The research, published in the peer-reviewed journal Ethnic and Racial Studies, confirmed the existence of a “Muslim penalty” in the labor market, but rejected earlier suggestions that it was due to cultural and religious practices. Both Muslim men and Muslim women were found to be significantly more likely to be unemployed than their white British Christian counterparts, after adjustments were made for factors such as age, place of residence, education and having children. The author then adjusted for factors such as religiosity, gender attitudes, and civic participation, but found that they had only a small effect on the “Muslim penalty.” Samir Sweida-Metwally, PhD researcher at the University of Bristol, who carried out the research, supported by the Economic and Social Research Council, said: “The findings provide evidence against the view that the poor employment outcomes of Muslims in Britain are due to the so-called “socio-cultural attitudes”. “Challenging this narrative, which problematizes Muslims and their faith, the study supports the overwhelming evidence from field experiments showing that anti-Muslim discrimination against Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim is a significant barrier to their access to work.” His paper uses 10 years of data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study, an annual survey of around 100,000 people from 40,000 households that collects information, mainly through face-to-face interviews, about people’s socio-economic status. Participants were asked questions about, among other things, the strength of their religious beliefs, whether they were members of social organizations, and whether they agreed with statements such as “The husband should earn, the wife should stay at home” and “Family life suffers if the mother works full time. -time”. This enabled Sweida-Metwally to ascertain whether certain behaviors are associated with a higher risk of unemployment. And he concluded: “Sociocultural variables,” such as gender attitudes, language proficiency, and the extent of inter- and intra-ethnic social ties, are not a convincing source of unexplained ethno-religious differences in labor market participation and unemployment among Muslim men and women. .” Another important finding was that country of origin or “perceived Muslimness” can be important. While white British Muslims did not show a significantly different risk of unemployment and inactivity than white British Christians, non-religious Arabs were among those with the highest probability of unemployment/inactivity. Sweida-Metwally wrote this “may suggest that perceived Muslimness is more important in predicting religious disadvantage among men than actual adherence to the faith.” Subscribe to First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every morning at 7am. BST He added: “This means that understanding that Islamophobia is multi-dimensional and related to colour, religion, culture and country of origin, with any dimension of difference being ‘enough’ for someone prone to prejudice, is necessary for any strategy it pursues. to mitigate these inequalities”. The study found that when it came to men, those of black Caribbean descent had the highest risk of unemployment. Among women, Muslims generally showed the highest risk of unemployment, with Pakistani women showing the highest risk of unemployment. Sweida-Metwally said: “Overall, the evidence suggests support for the position that there is both a religion (Muslim) and a color (black) penalty in the British labor market. Confirming previous research, religion is a much better predictor of unemployment and inactivity for women, while for men both color and religion are important.”
