2. Emigration in the Perspective of the Search for a First Job in Bulgaria Rumiana Stoilova – Institute of the Studies of Societies and Knowledge at BAS Elitsa Dimitrova – Institute for Population and Human Studies at BAS BULGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

3. Introduction In 2007 Bulgaria became a member of EU and the opportunities to find first job in EU increased some years later. Emigration is one of the potential options that young people could consider to find job abroad, provide an income for themselves, and gain independence from their parents. We suppose that not all categories of young people are equally taking advantage of the possibility to work abroad.

4. Socio-economic context In 2011 traveling abroad for work as a reason for leaving the country is reported by 22% of the people at age 15-19. Among those at age 20-39, the percentage is three times higher (62%). (Migration and Migratory Behavior of the Population 2012: 22).

5. Gender differences Indicating work as the aim of emigration are 65.0% of men and a considerably lower share of women - 49.4% (Migration and Migratory Behaviour of the Population, NSI 2012: 29). To the contrary, women more often stay in foreign countries due to family reasons - 11.2% as compared with 1.9% of men. There are generational differences in the subjective evaluation of the experience, gained through the work abroad - younger women are more inclined to value their emigration experience, while the middle generation of women find it harder to integrate in a different context, even when they achieve professional success (Stoilova and Slavova 2006: 190-280).

6. Significant regional variations in the intentions of young people to migrate (Mitev and Kovacheva 2014: 179) Stronger emigration intentions of younger people from the more prosperous Southwestern region, while young people from the poorer Northwestern region prefer more often to move within the country. The emigration intentions are stronger among young people in education and diminish among those who work. Regional Differences

7. Objectives The aim of the investigation is to explore if all categories of young people in Bulgaria are equally taking advantage of the possibility to work abroad or there are significant differences among them in there work-related emigration intentions and experience, based on gender, age, education, ethnicity, family status, region/ place of residence, social origin etc. Theoretical Background In making the transition from education to first full-time job, young people take into account, and their decisions largely are shaped in accordance with, the social structures and institutions and by their, and their parents’, place in the social structure of the respective society (Kogan 2012: 701-703: Robert and Saar 2012: 742-754). The study of the place of emigration in the transitions within the individual life course adds a transnational perspective to these approach inasmuch it reveals the effect of the passage from one institutional context, in which the individual’s life has been shaped and in which a certain education has been acquired, to a different national and institutional context of the labour market (Söhn 2011: 28; Noelke et al 2012: 704-716).

8. Research questions What is the sociological profile of a young person with emigration experience? To what extent the social status-based differences between young people explain the differences in their emigration intentions and in their actual emigration experience? What are the differences between young people with or without experience in work abroad based on their education, gender, age, social origin (including ethnic origin), place and region of residence, family status, degree of independence from parents ?

9. Data School leavers survey Sample – 2 100 young people aged 15-34 Field work - 2014 Selected are young people who had completed or interrupted their education for the first time between January 2009 and December 2013 for more than one year for any reason excluding maternity leave, a serious illness, military service, waiting for a certificate giving access to the next level of education, or taking a vacation. (http://www.schooltowork.bg)http://www.schooltowork.bg

10. Methods of analysis We used the logistic regression method, taking as dependent variables the emigration intention as against the decision not to emigrate, and actual emigration experience as against the lack of experience in working abroad. The independent variables are: gender, completed education, respondent’s employment status, family status, number of children, type of household, parents’ employment status and number of siblings, respondent’s ethnic origin, place of residence.

11. Descriptive analysis Emigration intentions

12. Descriptive analysis Emigration experience

13. Duration of employment abroad (for those who have returned) by gender FrequencyAverageStand. Dev.Min.Max.Sign. 1 Corr. 2 Duration of the 1 st job abroad Men190.730.640.252.25 *0.348 Wom en151.481.390.254.08 Duration of the 2 nd job abroad Men190.780.710.173.25 *0.280 Wom en101.281.070.173.17 Duration of the 3 rd job abroad Men150.640.610.252.50 **0.529 Wom en51.420.421.002.08

14. Emigration intentions (results from logistic regression)

15. Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4Model 5 Emigration intentions Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Constant0.27***0.23***0.14***0.10***0.09*** Gender Male (ref.) 1 1 1 1 1 Female0.54***0.58***0.61***0.60***0.68** Ethniciy Bulgarian (ref.) 1 1 1 1 1 Not Bulgarian1.36**1.24 1.27 1.21 1.15 Completed education Primary or lower (ref.) 1 1 1 1 1 Secondary1.00 1.04 0.98 1.08 1.10 Higher0.66**0.72 0.70 0.79 0.80 Employment status of respondent Employed (ref.) 1 1 1 1 Unemployed 1.54***1.52**1.52**1.53** Economically inactive 0.70 0.72 0.75 0.66* Family status No partner (ref.) 1 1 1 In cohabitation 1.22 1.21 1.18 Married 0.92 0.78 Separated/divorced 1.49 1.34 1.18 Number of children None (ref.) 1 1 1 1 child 0.18 0.69 0.71 2 or more children 0.20 0.57 0.61 Place of residence Sofia (ref.) 1 1 1 Large city 1.89**1.97**2.00** Small city 1.99**2.07**2.16** Village 1.77**1.84**1.85**

16. Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4Model 5 Emigration intentions Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Household Lives with parents (ref.) 1 1 1 Lives in own dwelling 1.01 0.97 0.88 Lives in rented dwelling/with other people 1.31 1.26 1.17 Father’s employment status Employed (ref.) 1 1 Unemployed 0.91 0.98 Economically inactive 0.88 0.84 Deceased/ no father 1.21 1.08 Mother’s employment status Employed (ref.) 1 1 Unemployed 0.84 0.78 Economically inactive 0.91 0.88 Deceased/ no mother 1.62 1.59 Number of brothers and sisters None (ref.) 1 1 1 brother/sister 1.21 1.19 2 brothers/sisters 1.45 1.52* 3 or more brothers/sisters 1.77 1.92** Emigration experience No (ref.) 1.00 Yes 5.64*** Log likelihood -938.00-929.09-919.47-912.17-870.30 Pseudo R20.0250.03430.0440.0490.093 *** p≤0.01; ** 0.01<p≤0.05; * 0.05<p≤0.10

17. Explanatory models Emigration intentions – Summary Intentions for emigration significantly vary among men and women with men being more likely to have a positive attitude and plans to leave the country in near future in order to find a job abroad. The economic status (being unemployment) increase the likelihood for positive intention for labor emigration. The place of residence is also a strong predictor revealing the importance of the regional disparities within the country. Previous emigration experience is one of the strongest predictors of the emigration intentions.

18. Emigration experience (results from logistic regression)

19. Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4 Emigration experience Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Constant0.11***0.10***0.07***0.06*** Gender Male (ref.) 1 1 1 1 Female0.50***0.47***0.41***0.41*** Ethniciy Bulgarian (ref.) 1 1 1 1 Not Bulgarian1.36 1.28 1.34 Completed education Primary or lower (ref.) 1 1 1 1 Secondary0.90 0.93 0.96 0.92 Higher0.88 0.95 0.84 0.78 Employment status of respondent Employed (ref.) 1 1 1 Unemployed 1.05 1.14 1.150 Economically inactive 1.67**1.61*1.739** Family status No partner (ref.) 1 1 In cohabitation 1.18 1.15 Married 2.10**2.09** Separated/divorced 2.55 2.13 Number of children None (ref.) 1 1 1 child 0.88 0.87 2 or more children 0.56 0.54 Place of residence Sofia (ref.) 1 1 Large city 1.16 1.13 Small city 0.96 0.94 Village 1.22 1.18

20. Model 1Model 2Model 3Model 4 Emigration experience Odds Ratio ` Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Odds Ratio Sig. Household Lives with parents (ref.) 1 1 Lives in own dwelling 1.50 1.44 Lives in rented dwelling/with other people 1.73**1.68** Father’s employment status Employed (ref.) 1 Unemployed 0.62 Economically inactive 1.33 Deceased/ no father 1.77** Mother’s employment status Employed (ref.) 1 Unemployed 1.51** Economically inactive 1.05 Deceased/ no mother 1.37 Number of brothers and sisters None (ref.) 1 1 brother/sister 1.29 2 brothers/sisters 0.96 3 or more brothers/sisters 0.86 Log likelihood -544.79-542.80-533.25-526.62 Pseudo R20.0200.0230.0400.051 *** p≤0.01; ** 0.01<p≤0.05; * 0.05<p≤0.10

21. Explanatory models Emigration experience – Summary The model of emigration focuses only on those young people who have returned after labor migration abroad. Most likely these people have specific characteristics that hamper their integration in foreign labor market context. The models suggest that it is more likely that these people have limited social and educational resources. It is more likely for them to be men, coming from large families with many siblings, often without one parent or one of the parents being unemployed, who cannot integrate to the national labor market after the return and remain economically inactive.

22. Conclusions We can draw the following sociological profile of the young people who have emigrated abroad to work for various periods of time after completing their education: The emigrants are more likely to be men, with lower education, who don’t have or cannot find job at home. The economically inactive and unemployed are more likely to have worked abroad than those who were employed at the time of the survey and, hence, had made the transition from education to work within the country.

23. Conclusions The successful labour market integration of young people with a low education level proves to be one of the most serious challenges for the youth employment policy of the country which could prevent the youth emigration It might be expected that young people with limited social /educational resources would also find it difficult to integrate themselves in the labour market of a foreign country. This creates a double vulnerability of young people with less resources and human capital. They can’t find first stable job neither in Bulgaria, nor abroad.

24. Thank you for your attention! Acknowledgement: This research has been done with the financial support of Switzerland’s Contribution to the Expanded European Union and the Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science. Rumiana Stoilova@gmail.com http://issk-bas.org/ Institute for the Study of Societies and Knowledge Bulgarian Academy of Sciences 13A, Moskovska Street 1000 Sofia elitsa_kdimitrova@yahoo.com Institute for Population and Human Studies - BAS