Gender and family dimensions of irregularised migrants’ experiences and rights

Lena Näre, Paula Merikoski and Davide Colombi

This report examines how gender and family relations shape migrants’ experiences of irregularity and how legal, labour and welfare systems across Europe reproduce gendered and generational inequalities. Drawing on comparative findings from the I-CLAIM project across Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and the United Kingdom, the report analyses the intersections of migration status, gender, work and household life. It shows that irregularity is produced at the intersection of migration control, labour exploitation and social welfare exclusions.

Irregularisation affects men and women differently because migration, labour markets and family life are all structured by gendered divisions of labour. Women are overrepresented in domestic and care work, sectors undervalued, underregulated and often excluded from basic labour protections, while men are more prevalent in physically demanding sectors, such as food delivery work, and in certain agricultural jobs. In both cases, migrants’ dependence on employers, sponsors and intermediaries creates a condition of ‘unfreedom’ in which changing jobs risks loss of status. The gender pay gap and occupational segregation exacerbate these vulnerabilities by making it harder for women to meet the economic thresholds attached to residence permits, permit renewals and family reunification.

The report highlights how economic and bureaucratic barriers embedded in residence permits linked to family relationships produce structural discrimination. Across I-CLAIM countries, conditions such as minimum income, suitable housing and secure employment contracts function as de facto mechanisms of exclusion. For instance, in Finland, the income required for family reunification is so high that it is unattainable for migrants working in low-wage sectors, such as cleaning or agriculture. In Italy, the housing requirement for family-based residence permits is often hard to satisfy due to widespread discrimination in the rental market. These thresholds disproportionately disadvantage women, low-paid workers and families with children, transforming the right to family life – formally guaranteed in EU and international law – into a privilege accessible mainly to the well-off.

The empirical evidence further shows that precarious work and temporary status directly affect family and household life. Migrant workers in the agriculture, domestic work and food delivery sectors report long hours, unstable income and limited access to childcare or housing, which strain relationships and limit the possibility of family formation or reunification. Women often migrate to provide for their children but are forced into situations that separate them from them for prolonged periods. Men in delivery work described instability and exhaustion that make it difficult to establish long-term relationships. For both, care responsibilities – whether local or transnational – are a major source of stress and vulnerability.

Gender-based violence and harassment are recurring features of irregularised and feminised work. Women employed in private homes or remote agricultural settings face high risks of sexual harassment, abuse and coercion, compounded by isolation and dependence on employers for income and housing. Even workers in public-facing jobs, such as delivery riders in Germany and the Netherlands, report racist and sexist harassment in public spaces. These findings underline how the intersection of gender, race and legal status shapes unequal exposure to exploitation and violence.

The report also analyses how rights to family life and children’s protection, formally enshrined in international and European Union (EU) law, are undermined by national migration regimes. The Family Reunification Directive and other EU frameworks adopt a restrictive and conditional approach, making rights contingent on income, housing and integration criteria. In practice, this creates hierarchies of deservingness: some groups – such as Ukrainian beneficiaries of temporary protection – gain swift access to family reunification, while others face years of separation. In all I-CLAIM countries, restrictive policies and bureaucratic delays result in prolonged insecurity for parents and children, with irregularised families living in fear of deportation or loss of status.

Public and political narratives about irregular migration further reinforce gendered and racialised hierarchies. Across the six countries, women and children are framed as vulnerable and deserving of care, while men – particularly racialised young men – are depicted as dangerous or criminal. Media and political discourses thus legitimise restrictive policies in the name of security and protection. Civil society actors tend to mobilise human rights and family-based arguments, but their impact is limited in the face of securitisation and deterrence narratives.

In conclusion, the report demonstrates that the production of irregularity in Europe is deeply gendered and familial. Migration and labour regimes intertwine to generate administrative and economic precarity that reverberates through households and across generations. Addressing these inequalities requires policies that:

• recognise care and reproduction as integral to migration and labour governance;
• decouple residence rights from income thresholds and employer dependency;
• ensure equal access to family reunification and protection irrespective of residence status; and

• extend labour protections and complaint mechanisms to domestic, care and seasonal workers.

Only by confronting the gender and family dimensions of irregularity can Europe begin to uphold its commitments to equality, dignity and the right to family life for all.