridges for Global Labour Mobility (C. 763). OECD Publishing.
48. Özgüler, V. C. (2018). Kitlesel göçlerin emek piyasalarına etkisi: Türkiye’deki Suriyeliler. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 74, 77-102.
49. Öztek, A. S. (2021). Refugees and the informal labour market: Evidence from Syrian inflows to Turkey. Journal of Economic Theory and Econometrics, 32(2), 1-53.
50. Pécoud, A. (2017). The politics of the UN Convention on Migrant Workers’ rights. Groningen Journal of International Law, 5(1), 57-72. https://doi.org/10.21827/59db6983b848b
51. Pécoud, A., & De Guchteneire, P. (2006). Migration, human rights and the United Nations: An investigation into the obstacles to the UN Convention on Migrant Workers’ Rights. Windsor YB Access Just., 24(2). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1816451
52. Pellerin, H. (2017). Migration and Border Controls in the EU: Economic and Security Factors. İçinde Routledge Handbook of International Trade Governance (ss. 105-122). Routledge.
53. Pe-Pua, R. (2003). Wife, mother, and maid: The triple role of Filipino domestic workers in Spain and Italy. İçinde N. Piper & M. Roces (Ed.), Wife or worker? Asian women and migration (ss. 157-180). Rowman and Lettlefield.
54. Perna, R., & Batalla, M. (2023). Immigrant regularisation politics during COVID-19: Advocacy coalitions and governments’ incentives in Italy and Spain. South European Society and Politics, 28(4), 415-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2024.2354007
55. Peters, B. G., & Fontaine, G. (Ed.). (2020). Handbook of research methods and applications in comparative policy analysis. Edward Elgar Publishing.
56. Piper, N. (1999). Labor Migration, Trafficking and International Marriage: Female Cross-Border Movements into Japan. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 5(2), 69-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/12259276.1999.11665849
57. Piper, N. (2022). Temporary labour migration in Asia: The transnationality‐precarity nexus. International Migration, 60(4), 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12982
58. Piper, N., & Roces, M. (2003). Introduction: Marriage and Migration in an Age of Globalization. İçinde N. Piper & M. Roces (Ed.), Wife or worker? Asian women and migration (ss. 1-22). Rowman and Lettlefield.
59. Preibisch, K., & Otero, G. (2014). Does Citizenship Status Matter in Canadian Agriculture? Workplace Health and Safety for Migrant and Immigrant Laborers. Rural Sociology, 79(2), 174-199. https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12043
60. Rivera-Batiz, F. (1999). Undocumented workers in the labor market: An analysis of the earnings of legal and illegal Mexican immigrants in the United States. Journal of Population Economics, 12(1), 91-116.
61. Ruhs, M. (2013). The Price of Rights: Regulating International Labor Migration. Princeton University Press.
62. Ruhs, M. (2017). Rethinking International Legal Standards for the Protection of Migrant Workers: The Case for a “Core Rights” Approach. American Journal of International Law, 111(1), 172-176. https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2017.35
63. Simon, R. J., & DeLey, M. (1984). The work experience of undocumented Mexican women migrants in Los Angeles. International Migration Review, 18(4), 1212-1229.
64. Siviş, S. (2021). Integrating bottom‐up into top‐down: The role of local actors in labour market integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey. International Migration, 59(4), 190-206.
65. Strauss, K., & McGrath, S. (2017). Temporary migration, precarious employment and unfree labour relations: Exploring the ‘continuum of exploitation’ in Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program. Geoforum, 78, 199-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.01.008
66. Sudiono, F., Savitri, C., Rismayadi, B., Isyanto, P., & Akasaka, M. (2023). Analysis Of Human Resources And Foreign Labor In Japan (Situation And Problems Related To Foreign Workers). Edutran Business and Management, 1(1), 42-51. https://doi.org/10.59805/ebm.v1i1.25
67. Terasawa, K. (2003). Labor law, civil law, immigration law and the reality of migrants and their children. İçinde M. Douglass & G. S. Roberts (Ed.), Japan and Global Migration: Foreign Workers and the Advent of a Multicultural Society (ss. 219-243). Routledge.
68. Yamamoto, R. (2010). Migrants as a Crime Problem: The Construction of Foreign Criminality Discourse in Contemporary Japan. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 34(4), 301-330. https://doi.org/10.1080/01924036.2010.9678831
69. Yildiz, G. B. (2022). Legal and social aspects of migrant employment in Turkey. Z Problematyki Prawa Pracy i Polityki Socjalnej, 3(20), 1-20.
70. Zou, M. (2015). Immigration Law as Labour Market Regulation: Temporary Migration Status and Migrant Work Relations. Mondi Migranti, 1(1), 41-64. https://doi.org/10.3280/MM2015-001003