Job Satisfaction among Indian Migrants and Nonmigrants and its Relationship with their Psychological Profile—A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Background:

Unemployment, insufficient resources, family poverty, and poor financial benefits are crucial determinants for internal or external migration of large sections of educated youth.

Aims:

To perform a comparative analysis of different levels of job satisfaction and the status of mental morbidity among migrant and nonmigrant population.

Settings and Design:

A cross-sectional study was employed between March 2016 and October 2017 at the field practice area of one of the tertiary health care institutes in Anand District of Gujarat State of India.

Methods and Material:

A total of 456 educated and skilled professionals participated in the study. Job descriptive index, Job in General, and Global Health Questionnaire-28 were utilized.

Statistical Analysis:

The data entry was performed in Epi Info™ 7 followed by data analysis in EPI-INFO Software.

Results and Conclusions:

The overall job satisfaction in the study was found to be significantly higher among nonmigrants than migrants. All three scores were correlated with each other significantly. Overall, migrants were found to be significantly less satisfied with their jobs in general and more psychologically distressed, as compared to their nonmigrant counterparts.

INTRODUCTION

India, owing to its culturally diverse settings and wide geographical placement, is characterized by a relatively immobile society.[1] India has a major share of internal migration and is the top origin nation of international migrants.[1] Three out of every ten Indians are internal migrants, and there are many more who are uncounted and invisible.[2] Prevailing unemployment, inadequate resources, family poverty, and low wages are major key drivers for internal or external migration of particularly large sections of educated youth.[2]

In search of a better life and job avenues, people especially educated youth migrate long and short distances, predominantly to neighboring states, and when they migrate from one place or culture to another, they carry their knowledge and expressions of distress with them.[3] Usually, employees have positive feelings toward their work if they have job satisfaction pertaining to certain factors like wages, organization culture, promotion prospects, relationships with coemployees, job security, etc.[4] The literature shows that migrant workers manifested more common mental issues, specifically, depressive illness compared to local workers due to stressors like financial constraints, trust deficit, discrimination from cocolleagues, poor work environment.[4]

The research underlines the positive association between migrants and psychological morbidity. The postmigration environment shows a substantial influence on the mental health of migrants who experience multiple issues like stress, anxiety, substance abuse, and inadequate sleep.[5]

Hence, in addressing the concern of mental health among migrants, this study was primarily intended to evaluate various levels of job satisfaction as well as the status of mental morbidity among this population. The study also aimed to compare respondent variables, mental morbidity, and level of job satisfaction of migrant to nonmigrant workers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ethical consideration

An ethics approval was obtained from the IEC committee of the respective institute. An informed consent was received from the study participants.

Research design and settings

A cross-sectional study was implemented between March 2016 and October 2017 in the field practice area of one of the tertiary health care institutes in Anand District of Gujarat State of India.

Study population

The educated and skilled professionals who migrated to the Anand-Vidyanagar-Karamsad area (study area) for prospective job opportunities from other states of India were enrolled as primary study participants (migrants). They were all working in organized sectors like corporates, banks, institutions, hospitals, universities, and managerial jobs in industrial sectors. A nonmigrant from the same work environment was considered a secondary participant. After ensuring age and sex matching, they were taken as controls with a 1:1 ratio.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Highly qualified Indian nationals who migrated to Gujarat State in the last 6 months or more and held a job in the organized sector were eligible as primary participants. Migrants below 20 years and were not first-generation migrants were excluded from the study. Those nonmigrants whose usual place of residence was Gujarat and who were working at the same place as primary participants were considered secondary participants.

Sample size estimation

Sample size calculation was done in Epi Info™ 7 stat calculator using cohort or cross-sectional command. Considering the nonresponse rate of 5%, the revised sample size was 228, each for migrants and nonmigrants.

Recruitment procedures

Three categories of primary participants (health care providers, professors, and managers) were included in the study. The participant's list was retrieved from the Human Resource Department of respective workplaces. The participants were identified by the “Lottery Method” and “Snowball Sampling technique”. The process was continued till the required sample size was achieved. The Face-to-face interview method was implemented in the preferred language of the participants.

Survey tool

Three validated and pilot-tested questionnaires in three preferred languages were used in the study. These were the “General Health Questionnaire” (GHQ-28),[6] “Job satisfaction questionnaire,”[6] and “The Stress in General (SIG) scale,” which was used to measure participants’ general level of workplace stress. “The Trust in Management Scale”[6] assessed participants’ feelings of trust toward senior management in their organization.

Statistical analysis

The data entry was performed in Epi Info™ 7 followed by data analysis in EPI-INFO Software. Univariate and multivariate analyses were done using appropriate statistical tests to find an association between job satisfaction and psychological distress and the impact of migration and other variables on it. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Sociodemographic characteristics and migration status

Table 1 describes the sociodemographic profile and migration status of 456 study participants. In the study, 198 (86.84%) migrants and all 228 (100%) nonmigrants were well versed in the local (Gujarati) language. Fifty-six (24.6%) migrants and 40 (17.5%) nonmigrants had addictions like tobacco and alcohol. A history of chronic medical illness was reported among 82 (36%) migrants and 49 (21.5) nonmigrants.

Table 1.

Sociodemographic and migration features of study participants (n=456)

Sociodemographic variables	Migrants (n=228)		Nonmigrants (n=228)
	Frequency	Percentage	Frequency	Percentage
Usual place of residence (UPR)
Out-state migration (Migrants)	228	100	0	0
Within-state migration (Nonmigrants)	0	0	97	42.5
Local residents (Nonmigrants)	0	0	131	57.5
Age
20-29 years	52	22.8	52	22.8
30-39 years	94	41.2	95	41.7
40-49 years	44	19.3	46	20.2
50 years and above	38	16.7	35	15.4
Sex
Male	152	66.7	152	66.7
Female	76	33.3	76	33.3
Marital status
Single	48	21.1	32	14.0
Married	167	73.2	178	78.1
Separated	6	2.6	11	4.8
Divorced	4	1.8	3	1.3
Widow/Widower	3	1.3	4	1.8
Education
Graduate	31	13.6	26	11.4
Postgraduate	197	86.4	202	88.6
Job profile
Doctors	73	32	73	32
Managers	70	30.7	70	30.7
Professors	85	37.3	85	37.3
Organized sector
Government	65	28.5	65	28.5
Private	163	71.5	163	71.5

Job satisfaction

Job descriptive index (JDI)

The participants having a JDI score of 62 (cut off) or more was considered as being satisfied with their job. Overall, 55.2% of participants were satisfied with their job. It was significantly higher among nonmigrants (66.6%) than migrants (43.8%) (p < 0.001).

In the study, marital status had a significant impact on the migrant population (p < 0.05). The addictions among migrants significantly affected the level of job satisfaction (p < 0.05). The migrants with a lesser duration of stay and living alone since migration were less likely to have job satisfaction than those with a prolonged duration of stay and living with family members. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05).

Significant influence on job satisfaction was reported in those migrants and nonmigrants who considered “migration” as a stressor (p < 0.001), but only migrants with perceived work-related stress showed a statistically significant change in their level of job satisfaction (p < 0.001). The association was insignificant for nonmigrants. The majority (71.9%) of migrants wished to settle back in their native places.

Stress in general

The participants having an SIG score of 10 (cut off) or more were considered to be stressed with their work. Overall, 48.68% of participants were satisfied with a current job. The stress was significantly higher among migrants (50.43%) than nonmigrants (46.92%) (p < 0.05).

Except for job profile, none of the sociodemographic variables showed a significant impact on stress-related work among participants (p > 0.05). Compared to doctors and professors, managers (61.4%) perceived more workplace SIG. Table 2 indicates a significant association between addictions and workplace SIG among migrant participants. However, no significant (p > 0.05) effect of migration-related variables was found on the stress level of participants. “Migration” was the contributing factor to SIG among the migrant group (p < 0.05).

Table 2.

Stress in general (SIG) of study participants with respect to comorbidity and health behavior-related variables (n=456)

Comorbidity and health behavior-related variables	Category	Migrants (n=228) Stress in general			Nonmigrants (n=228) Stress in general
		Yes (%)	No (%)	P	Yes (%)	No (%)	P
History of addiction	Yes	37 (66.0)	19 (34.0)	0.007	16 (40.0)	24 (60.0)	0.333
	No	78 (45.3)	94 (54.7)		91 (48.4)	97 (51.6)
History of regular exercise	Yes	67 (50.0)	67 (50.0)	0.874	46 (46.0)	54 (54.0)	0.804
	No	48 (51.0)	46 (49.0)		61 (47.7)	67 (52.3)
History of chronic medical illness	Yes	41 (50.0)	41 (50.0)	0.921	16 (32.7)	33 (67.3)	0.024
	No	74 (50.7)	72 (49.3)		91 (50.8)	88 (49.2)
History of regular medication	Yes	24 (42.9)	32 (57.1)	0.311	13 (30.9)	29 (69.1)	0.071
	No	66 (51.2)	63 (48.8)		38 (50.7)	37 (49.3)
	NA	25 (58.1)	18 (33.9)		56 (50.5)	55 (49.5)
Family history of chronic illness	Yes	54 (48.6)	57 (51.4)	0.599	50 (48.0)	54 (52.0)	0.751
	No	61 (52.1)	56 (47.9)		57 (46.0)	67 (54.0)
Family history of psychological illness	Yes	15 (42.9)	20 (57.1)	0.330	7 (29.1)	17 (70.9)	0.065
	No	100 (51.8)	93 (48.2)		100 (49.0)	104 (51.0)

P<0.05 was considered statistically significant

Trust in management (TIM)

The participants with a TIM score of 26 (cut off) or more was taken to have TIM of the organization they worked for. Overall, 51.75% of participants showed trust in their management. It was significantly higher among nonmigrants (60.52%) than migrants (42.98%). TIM increased with age among participants, but the difference was statistically nonsignificant. Male and married participants expressed higher TIM, but the association was statistically insignificant (p > 0.05).

Among migrants, no any economic variable showed a significant effect on the employee's trust in the management and working of the organization [Table 3]. Similar findings were observed for nonmigrant participants.

Table 3.

Proportion of migrants and nonmigrants having trust in management (TIM) with respect to various economic variables (n=456)

Economic variables	Category	Migrants (n=228) Trust in management			Nonmigrants (n=228) Trust in management
		Yes (%)	No (%)	P	Yes (%)	No (%)	P
Education status	Graduate	18 (58.0)	13 (42)	0.068	17 (65.4)	9 (34.6)	0.590
	Professional degree	80 (40.6)	117 (59.3)		121 (59.90)	81 (40.1)
Job profile	Doctors	28 (38.4)	45 (61.6)	0.435	43 (58.90)	30 (41.1)	0.559
	Manager	29 (41.4)	41 (58.6)		46 (65.8)	24 (34.2)
	Professors	41 (48.2)	44 (51.8)		49 (57.6)	36 (42.4)
Organized sector	Government	29 (44.6)	36 (55.4)	0.753	40 (61.5)	25 (38.5)	0.843
	Private	69 (42.3)	94 (57.7)		98 (60.1)	65 (39.9)
Spouse working	Yes	48 (43.6)	62 (56.4)	0.903	80 (61.5)	50 (38.5)	0.577
	No	32 (43.8)	41 (56.2)		35 (55.5)	28 (44.5)
	Single participant	18 (40.0)	27 (60.0)		23 (65.7)	12 (34.3)

P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

General Health Questionnaire

A GHQ score of more than 4 was considered to suggest psychological distress and was reported among 29.1% of participants. The stress was significantly higher among migrants (40.78%) than nonmigrants (17.54%) (Z-score = 5.460; P < 0.05).

Figures 1 and 2 indicate that GHQ scores were not normally distributed among migrants and nonmigrants and were leptokurtic. The mean of GHQ scores among migrants was 4.287, and in nonmigrants, it was 2.189. It was seen that nonmigrants had a lesser mean value of GHQ than migrants, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05, t = 5.168). A GHQ had a significant positive association with variables, viz., female gender, managers as a profession, separated participants, employment in the private sector, perceived work-related stress, migration contributes to stress, and willingness to settle in native place (p < 0.05).

Figure 1.

Distribution of GHQ scores among migrants

Figure 2.

Distribution of GHQ scores among nonmigrants

DISCUSSION

Job satisfaction is a multidimensional concept and has several facets of job influencing it.[7,8,9] Therefore, the current study sought three independent subscales to evaluate job satisfaction, namely, the JDI, SIG, and TIM. Overall, migrants (43.8%) reported lesser job satisfaction than nonmigrants (66.6%). It may be attributed to a sense of job insecurity and perhaps to discrimination against specific groups of migrants.

The migrants, especially those with chronic health ailments and family members, experienced higher job insecurity than nonmigrants. Such disparities gradually reduced as years since arrival in the migrant place (Gujarat), which became almost similar to nonmigrants after a few years postarrival, with a notable exception of a few migrants, for whom disparities persisted. Similar findings were reported among migrant and native workers in Australia.[7] However, the migrant status–job insecurity relationship in the present study was not confounded by age, gender, educational qualifications, and professional skill level. There is scarce literature that directly compares job insecurity between migrants and native workers, with the majority of them reports that migrants perceived higher job insecurity.[10,11,12,13]

Several studies documented that women show greater job satisfaction than men. It could be due to those men and women value job characteristics differently. Women are more socialized to have minimum expectations regarding jobs and show less value on promotion and financial benefits; therefore, they are easily satisfied.[12,13,14] In our study, there were striking gender differences pertaining to job satisfaction. It was less among female than male migrants but statistically insignificant. Nonetheless, the inferences concerning gender disparities in terms of job satisfaction and quality of life are mixed. A European study also observed a deficit in job satisfaction among female workers than males.[12] However, in a study conducted by Pichler and Wallace, women experienced higher levels of job satisfaction, social contributions, and career.[13]

In this study, demographic characteristics did not show a significant influence on the job satisfaction of migrant workers; it might be that, as the sample comprised of skilled migrants and there might have been little variation in the level of education and English language skills, both of which tend to be high among skilled migrants.

In this study, negative relationships were found between interpersonal trust and job-related stress (SIG), and also between SIG and job satisfaction. On the interaction between TIM and SIG, it was observed that an effect of TIM masked the effect of SIG on job satisfaction. This suggests that the feeling of trust in the management of the organization super cedes stress and inspires job security and satisfaction. In the present study, with an increase in age, not only was the TIM enhanced, but also the difference between groups became insignificant. Male and female migrants had significantly lower trust than nonmigrants.

Comparatively, a high prevalence of stress was reported among migrants (40.78%) than nonmigrants (17.54%), and the association was statistically significant. This poses the migrants at a steep risk of suffering from psychological distress. This finding was consistent with the study carried out in Sweden, where a large number of migrants reported psychological ailments than the nonmigrant population.[14] In the present study, migrants from the private sector, separated (from the spouse) and engaged in administrative responsibilities, were found to be significantly associated with distress symptoms. Generally, the greater levels of psychological distress, specifically in migrant workers, could be ascribed to multiple stressors like financial challenges, health risks, language barriers, discrimination, and poor accessibility to health care.[12,13,14]

Limitations

The study only assessed a limited number of objective job characteristics, which primarily emphasized on few economic and sociodemographic variables. However, sociologists and organizational psychologists have addressed job quality through a wide array of aspects comprising workers’ well-being, personal growth, job autonomy, and work-life balance.

CONCLUSIONS

Migrants were found to be significantly less satisfied with their jobs in general and more psychologically distressed, as compared to their nonmigrant counterparts. However, further research with a combined quantitative and qualitative approach is highly warranted to bridge knowledge gaps in this area.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.