Polska będzie potrzebowała migrantów: Jak przygotować się na zmiany demograficzne?

This text was created as part of the WP Opinions project. It presents diverse perspectives from commentators and public opinion leaders on key social and political issues.

Poland will need migrants. That much is certain. This is due to the low birth rate that has been with us for decades. According to estimates from the Central Statistical Office, by 2040 the number of people of working age will fall from around 22 million today to just under 20 million. A decade later, there will be only 16.4 million (pessimistic scenario) to 17 million (optimistic scenario). At the same time, the number of people of retirement age will increase. This, in turn, means rising pension expenditure, as well as growing needs of the healthcare system. Both systems require an influx of funds.

In simple terms, we have three ways to obtain these funds: we can “generate” them through debt, economic growth, or taxes. However, for the latter to work, our economy needs workers.

Here, it’s worth opening a parenthesis and adding that there are at least three lines of defense against the low birth rate. The first of these, which we will focus on in the rest of the text, is migration. The second is raising the retirement age. The third is increasing labor productivity. None of these alone will be enough to meet the challenges that await us.

Migration is therefore one of the pillars of our future prosperity. Unfortunately, current debates focus excessively on the dangers, and right-wing politicians are beating the drum of fear. This, of course, does not mean that there are no dangers.

According to information from the Demagog.org portal, in Germany the number of suspects of committing crimes is higher both in the case of refugees (they commit crimes from several to 10 times more often than native Germans, depending on the type of offense) and in the case of economic migrants. Similar information is coming from Swedish and Dutch services, where almost 60 percent of sexually motivated crimes are committed by people with a “migration background.”

Let’s divide this into four. First, the fact that some migrants commit crimes more often than locals does not mean that most migrants are potential criminals. Nothing could be further from the truth. The vast majority of them are ordinary people wanting to earn a living, paying taxes, and wanting to raise their children to be decent people.

Second, not all migration leads to increased crime. There are examples of this close to home – the very large migration from Ukraine and Belarus in recent years has shown that newcomers do not differ from Poles in terms of the frequency of crimes committed.

Let’s start by distinguishing, which was already signaled above. In a very simplified way, migrants are divided into two groups: refugees who flee war or absolutely unbearable living conditions, and economic migrants (seeking work).

A recent report by the Polish Economic Institute shows that 72 percent of foreigners of working age arriving in a dozen or so analyzed OECD countries were legally employed (data for 2024). “Work not only provides income, but is also a source of dignity, stability and belonging to society, making it a key element of integration” – reads the report.

As expected, newcomers earn less than locals. In the first year, their earnings are on average 34 percent lower. After five years, the disparity decreases to 21 percent. It still remains noticeable. In each of a dozen or so analyzed countries, there were differences between the salaries of newcomers and locals. There were also wage gaps between newcomers and locals after five years of residence.

Delving into the OECD’s “International Migration Outlook 2025” reveals how important the region of origin of newcomers is. The wage gap at the time of entering the labor market is greater for immigrants from Africa, the Middle East and Asia than for migrants from the European Union and North America. However, it would be a mistake to attribute everything to discrimination. As the report states, “The difference is partly due to the fact that migrants from Africa, the Middle East and Asia work in lower-paying sectors and less well-paying companies.”

According to an analysis by the OECD, almost two-thirds of the wage gap (63 percent) between foreigners and locals can be attributed to the concentration of newcomers in lower-paying companies and sectors (in OECD countries, these are mainly: construction, domestic services, accommodation and catering, manufacturing, healthcare and IT).

Part of the initial wage difference is also due to the fact that migrants work less than locals in their first year. But this is not by their choice – they are more often than locals (and migrants who have already settled on the labor market) have less choice of offers. This changes over time, and switching to full-time employment is one of the variables that causes income to converge.

Why do migrants choose lower-paying jobs? First, of course, because they have little other choice. When a middle-class person loses their job, they have a financial safety net that allows them to wait for a better job offer. They also have friends who can recommend them to someone. Migrants do not have these resources – they have to grab what is currently available.

Another factor is social capital. Newcomers often go to work where their friends and family already work. This, in turn, perpetuates the division into “migrant industries” and local jobs. However, over time, foreigners gain experience and skills in navigating the new labor market and earn more.

What can speed up these transfers? The Polish Economic Institute mentions, among other things, vocational training. “Social adaptation of immigrants who undergo vocational training is 2-3 months shorter” – reads the report. The OECD also emphasizes the role of efficient career counseling and well