Abstract
Strict family reunification policies and the lack of affordable housing significantly contribute to the social exclusion of non-European migrants in Ireland. Restrictive immigration regulations often prevent families from living together, while housing shortages and higher rents create precariousness in enjoying family life for low-income migrants. Weak immigration status limits access to essential services, employment, and social networks, further reinforcing marginalisation. This paper explores the intersection of immigration and the recent housing crisis, analysing their impact on Bangladeshi migrant communities. It identifies key structural barriers and proposes policy reforms, highlighting pathways to improved integration and social cohesion
Introduction
Jamal, a Bangladeshi migrant in his late thirties, arrived in Ireland with a student visa nearly a decade ago. During the interview in 2024, he held a Stamp 4 visa, which allows him (and all other non-European migrants) to work in any profession and to establish and operate a business without obtaining a work permit.[i] Furthermore, it grants migrants access to social welfare and permits them to sponsor family members to join them in Ireland. However, Jamal is not eligible to sponsor his family members (wife and a child) due to the income threshold required for family reunification. He married a decade ago but left his family in Bangladesh, intending to sponsor his wife once he earned €30,000 annually, the amount required to sponsor a family member. After losing his previous job at a restaurant, he could not find a suitable job that allowed him to reach the required income threshold. He visits his family once or, if financially possible, twice a year. He promised himself he would get the income threshold to sponsor his family. However, due to the recent housing crisis in Ireland, he doubted his ability to afford a small house or an apartment for his family in the near future. As a result, he and his family experience isolation, deprivation of the right to family life and mental distress.
This is one of many examples of Bangladeshi migrants, particularly those with low skills and low income. While migrants from EU or EEA countries benefit from more streamlined family reunification processes, non-European nationals face significant challenges due to strict eligibility criteria and complex applications, coupled with limited affordable housing in Ireland. This paper is based on qualitative data collected from quasi-ethnographic interviews conducted in three suburban areas—Lucan, Clondalkin, and Tallaght—in Dublin. To date, 48 low-income Bangladeshi migrants have been interviewed face-to-face to understand their housing experiences, family reunification, and access to the Irish labour market. This paper employs the conceptual approach of social exclusion to illustrate how the strict family reunification policy and the precarious nature of housing affect the social and emotional well-being of non-European Bangladeshi migrants.[ii] The paper concludes by discussing the policy implications of family reunification, which can benefit non-European migrants by allowing them to enjoy their right to family life and to be integrated into Irish society and the labour market.
Social exclusion: a conceptual framework
Social exclusion has been a key policy concept widely practised by policymakers and academics worldwide (e.g. Silver, 1995; Levitas, 1998). It is linked to poverty and also encompasses broader issues such as limited access to housing, gender discrimination and certain ethnic identities that contribute to marginalisation. Social exclusion is the unfair process through which individuals or groups are systematically marginalised and left out of societal participation—for example, less access to employment, housing, treatment, education and other essential services that contribute to well-being. The term social exclusion was used for the first time by former French Secretary of State for Social Action, René Lenoir (1974), to refer to the situation of certain groups of people (e.g. aged individuals and suicidal people) who are excluded from the social safety net. The European Commission addressed social exclusion and stressed social integration noting that:
‘The concept of social exclusion is…a particularly appropriate designation for structural changes…it even goes beyond participation in working life: it is felt and shown in the fields of housing, education, health and access to services…’ (Commission of the European Communities, 1992, p. 8).
Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate in Economics, contributed to the concept of social exclusion by linking this capability approach. He argued that we have valid reasons to appreciate inclusion in social relations, indicating that social exclusion could be directly linked to capability poverty, which recognises non-material aspects of poverty that prevent individuals from gaining the essential capabilities necessary for well-being (Sen, 2000). When thoughtfully applied, the concept of social exclusion can provide valuable insights into the deprivation of essential capabilities and the associated policy implications (ibid.).
Non-European migrants are more prone to poverty than other communities (e.g., Lelkes & Zólyomi, 2011). Limited affordable housing in Ireland complicates their efforts to reunite with family members. Together, these restrictive policies and housing issues leave non-European migrants feeling marginalised and unsupported in their attempts to rebuild their families. Many of these migrants, especially those with low income, are unable to sponsor family members to join them, leading to emotional distress from separation. However, the Irish immigration policy regarding family reunification for non-European nationals recognises that family reunion is vital for the integration process. For example, the Department of Justice and Equality (2017) has reasonably pointed out that if integration is not actively promoted by the government, communities, and individuals, Irish society may encounter significant challenges, such as the segregation and ghettoisation of certain migrant communities.
Non-EEA Family Reunification Policy and Migrant’s Experience
According to the family reunification policy, migrants’ yearly income plays a crucial role in family reunification applications, as it ensures that the sponsor can provide financial support to their family members without burdening the State (Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS), 2016). Broadly, non-European migrants can be categorised into (a) Naturalised Irish citizens and (b) non-Irish or non-EEA nationals. The required eligibility varies depending on their immigration status, income, and the family members involved. Naturalised Irish citizen sponsors must not have relied on state benefits for a continuous period exceeding two years immediately prior to the application and must have earned a cumulative gross income of at least €40k over the three years prior to the application. Non-EEA national sponsors are divided into two categories. Category A sponsors (e.g., Critical Skills Employment Permit holders, researchers, PhD students, etc.) can sponsor family reunification immediately, assuming they meet the terms of their permission and projected earnings. Category B sponsors ( e.g., general permit holders, Stamp 4 holders) must have gross incomes of at least €30k. The income threshold increases depending on the number of children. For example, the minimum net income per week for one child is €511, for two children €612, and it increases according to the number of children that the sponsor wants to sponsor. Furthermore, for elderly dependant parents, every category sponsor must have earned an income after tax and deductions of not less than €60,000 each year for the previous 3 years for one parent and €75,000 for two parents. The policy document on non-EEA family reunification (INIS, 2016, p. 5) states:
Economic considerations are thus a very necessary part of family reunification policy. While it is not proposed that family reunification determinations should become purely financial assessments, the State cannot be regarded as having an obligation to subsidise the family concerned and the sponsor must be seen to fulfill their responsibility to provide for his/her family members if they are to be permitted to come to Ireland.
The clear guidelines of the family reunification policy are more likely to treat migrants as merely rational and economically motivated individuals. Their subjective feelings and emotions toward family members have received little attention. Although migrants, be they European or not, work in the same sectors as non-migrants and invest their physical and mental labour to the same extent, they are officially treated differently.
Unlike the critical skilled migrants (e.g. doctors, researchers, IT professionals), many migrants arrived in Ireland with student visas. Students are given Stamp 2, a visa category or immigration permissions, that allow them to stay in Ireland for study purposes and limited hours for working. They are not allowed to bring their family members, except doctoral students with sufficient funding, which is assumed to be adequate to afford the dependent’s living costs in Ireland. Satyajeet (pseudonym), a male migrant, moved to Ireland with a student visa (Stamp 2) two years ago. After completing his studies, he received Stamp 1G, which indicates that he has completed a degree in Ireland and is allowed to work or look for opportunities for further studies under the third-level graduate programmes. Post-study Stamp 1G holders can stay in the state for 2 years unless employed on a work permit.
Migrants like him move to Ireland with a European dream: to stay in Ireland and get a decent job that would allow them to enjoy a European lifestyle. To materialise the dream, Satyajeet must have been offered a job on an employment permit processed by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, and the minimum salary will not be less than €34,000; this opportunity is provided with a Stamp 1, which is the dream for every non-European migrant to Ireland. However, non-European migrants experience employers showing less interest in recruiting non-European migrants as workers due to the bureaucratic processes involved in applying for work permits.
After getting a security guard job, Satyeajeet dreamt of sponsoring his wife, who was left behind in Bangladesh. His job does not allow him to sponsor his wife, since his job does not provide him with a minimum annual salary of €34,000[iii]. As a result, they do not enjoy family life. He hopes to find an employer to apply for a work permit to fulfil his ‘European dream’: bringing his family to Ireland and enjoying security, freedom, a standard lifestyle, human rights and respect for cultural diversity. He put it:
I moved to Ireland for a bright future. Before moving to Ireland, I researched it online and found it is a rich European country. The language is English, and English is a familiar language in my country, so I thought I would have a good future in an English-speaking country. …My parents spent most of their savings on sending me to Ireland…altogether they spent nearly €25,000 on my education and living in Ireland. …It is my time to earn money [remittances] and to sponsor [bring] my family here. It looks like it will not happen because finding a work permit [Stamp 1] is impossible nowadays. (Interview notes, 2024)
Another migrant, Jamshed, earns approximately €22,000 annually, which is certainly not enough to afford a house for his family. He resides in a shared apartment in a suburban area of Dublin. He sorrowfully puts it:
I miss my family…I have planned to bring them here, but my income is too low to sponsor them. Also, where can I put them? The rent is so high…at least I need a two-bedroom apartment to lead a family life here…I will not be able to rent even a small apartment soon. Sometimes I think about returning home, but when I consider my family being here, my daughter would receive a world-class education in Ireland. I will try for a few more years to become eligible to bring my family here. (Interview notes, 2024)
Undoubtedly, the family reunification process is the most labour-intensive (INIS, 2016). Critics have identified some practical challenges that migrants face when they apply for family reunification—for example, the guidelines are hard to understand for those whose first language is not English (Gotzelmann, 2016). The handling of applications by INIS presents challenges for applicants: Navigating this fragmented system makes it difficult for individuals to obtain essential information about their rights, entitlements, and necessary procedures (Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI), 2012). The sponsor and the family members of the applicant have encountered numerous difficulties in their efforts to collect the necessary documentation from their country of origin (Arnold & Quinn, 2017). This process is far from straightforward, as they must navigate the complexities of two distinct bureaucratic systems. On one hand, they must deal with the regulations and requirements imposed by their home country, which may involve various government agencies, language barriers, and differing cultural practices. On the other hand, they also need to comply with the host country’s legal standards and procedural demands, which can add additional complexity to an already challenging situation. This dual navigation of bureaucratic landscapes complicates the documentation process and places an emotional and logistical strain on the family as they strive to meet all necessary criteria successfully.
In addition to the legal and administrative systems, the struggle to find affordable housing for families delays the application process. Some migrants are financially eligible but cannot afford family housing, which contributes to emotional distress, instability, and weakened family bonds over time. Finding no better options, some migrants place their families in shared housing, which diminishes their self-esteem and leads to overcrowded and unhygienic living conditions. Non-affordable housing forces migrant families to the urban margins or into precarious housing. In other words, housing affordability is not just a social issue but a gatekeeping mechanism that directly shapes who can live with their family and who remains separated.
When male family members are absent, the sense of safety within the home is significantly affected for women and children. This absence can lead to increased anxiety and feelings of vulnerability among them. Many low-income migrants and their dependents left behind at home experience deep loneliness, which limits their opportunities for social interaction and connection. This isolation can lead to a notable decline in self-esteem, as the social support system that typically contributes to mental well-being becomes weakened.
The existing limitations on family reunification for non-European male migrants hinder their family members, especially spouses, from participating in the European labour market. This exclusion diminishes their economic involvement and limits social and economic integration opportunities. Allowing family reunification would align with the goals of inclusive migration policies and improve labour market diversity and social cohesion. Research in integration indicates that family stability leads to smoother adaptation, positively affecting local economies and the social fabric of host communities (Kofman, 2018; Strang and Ager, 2010). Therefore, revisiting family reunification policies could spur broader societal advantages in Europe.
Figure 1: Restrictive immigration and family reunification policies, combined with the housing crisis, drive social exclusion among migrants.
These factors create a challenging environment, leaving women and children feeling both physically and emotionally unprotected. Furthermore, Bangladesh’s cultural understanding of family extends beyond the nuclear family model. A Bangladeshi male is socially responsible for caring for his extended family members, including parents, younger siblings, a wife, and children. As a result, Bangladeshi migrants often view family reunification as the process of bringing their parents, spouses, and children to Ireland to live under one roof. However, stricter family reunification policies can hinder low-income migrants from sponsoring their families.
Conclusion and Policy Implications
The paper sheds light on the challenges that non-European migrants face in Ireland, including precarious employment, housing and social isolation, which can exacerbate feelings of exclusion and marginalisation. It emphasises the importance of family reunification not only as a legal process but also as a fundamental right that supports the emotional and psychological stability of migrants. It argues that facilitating easier access to family reunification can enhance the overall well-being of non-European migrants, enabling them to achieve a more stable and fulfilling life. It is essential to understand that the less stringent the family reunification policy, the more it reinforces the migrants’ right to family life and fosters their integration into society. Being reunited with family members fosters personal stability and serves as a foundation for social and economic integration within their host communities.
The current family reunification policy in Ireland creates a disproportionate strain on non-European migrants, limiting their ability to maintain familial bonds and fully integrate into Irish society. Addressing these issues through policy reform would not only enhance the lives of these individuals but would also contribute to a more inclusive and cohesive community. Some areas can be addressed to make family reunification more realistic regarding non-European migrants’ employment and immigration status. These include:
- Expanding diverse employment sectors as well as identifying industries that have a worker shortage, which can apply for General Work Permits for non-European workers;
- Revisiting the duration of staying in Ireland for the post-study visa (Stamp 1G) holders to look for employment opportunities;
- Revising the minimum annual income from €34,000 to a more realistic figure, particularly for those who have completed their postgraduate studies in Ireland and are residing legally, to apply for a general work permit (Stamp 1);
- Extending the duration of post-study Stamp 1G based on a certain income threshold can be helpful for them to adjust to the Irish labour market;
- Reviewing the income threshold and making it more realistic for sponsoring family members;
- Considering the definition of ‘family’ within the context of migrants’ cultures and societies;
- Offering housing subsidies or grants specifically for migrant families undergoing family reunification;
- Complex information should be translated into migrant’s first language Bengali or Bangla;
- Revisiting the criteria for non-European migrants to access social housing and
- Providing immigrants with training in workshop settings on the conditions and application process of the family reunification.
References
Arnold, S. and Quinn, E. (2017) Family reunification of non-EU nationals in Ireland. Dublin: The Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
Commission of the European Communities (1992) Towards a Europe of solidarity: intensifying the fight against social exclusion, fostering Integration, Brussels.
Department of Justice and Equality (2017) The migrant integration strategy: a blueprint for the future. Dublin: Department of Justice and Equality.
Götzelmann, C. (2016) ‘The implementation and administration of family reunification rights in Ireland’. The Irish Jurist, 55: 75–111.
Immigrant Council of Ireland (2012) Family reunification: a barrier or facilitator of integration? Dublin: Immigrant Council of Ireland.
INIS (2016) Policy document on Non-EEA family reunification. Dublin: Department of Justice and Equality.
Kofman, E., (2018) ‘Family migration as a class matter’. International Migration, 56(4), pp. 33-46.
Lelkes, O., and Zólyomi, E. (2011) ‘Poverty and social exclusion of migrants in the European Union’. Policy Briefs, 1, 17.
Lenoir, R., (1989) Les exclus: un Français sur dix. FeniXX.
Levitas, R. (1998) The inclusive society? social exclusion and New Labour. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sen, A. (2000) Social exclusion: concept, application and security. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Silver H (1995) ‘Reconceptualising social disadvantage: three paradigms of social exclusion’, in Rodgers, G., Gore, C. and Figueiredo, J. B. (eds.) Social exclusion: rhetoric, reality, responses. Geneva: International Labour Organisation, pp. 57-80.
Strang, A. and Ager, A., (2010) ‘Refugee integration: emerging trends and remaining agendas’. Journal of Refugee Studies, 23(4), pp. 589-607.
[i] Before becoming eligible to receive Stamp 4, he obtained Stamp 1 (general work permit), the entry point to access the Irish labour market for the long term.
[ii] This paper is part of a broader project that explores the housing precarity of Bangladeshi migrants living in Dublin’s suburban areas.
[iii]https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving-country/working-in-ireland/employment-permits/work-permits/#:~:text=Pays%20at%20least%20%E2%82%AC34%2C000,%E2%82%AC14.79)%20and%20you%20are: (18 May 2025).