User:Denizmasjedi/Third country resettlement

Approaches for resettlement
One approach for refugee resettlement, especially in the United States, has been the work-first approach. The result of this approach is an increase in employment rates as refugees are provided with resources—language lessons, resume building, interview skills, etc.—that prepare them for obtaining their first job. The limits of this approach have been ignoring other factors that present as barriers to employment rates including mental and physical health problems, unfamiliarity with work and social culture in their new environment, and "brain waste" which is a term used to describe those who have professional qualifications but their English language proficiency is limited and prevents them from obtaining jobs matching their skills. This job-first focus does not take into account that refugees have limited time to adjust to their new environment and enter low-skilled jobs. It also ignores the background of refugees; this population does not receive services that match their specific needs.

Another approach has been increasing social and political power of refugees through advocacy work and at the same time involving refugees, NGOs, and federal/local government. This approach can create a foundation for future collective action. Political advocacy can be most effective if members of the community themselves become involved and voice their needs, which differs in each refugee community. Efforts can be made by academics and researchers to publicize the benefits that refugees provide to their local communities, and highlight the negative consequences of their exclusion. Such scholars have the ability to not only challenge the burden frame but can also testify in front of congress as non-government experts to influence policy decisions that could ultimately benefit refugees. By involving refugees in decision making and advocacy work, NGOs can teach them how to complete processes themselves starting from their arrival in the new country This can help staff of such organizations as they would not be overwhelmed since refugees learn to fill out forms and other tasks as their language proficiency increases.

Economic empowerment in the United States
Refugee resettlement in the U.S. emerged as a response to the violence brought on by World War II that displaced millions of people in Europe. Non-governmental groups partnered with the U.S. government to respond to this humanitarian crisis in the 1930s, playing vital roles in the future in resettlement of refugees. In the next forty years, the U.S. was committed to expanding its focus to other continents as well, coordinating with Non-Governmental Organizations to help those most in need. The Refugee Act of 1980 established political asylum in the United States, creating refugee resettlement programs to ease the transition to the refugees’ life in America. One objective of the U.S. Refugee Act of 1980 was economic self-sufficiency. Efforts were made towards helping refugees find employment and cease dependence on federal/state aid. After the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reauthorization Act under President Clinton, poor families could receive support for five years provided they maintained a job search. After this period, U.S. federal law prevented any further forms of cash assistance. This affected legal immigrants/refugees as they struggled to learn English and find employment at the same time. These key events intertwined the relationship between federal/state governments and non-governmental organizations as they partnered to provide resources to refugees.

The refugee program in the US emphasizes the work-first approach. The result of this approach is an increase in employment rates as refugees are provided with resources—English language lessons, resume building, interview skills, etc.—that prepare them for obtaining their first job in the U.S. The limits of this approach have been ignoring barriers to employment rates including mental and physical health problems, and unfamiliarity with work and social culture in their new environment. This job-first focus does not take into account that refugees have limited time to adjust to their new environment. Without acknowledging people’s concerns from a bottom-up perspective (a perspective that allows refugees themselves to make informed decisions and create change for themselves), the job-first focus approach cannot be as effective. The result is underemployment. Regardless of their qualifications, new refugees take low-level jobs as janitors, hotel maids and domestic workers. Interviews with refugees often portray the shame members of the group experience, while on paper they are employed and ‘self-sufficient’. The job-first approach may be effective in helping refugees find low-skilled jobs immediately, but it ignores the underemployment rate and their other essential needs. It encourages ceasing dependence on welfare. Experts suggest that approaches must strengthen the workforce, allowing refugees to build essential skills towards further advancement in economy or education, which can be done by addressing other needs such as mental health, affordable housing, and going further than policies that determine the lowest wage needed for mere survival.

A challenge for empowerment has been determining who is responsible for providing funds. Although the U.S. Department of State has provided funding over the years, empowerment programs have struggled as the number of refugees increased and unemployment rose within the country. In communities in the US cities such as Tennessee, states and local governments experience unemployment and budget issues, and question the costs of resettlement especially regarding the use of resources to meet the housing, education, and health needs of refugees. These governments have no choice but to put the responsibility into the hands of the private sector and refugees to sustain themselves. The role of the government has become limited and they attempt to solve poverty in the cheapest manner possible, providing little public money, and without expanding the involvement of the government. This not only affects the poor within the US but refugees who struggle to find jobs. Without appropriate funding, pressure is put on local welfare agencies, giving them discretion over who obtains resources. Rationing has become a common practice found among workers at the front lines of service delivery who must balance client demand with limited resources. Under these circumstances workers will routinely expend limited resources on select clients, while withholding them from others. Street-level studies have also found that workers routinely target resources at the clients who are most likely to succeed at the desired outcomes of the intervention. Neutral legislation in practice varies across the nation since local offices have discretion over distribution of resources.