No improvement in sight: IAQ report on multiple precarization highlights the social situation of immigrants from Romania and Bulgaria in Duisburg

dossier

Tradition: "Ausländer" auf dem deutschen Arbeitsmarkt “10 years ago, the area of European free movement of workers expanded to include Romania and Bulgaria. Today around 1.3 million people from these countries live in the Federal Republic, which is around 10 percent of the foreign population. But migration from these two countries is often still stigmatized as poverty immigration. In a new study, Polina Manolova, Thorsten Schlee and Lena Wiese from the Institute for Work and Qualification (IAQ) at the University of Duisburg-Essen shed light on the diverse, mutually dependent experiences of discrimination among Southeast European migrants in Duisburg…”IAQ press release from October 15, 2024 externer Link to the final report of the djeka project (discrimination beyond categories) – see more about it and:

Radio Migrant – Voices from Southeast Europe tells about the lives of migrants from Southeast Europe in Germany, especially in the Ruhr area
The podcast highlights work, social policy, housing and local politics that shape their everyday lives: “We recently published a three-part podcast series called “Radio Migrant: Voices from Southeast Europe”. It sheds light on the life and work experiences of migrants from Southeast Europe in the Ruhr area. The individual episodes cover topics such as migration and work, precarious employment, housing, social policy, racism and migrant struggles. Migrants, activists, specialists and scientists contribute their perspectives.” Listen to Radio MigrantSubstack and upSpotify
“Evictions serve oppression.” When it comes to practices against so-called problem properties, Duisburg is leading the way as a negative example
“…As a rule, these are newcomers who do not have access to the regular rental market due to discriminatory practices or impossible bureaucratic criteria. People with a Schufa entry, i.e. those with significant debts who are rejected by private landlords and municipal housing associations. So it is a combination of ethnic discrimination and socioeconomic precarity that pushes people into these informally managed housing conditions. These “problem properties” are often the only way to secure accommodation and escape homelessness. (…)
It is not European freedom of movement per se that encourages the exploitation of migrants by criminal landlords. The problem is complex and is related to the financing of the housing market in Germany, especially since 2019. The decline in social housing and local social policy approaches that disadvantage migrants as tenants instead of punishing unscrupulous landlords also play a role. In this sense, the proposal to restrict access to social benefits is counterproductive. By restricting social support for the most disadvantaged groups, authorities are increasing the risk of homelessness and extreme material hardship for migrant groups.”Interview by David Bieber from October 27th, 2025 in ND online with Polina Manolova, sociologist and activist at Stolipinovo in Europe, a migrant self-help initiative in Duisburg. Currently see:
- Network Europe on the Move: Open letter to Social Affairs Minister Bärbel Bas against the criminalization of Union citizens in precarious living situations and other marginalized groups
  “Dear Federal Minister Bas,Today, October 27, 2025, you will find out more about “challenges and solutions in connection with immigration from EU member states” at a municipal conference in Duisburg. The focus will be on approaches to combat “social fraud in the context of EU freedom of movement”, particularly in connection with the current changes to citizens’ benefits.The conference brings together representatives from city administrations, job centers, the Federal Employment Agency and the State Ministry for Migration and Integration - however, interest groups for Union citizens receiving social benefits and precariously employed Union citizens in Germany are not invited.
  With this open letter, we ask you to look around to see what brutal effects the general suspicion of abuse and exclusion from benefits is having on the lives of many people, especially migrants, in Germany. We call on you to defend the principle of the welfare state, (EU) freedom of movement and human dignity regardless of nationality, instead of criminalizing, devaluing and excluding people in precarious living situations.
  Numerous civil society organizations are warning about the social consequences of the planned social reforms, especially increasing homelessness, and are calling for support for people affected by poverty instead of tougher sanctions. We fear that the tightening measures discussed today in Duisburg will be even more severe for people without a German passport, who are generally accused of abuse and fraud. (…)
  With this open letter we are sending you reports and statements from civil society that oppose the criminalization and exclusion of Union citizens in precarious living situations in Germany and draw attention to the serious imbalances in public reporting.
  TheClub Stolipinovo in Europe, an initiative of Bulgarian migrants, reports on the inhumane consequences of the mass eviction of so-called problem properties - as well as the de-registration of affected families from their place of residence and from all educational and social benefits - by the city of Duisburg's task force of the same name (see appendix).
  The intercultural oneYouth association of Roma and non-Roma Amaro Foro e.V.points to a completely disproportionate raid on an emergency shelter for homeless people on October 14, 2025 in Berlin. Presented implausibly as a benevolent advisory campaign, it is actually politically motivated and comes at the expense of Europe's largest minority. The media reported misleading and racist reports.
  TheUnemployed initiative BASTA! Berlinreports on invasive home visits, an increase in discriminatory statements in the authorities, residence checks by the family fund as well as the successful lawsuit of a Romanian family who was falsely accused of social fraud but who have not yet received all of the living benefits to which they are entitled (see appendix). (…)
  We call on you to take these reports and experiences seriously and to work to stop the policy of discrimination and criminalization of precarious EU migrants, people in disadvantaged neighborhoods, refugees, benefit recipients and other marginalized groups. We call on you to reverse the recent tightening of social and migration policy and to ensure the right to a dignified livelihood for all people in Germany. With best regards, Stolipinovo in Europe e.V. and the Europe on the Move network“ Open letter from October 27th, 2025 at the Europe on the Move network
Shift to the right according to the Duisburg model: The discourse about “social abuse” and “mafia structures” conceals the exploitation of migrants and enables them to be disadvantaged
“The nationwide wave of anti-right demonstrations in early 2024 expressed justified outrage at the rise of the right and its discussions about “remigration.” There is no sign of this rebellion anymore. The shift to the right has long been implemented in the politics and legislative initiatives of the black-red coalition, which persistently questions fundamental social and political rights. A closer look also makes it clear that a change in social policy has been taking place at the local level for over a decade. Cities with high immigration rates and structural challenges in particular play a leading role in the development of restrictive social policy and associated law-and-order measures.
An example of this interplay between local preparation and translation into federal policy are the recent announcements by Bärbel Bas that he wants to restructure social assistance into a basic security system with stricter sanctions. The new Social Democratic Minister for Labor and Social Affairs justifies this project with the need to combat undeclared employment and “organized fraud” in social benefits. Bas also questions the right to freedom of movement for migrants claiming social benefits and calls for more effective data exchange between authorities, in particular an expansion of the mandate of the immigration authority to detect and prosecute cases of “abuse of freedom of movement”.
Bas's comments reflect the SPD's long-standing approach in her hometown of Duisburg. The mayor there, Sören Link, became known nationwide as one of the harshest critics of freedom of movement and often openly expresses his disdain for Southeast European immigrants with clearly anti-Gypsy undertones. As early as 2013, Link played an active role in the German Association of Cities in formulating the discourse on so-called “poverty migration”. This places Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, especially Roma and other minorities, under suspicion of social abuse and accordingly as a central threat to social peace in structurally disadvantaged cities.
Despite empirical evidence of the important role of EU migrants in the service economy, the discourse about “poverty migration” is currently being fueled again in the run-up to the local elections in North Rhine-Westphalia. (…)
In complete contradiction to the social democratic tradition, workers in the most precarious and deregulated economic sectors are not only excluded, but actively disadvantaged. Because of the additional restrictions on access to vital social support, they become even more vulnerable to practices of hyper-exploitation and the resulting criminalization, which rarely targets employers. The targeted reform would reinforce the dichotomy of the labor market. The differences in wages and working conditions as well as job security for permanent employees, locals or better established employees compared to those with temporary or temporary employment contracts are already striking.
This structural gap is a bitter reality for thousands of wage earners from Southeast Europe. One of them is Smail V., a temporary worker at Thyssenkrupp Steel Bruckhausen in Duisburg, who has been rotating between fixed-term contracts with a term of a few days to a maximum of six months for the past five years. In the last four months alone, he has switched between two temporary employment agencies that place workers at the plant, and each time he has had to accept new probationary periods, irregular working hours, the embezzlement of wages and the risk of sudden dismissal. As a rule, cleaners are employed on fixed-term contracts without a guaranteed minimum number of hours, which can be terminated at any time. A common tactic among employers is to insure workers on a part-time basis (from 60 to 80 hours per month) and pay cash for any working hours beyond that. Applications for full-time contracts are routinely rejected and workers are instead referred to the job center to supplement their income. (…)
This and many other examples show how unfounded Bas' and Link's claims are that employees are victims of organized "mafia structures" or that they deliberately limit themselves to contracts with a minimum number of hours in order to supplement their income with social benefits. The reason lies rather in the structure of the low-wage sector in post-industrial cities like Duisburg. As in the case of Smail V., part-time employment is not a question of choice, but rather a central characteristic of an entire segment of the labor market. Here, large companies such as Thyssenkrupp circumvent regulatory restrictions such as collective agreements and regulations on occupational safety, overtime and social security contributions by commissioning a number of subcontractors and temporary employment companies. However, both the regulation and auditing of subcontractors and temporary employment companies, as well as the responsibility of large corporations that outsource work to them, are practically completely ignored in the current debates. Limiting the employment of “top-ups” or temporary and temporary workers in large companies like Thyssenkrupp could really change something. Such a measure would significantly limit the possibilities of passing on risks to workers, concealing actual working hours or embezzling wages subject to social security contributions.
Hyper-restrictive regime
The hyper-restrictive regime demanded by Bas and Link already exists in cities like Duisburg, where repressive and disciplinary measures against migrants have been developed and applied for years. Bas's claim that certain districts of Duisburg are known for the "abuse of social benefits" was rejected by social scientists as empirically unfounded, but is part of a local policy that mobilizes entire administrative units to combat groups and behavior that are perceived as problematic. (…)
Combined with long waiting times and complex procedures, these practices act like repressive control mechanisms that effectively prevent or delay access to basic livelihoods, often for months. In fact, the example often cited by Bas and Link, according to which just four working hours per week was enough to be entitled to benefits, does not reflect the reality in the Duisburg job center, where applicants are subject to strict eligibility checks and restrictions on access to benefits for employed people. This often results in late or partial payments that are not enough to cover basic living expenses. The renewed discourse about “social abuse” and “mafia structures” obscures the fundamental problem of the massive exploitation of migrant workers from Southeast Europe and its underlying structural factors and heralds the next stage of the socio-political shift to the right. The gradual erosion of migrants’ social rights is not just a strategy of exclusion. It also serves the interests of capital – in this case, large companies and a network of subcontractors and temporary employment agencies…”Article by Polina Manolova from September 13, 2025 in ak 718 , see also:
- Misuse of power: election campaign with scapegoats
  “In the Ruhr area, Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants are becoming political tools. Instead of addressing structural causes, top politicians are stirring up resentment - and thus endangering social peace…”Contribution by Joachim Krauß from September 11th, 2025 in Migazin
- And in LabourNet about forced evictions, which are primarily directed against Bulgarian and Romanian residents in so-called “junk properties” – see the dossier:Racist everyday life (not only) in the police: “target objects” Sinti and Roma
- the dossier:[Open letter] Dismissive treatment of those entitled to benefits from EU countries in the job centers; Refusal of legitimate claims for benefits
- and the dossier:After refugees, it is logically the turn of the “lazy” people: the Union, FDP and the right are demanding “payment cards” and compulsory work for those receiving citizens’ benefit
- as well as the dossier:Parallel working world in Germany: “The exploitation of migrant workers has a long tradition in Germany”
Class struggle in Duisburg: “The city actively produces poverty.” Research project by Polina Manolova surveyed migrant workers in Duisburg districts
In theInterview by David Bieber in the young world from December 6, 2024 the sociologist at the University of Duisburg-Essen, Polina Manolova, describes her research project:"The aim was to examine the experiences of discrimination of Bulgarian and Romanian migrants in segregated neighborhoods in Duisburg. To do this, we took into account the conditions on the labor market, the housing situation, social benefits and the interactions between these areas (...) Migration from Southeast Europe is a highly political issue at the city level. In Duisburg it has been instrumentalized for a decade to mobilize voters, especially through narratives of "abuse of social benefits" and “No-go neighborhoods.” (…) Our goal was to provide solid evidence of the mechanisms of exclusion and the active production of poverty by the city authorities. (…) Of the 20 cleaners we interviewed at Thyssen-Krupp Steel, the employees are dependent on additional benefits However, access to these benefits is made unnecessarily difficult, so that many end up in poverty, homelessness and hardship (…) Many had fixed-term contracts with a six-month probationary period. They guarantee neither minimum nor maximum working hours, while the actual monthly working hours are often 60 to 70 hours.Although contracts formally respect the minimum wage, this is undermined by various informal practices: overtime is often not paid, social security contributions are withheld, deductions are made for work clothing and transport costs, travel expenses are not reimbursed, and there are no provisions for sick pay or holiday pay. In some cases, the contracts have not even been registered, leaving workers without access to social security despite being employed. A common practice is to issue contracts with reduced working hours and pay the remaining amount “under the table”. During our fieldwork in Marxloh, we documented numerous reports of industrial accidents and dangerous working conditions that resulted in serious injuries and long-term health problems such as back pain, broken ribs and lung disease. (…) The poverty associated with migrants from southeastern Europe is not an “imported” problem, as the authorities often claim. Instead, it is actively produced by the city, primarily through administrative control and policing practices such as erecting barriers to social services, conducting regular evictions, and police raids. This is exacerbated by a lack of interest in enforcing labor regulations or punishing fraudulent bosses and landlords.”
Further out of theIAQ press release from October 15, 2024 : “…In terms of population, Duisburg is the city with the most immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania in North Rhine-Westphalia. Around 26,000 people from both countries currently live here. Despite the worsening shortage of skilled workers, the full freedom of movement for workers for EU citizens from Romania and Bulgaria, which has existed for 10 years, is rarely seen as having potential for the German labor market. On the contrary: Attributions such as poverty immigration or “social tourism” still dominate, which is reflected in political programs as well as in the everyday lives of immigrants. In a new study, Polina Manolova, Thorsten Schlee and Lena Wiese from IAQ shed light on the diverse experiences of discrimination of Southeast European migrants in two Duisburg districts when it comes to access to work, housing and social security, as well as their interactions.
Although Bulgarians and Romanians are generally considered to have very good integration prospects and the employment rate of people from Romania (67.2%) and Bulgaria (53.6%) is relatively high overall, the narrative persists that migrants from these countries are taking advantage of the European freedom of movement for workers to gain access to the German social systems. This contradicts the results of the IAQ scientists, who accompanied around 720 people as part of social counseling in the Duisburg districts of Hochfeld and Marxloh between November 2023 and June 2024 for the “Discrimination beyond categories” project financed by the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency. In addition, detailed interviews were conducted with selected people.
"Contrary to widespread ideas about 'abuse of social benefits', the migrants we accompanied were reluctant to take advantage of welfare state benefits. In some cases, they actively rejected our suggestions about the possibility of applying for state aid," reports Polina Manolova. What often goes unmentioned in public reporting is that EU citizens in Germany only have full access to social benefits after five years of employment. This is made more difficult for immigrants by proof that is difficult to provide, long waiting times for an appointment and long processing times. This means that people with particularly high needs fall out of the social security systems. It is precisely they who keep the migrant-dominated economic sectors (meat industry, construction industry, industrial cleaning, logistics, 24-hour care) running in often precarious employment conditions.
Social security contributions are often not paid for the many part-time employees. In addition, migrant employees repeatedly switch between temporary employment contracts and periods of unemployment. This means you have no right to regular access to unemployment insurance, health insurance or social assistance. The wage structure and type of employment relationships mean that the pay is not sufficient to generate a living income: 44 percent of employees from Romania who are subject to social security contributions and more than half of Bulgarians receive wages below the low wage threshold.
When it comes to housing, immigrant Southeast Europeans continue to be exposed to discrimination based on their ethnicity or origin. (…)
The scientists emphasize: It is the interaction of discriminatory experiences in the world of work, on the housing market and in access to social rights that leads to the (re)production of the precarious situation of Southeast European migrants in Duisburg. Local social policy must ask itself where it sees responsibility for the persistently poor living conditions: in the barriers to integration and cultural deviations of immigrants or in deregulated labor and housing markets and its own programmatic orientations and administrative procedures. Because these sometimes worsen the already precarious situation of immigrants instead of strengthening and supporting them in difficult life situations.”
Polina Manolova, Thorsten Schlee, Lena Wiese, 2024: Multiple precarization - On the living situation of Eastern European migrants in urban social spaces using the example of the two Duisburg districts of Hochfeld and Marxloh. Duisburg: Inst. Work and Qualifications.IAQ Report 2024-1

The postNo improvement in sight: IAQ report on multiple precarization highlights the social situation of immigrants from Romania and Bulgaria in Duisburgappeared firstLabourNet Germany.