Who Builds Our Cities?

I often write about that what and how of city-building, but not always about the who. With the growing investment in the construction and infrastructure industries around the world, we are led to the question:

Who builds our cities? 

Below, I explore the similarities and differences between the US labor market and the labor force behind the World Cup. Two similar ambitions to build new infrastructure in two very different environments.

Workers Take Charge in Tight Labor Markets

The US construction industry employs over 7.6 million people who build nearly $1.4 trillion worth of structures each year. And, with the influx of infrastructure dollars, 15 million jobs will be created or saved in the next 10 years. This has definitely shown itself to be true. In just the first 6 months after the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, nearly 4,300 projects have been spurred.

Despite these investments, the construction labor market has tightened up. COVID-19 highlighted shifting population dynamics, high workforce attrition rates, the need to upskill workers, and… the impact of slowing immigration. This last element has been especially challenging for the construction industry, where immigrant workers make up nearly a quarter of the workforce. These pressures have left 440,000 jobs open even as money floods the construction market.

In such a tight market, workers are able to dictate the rules of engagement. The Association of General Contractors surveyed their membership and found that 77% of firms have difficulty hiring skilled workers. This has led to a new reality where 86% of firms have raised base pay rates for their workers, passing those costs along to project owners. And, existing employees, carrying the work load for unfilled positions, are feeling the pressure. They’ve organized in a growing number of disputes, walkouts, and strikes to negotiate for better work conditions and pay.

Constant Labor Market Reduces Pressure for Reform

In stark contrast to current US labor dynamics, what we just witnessed in Qatar highlights the harsh reality of labor supply and demand in the Gulf countries.

For over 70 years, the Gulf countries have sourced foreign labor. At first, to build the necessary infrastructure to grow the global oil industry right in their backyards. And most recently, foreign labor has been at the heart of Qatar’s World Cup infrastructure. As of today, the Gulf countries’ workforce is comprised 70% of migrant workers, whereas 49% of the population are migrants. That gap is even more extreme in Qatar: migrant workers account for 90% of the workforce, drawing from nearby countries, such as Nepal and Pakistan, as well as far away Philippines.

In the Gulf countries, the kafala system has become a mainstay for migrant workers. The kafala system defines the legal status of migrant workers, requiring local sponsors to be responsible for a worker’s employment and living expenses. Employers recruit with one-time contracts that make it very difficult to switch or leave a job. In 2016, Qatar took progressive steps to abolish the kafala system (only to later reinstate certain contingencies). Yet, World Cup construction brought to light harsh working conditions and human rights injustices perpetuated by the kafala system. To build seven stadiums needed for the games, migrant labor worked over 60 hours a week in temperatures higher than 104 degrees in the summers which led to thousands of worker deaths.

Constant migrant labor supply, poor labor regulations, and racial and ethinic stereotyping all contribute to the problem. Workers are prevented from organizing and difficult employees can be replaced by a continuous stream of migrant labor. Even as Qatar has instituted policy reform, there are still limited Qatari structures to support better working conditions.

Awareness and Support

Given the growth in the US and the Gulf, both regions rely on migrant labor. But that’s where the similarities stop. The difference in labor dynamics, to some extent based in immigration policy, has ramifications on how much labor has power to demand change.

So, how do we look towards the future? Labor rights will need to be at the forefront. This means investment in jobs training programs, provisions that allow workers to voice concerns, fair payment terms, and hospitable working conditions. Here are just some examples of what can be done:

Kate Gasparro