Labour Rights

One afternoon late August in a quiet Irish seaside town, a supermarket worker decided he could no longer separate his job from what he was seeing on his phone.

Images from Gaza, with neighbourhoods flattened and families buried, had followed him to the checkout counter.

At the time, Israel’s genocidal onslaught had killed more than 60,000 Palestinians.

His first act of protest was to quietly warn customers that some of the fruit and vegetables were sourced from Israel. Later, as people in Gaza starved, he refused to scan or sell Israeli-grown produce.

He could not, he said, “have that on my conscience”.

Within weeks, Tesco supermarket suspended him.

He requested anonymity following advice from his trade union.

In Newcastle, County Down, a town better known for its summer tourists than political protest, customers protested outside the store.

The local dispute became a test case: Can individual employees turn their moral outrage into workplace action?

Facing mounting backlash, Tesco reinstated him in January, moving him to a role where he no longer has to handle Israeli goods.

“I would encourage them to do it,” he said about other workers. “They have the backing of the unions and there’s a precedent set. They didn’t sack me; they shouldn’t be able to sack anyone else.

“And then, if we get enough people to do it, they can’t sell Israeli goods.”

“A genocide is still going on, they are slowly killing and starving people – we still need to be out, doing what we can.”

From shop floors to state policy

Across Europe, there is labour-led pressure to cease trade with Israel.

Unions in Ireland, the UK and Norway have passed motions stating that workers should not be compelled to handle Israeli goods.

Retail cooperatives, including Co-op UK and Italy’s Coop Alleanza 3.0, have removed some Israeli products in protest against the war in Gaza.

The campaigns raise questions about whether worker-led refusals can lead to state-level boycotts.

Activists say the strategy is rooted in history.

In 1984, workers at the Dunnes Stores retail chain in Ireland refused to handle goods from apartheid South Africa. The action lasted nearly three years and contributed to Ireland becoming the first country in Western Europe to ban trade with South Africa.

“The same can be done against the apartheid, genocidal state of Israel today,” said Damian Quinn, 33, of BDS Belfast.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement is a Palestinian-led campaign launched in 2005 that calls for economic and cultural boycotts of Israel until it complies with international law, including ending its occupation of Palestine.

“Where the state has failed in its obligation to prevent and punish the crime of genocide, citizens and workers across the world must refuse Israel and apply pressure on their governments to introduce legislation,” said Quinn.

That pressure, he said, takes the form of boycotting “complicit Israeli sporting, academic and cultural institutions”, as well as Israeli and international companies “engaged in violations of Palestinian human rights”.

The movement also seeks to “apply pressure on banks, local councils, universities, churches, pension funds and governments to do the same through divestment and sanctions”, he added.

Supporters argue that such pressure is beginning to shape state policy across Europe.

Spain and Slovenia have moved to restrict trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank following sustained public protests and mounting political pressure. In August 2025, Slovenia’s government banned imports of goods produced in Israeli-occupied territories, becoming one of the first European states to adopt such a measure.

Spain followed suit later that year, with a decree banning the import of products from illegal Israeli settlements. The measure was formally enforced at the start of 2026.

Both countries’ centre-left governments have been outspoken critics of Israel’s conduct during the war, helping create the political conditions for legislative action.

In the Netherlands, a wave of pro-Palestinian campus protests and public demonstrations in 2025 shifted political discourse. Student demands for academic and trade disengagement became part of broader calls for national policy change.

Later that year, members of the Dutch parliament urged the government to ban imports from illegal Israeli settlements.

Meanwhile, Ireland is attempting to advance its Occupied Territories Bill, first introduced in 2018, which would prohibit trade in goods and services from illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank.

Progress, however, has stalled despite unanimous backing in the lower house of Ireland’s parliament, the Dail.

Paul Murphy, an Irish pro-Palestine member of parliament who, in June, attempted to cross into Gaza, told Al Jazeera the delay amounts to “indirect pressure from Israel routed through the US”. He accused the government of “kicking the can down the road” as it seeks further legal advice.

Pro-Israel organisations are working to oppose initiatives that aim to pressure Israel economically.

B’nai B’rith International, a US-based group that says it strengthens “global Jewish life”, combats anti-Semitism and stands “unequivocally with the State of Israel”, decries the BDS movement. In July 2025, it submitted an 18-page memorandum to Irish lawmakers, warning the bill could pose risks for US companies operating in Ireland.

The memorandum argued that, if enacted, the bill could create conflicts with US federal anti-boycott laws, which prohibit US companies from participating in certain foreign-led boycotts – particularly those targeting Israel.

B’nai B’rith International also “vehemently condemns” the United Kingdom’s recognition of Palestinian statehood and has donated 200 softshell jackets to Israeli military personnel.

Critics say interventions of this kind go beyond advocacy and reflect coordinated efforts to influence European policymaking on Israel and Palestine from abroad.

While lobby groups publicly press their case, leaked documents, based on material from whistleblower site Distributed Denial of Secrets, suggest the Israeli state has also been directly involved in countering BDS campaigns across Europe.

A covert programme, jointly funded by the Israeli Ministries of Justice and of Strategic Affairs, reportedly hired law firms for 130,000 euros ($154,200) on assignments aimed at monitoring boycott-related movements.

Former Sinn Fein MEP Martina Anderson, who supports the BDS movement, previously accused Israeli advocacy organisations of attempting to silence critics of Israel through legal and political pressure.

According to the leaked documents cited by The Ditch, an Irish outlet, Israel hired a law firm to “investigate the steps open to Israel against Martina Anderson”.

She told Al Jazeera she stood by her criticism.

“As the chair of the Palestinian delegation in the European Parliament, I did my work diligently, as people who know me would expect me to do.

“I am proud to have been a thorn in the side of the Israeli state and its extensive lobbying machine, which works relentlessly to undermine Palestinian voices and to justify a brutal and oppressive rogue state.”

Pushback across Europe

In 2019, Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag, adopted a non-binding resolution condemning the BDS movement as anti-Semitic, calling for the withdrawal of public funding from groups that support it.

Observers say the vote has since been used to conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

The European Leadership Network (ELNET), a prominent pro-Israel advocacy organisation active across the continent, welcomed the move and said its German branch had urged further legislative steps.

Meanwhile, in the UK, ELNET has funded trips to Israel for Labour politicians and their staff.

Bridget Phillipson, now secretary of state for education, declared a 3,000-pound ($4,087) visit funded by ELNET for a member of her team.

A coworker of Wes Streeting named Anna Wilson also accepted a trip funded by ELNET. Streeting himself has visited Israel on a mission organised by the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) group.

ELNET’s UK branch is directed by Joan Ryan, an ex-Labour MP and former LFI chair.

During the passage of a bill designed to prevent public bodies from pursuing their own boycotts, divestment or sanctions policies – the Labour Party imposed a three-line whip instructing MPs to vote against it. Phillipson and Streeting abstained.

The Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill was widely seen as an attempt to block local councils and public institutions from adopting BDS-style measures.

A vocal supporter of the legislation was Luke Akehurst, then director of the pro-Israel advocacy group, We Believe in Israel. In a statement carried by ELNET, he said it was “absurd” that local councils could “undermine the excellent relationship between the UK and Israel” through boycotts or divestment.

“We need the law changed to close this loophole,” he said, arguing that BDS initiatives by local authorities risked “importing the conflict into communities in the UK”.

The legislation was ultimately shelved when a general election was called in 2024. It formed part of broader legislative efforts in parts of Europe to limit BDS-linked boycotts.

Akehurst has since been elected as Labour MP for North Durham, having previously served on the party’s National Executive Committee.

New York City, United States – For 14 years, BC Dodge built a career telling other people’s stories as a marketing and communications professional in the nonprofit sector in the Washington, DC area in the United States. But in late 2024, that stable career hit a speed bump.

He was laid off from his job amid a round of restructuring. The news landed without warning. One day he had a job, and the next he was sitting at home, staring at the numbers, trying to figure out how to keep paying the mortgage and putting food on the table.

He is married, and his partner is a teacher, but the math did not work. One salary might cover things for a little while, but not long enough to maintain long-term stability.

So he started applying for new work immediately. Over three months, he submitted 350 job applications. He got six interviews.

After months of searching, something moved.

He advanced in the hiring process for a Washington, DC–based nonprofit, making it far enough to sit across from senior leadership. It felt like he finally caught a break.

Then the ground shifted again. As Dodge was interviewing for a new job, Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, was advising the administration of US President Donald Trump on how to shrink the federal government, and that meant cutting funding to agencies that provide contracts and funds to swaths of nonprofit organisations around the country. The effects rippled outward, and Dodge was caught in the crosshairs.

Contracts were cancelled and funding streams dried up. Nonprofits that depend on government support had to pull back and scale down ambitions — those very same nonprofits from whom Dodge sought employment.

“I got a call from HR saying they weren’t going to hire for the position, and that all hiring was on hold. I couldn’t argue with them, because I’d been hearing the same thing from organisations I’d spoken to since I started applying. ‘We were relying on federal funds, and now they’re gone,’” Dodge said.

Then it was back to the drawing board. He began searching yet again, but this time with a cloud of uncertainty looming over the entire industry he works in. Dodge finally took what he could get — part-time work in his field. The pay was well below what he had been earning before, but he accepted it anyway. Some income, he reasoned, was better than none.

The result is underemployment. Underemployment can manifest in several ways, often when workers are seeking full-time work but can only find part-time positions, or when the jobs they work do not fully utilise their skills and training. It is generally associated with industries like restaurants or retail, but it also reaches into fields with fewer resources and shrinking opportunities, including the nonprofit sector, where jobs are increasingly precarious and full-time stability is harder to find because of the wave of government funding cuts in 2025.

The upshot is lower incomes for underemployed workers, sometimes below the cost of living or even pushing them into the ranks of the working poor.

Underemployment has been on the rise, according to the Economic Policy Institute, which has tracked the rate of underemployment since 1978. Today, 8 percent of the US population is underemployed, up 0.5 percent from 2024 and it is up 1.1 percent from 2023.

At the same time, many in the US are seeing their expenses increase.

The impact of tariffs has hit low-to-middle-income earners harder than others. Analysis from the Yale Budget Lab found that lower-income households are paying a higher percentage of their post-tax income on goods subject to tariffs as opposed to higher-income households, all while costs for necessities like healthcare are increasing.

Earlier this year, Congressional leaders failed to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies. Premiums increased by an average of 144 percent, according to analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

“Some people have lost their jobs and found new ones that pay less, but others have kept their jobs, but their healthcare premiums have increased. Their electric bills have also gone up. Their salaries no longer cover basic living costs,” Jillian Hishaw, a personal bankruptcy lawyer in Charlotte, North Carolina, said.

She said that because of increased costs like these and a stalling job market, she is seeing an increase in inquiries about personal bankruptcy filings in efforts by potential clients not to lose their homes to foreclosure.

“In one day last week, 85 foreclosures were filed in Mecklenburg County [where Charlotte is located]. Foreclosures happen daily, but 85 in a single day is unusually high. Two years ago, the daily average was 10 to 20, but now filings are approaching triple digits each day,” Hishaw said.

Shrinking options

The surging economic pressures hit workers across various sectors, including financial and administrative services. An Ohio-based accountant who did not want his name to be published, has worked a patchwork of accounting and administrative jobs over the past few years. In March, he was laid off from a research organisation in central Ohio.

After months of searching, he found new work, but not as an accountant, and the pay falls far short of covering his cost of living.

“I’m working as a sales coordinator, which I really don’t want to be doing, but it was the only thing I could land with how bad things are. It’s not enough to live on,” he said.

The labour market is under strain. Layoffs reached more than 1.1 million in 2025, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas, while job creation failed to keep pace, with just 584,000 jobs added. As a result, more workers are settling for underpaid or part-time work that does not meet basic living expenses, including Dodge and the accountant.

Michele Evermore, senior fellow at the National Academy of Social Insurance, says that economic uncertainty driven by tariffs and developments in artificial intelligence has put businesses across a wide set of sectors essentially on pause — maintaining the status quo or scaling back.

“People who are already at the margins are getting kicked out entirely, and that’s placing pressure on everyone who is clinging to a job,” Evermore told Al Jazeera.

In January, one of the key measures of underemployment, the number of people who work part-time for economic reasons, such as an inability to find full-time work or had their hours reduced, hit 4.9 million. It was a 453,000 decline from the month before, but is up 410,000 from this time last year, according to the January jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Wednesday.

Long-term unemployment jumped 386,000 from this time a year ago to 1.8 million, although it remains unchanged compared with the previous month.

The nonprofit sector has been hit particularly hard in the last year, losing 28,729 jobs in 2025, up sharply from 5,640 losses the year before, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Like the Ohio accountant, Dodge has been searching for new opportunities since he lost his full-time role a year and a half ago. He has applied for 460 jobs and only landed a handful of interviews.

Working weekends, washing dishes

The market is only getting tighter. US employers cut more than 108,000 jobs in January, while employers only announced intentions to hire 5,300 new roles for the month, the lowest on record since Challenger, Gray & Christmas started tracking that in 2009.

“Employers aren’t wanting to make any big investments right now, including increasing salaries to their workforce,” Evermore, who served as a policy adviser in the US Labor Department during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, added.

In December, labour market turnover remained stagnant. Amid economic uncertainty and a slowdown in new job growth, many Americans are hanging on to the jobs they already have. Job openings fell to 6.5 million, down 386,000 from the previous month, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Job Openings and Labour Turnover Survey (JOLTS).

Hiring and separations, which include layoffs and firings, were unchanged. That followed November’s report, which similarly showed little movement in both new hiring and the number of workers leaving their jobs.

Combined, that means that for the underemployed, finding a new role, either part-time to augment their existing income, or to replace it altogether, is increasingly difficult for people like the accountant.

“I’m also working weekends at a friend’s cafe, washing dishes, and I’m still applying and interviewing for other opportunities. But it’s the same story, no offers. At the same time, I’m debating whether to switch professions or even go back to school, even though I already have a master’s degree,” he said.

That shared distress has also created an unlikely sense of camaraderie among those struggling to get by, even as the outlook remains bleak.

Dodge finds it in late-night scrolls through Reddit, watching strangers narrate versions of the same stalled search.

“I doomscroll a lot,” he said, “getting depressed about the state of politics and the global economy, and taking some solace in knowing I’m not the only one struggling to find viable employment after 12, 13, 14, even 15 months.”

For now, that recognition of others stuck in the same place, hitting the same walls, is enough to keep him moving forward, submitting applications and waiting for a response that might not even come.

If the proposal is implemented, workers would not be able to seek remedy through an independent review board.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump is making it harder for fired federal employees to get their jobs back by limiting their right to appeal dismissals to an independent review board.

The change was proposed as part of a government plan released on Monday by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Under the proposal, federal employees seeking to challenge their termination would be required to appeal directly to OPM, which reports to the president, rather than to an independent body known as the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).

The MSPB acts as a mediator between federal workers and the government and has been in place since 1978. After Trump took office, the board’s caseload surged by 266 percent between October 2024 and September 2025. Federal workers who were cut in early 2025 and accepted buyouts received their final paycheques at the end of September.

If implemented, the proposal would build on Trump’s broader push to shrink the federal government and limit workers’ ability to challenge those decisions. The administration forced out roughly 317,000 federal employees last year.

The move comes amid a separate proposal announced last week that would reclassify high-level career civil servants as “at will” employees. That change would give the administration broader authority to fire career officials who do not align with the sitting president’s agenda, affecting roughly 50,000 workers at the nation’s largest employer.

Outlined in a more than 250-page document, the directive would allow workers to be fired if they were “intentionally subverting Presidential directives”.

“Congress gave OPM the authority to set how reduction-in-force appeals are handled, and this rule puts that responsibility to work,” an OPM spokesperson told Al Jazeera in a statement. “It replaces a slow, costly process with a single, streamlined review led by OPM experts. That means agencies can restructure without years of litigation, and employees get faster, fairer resolution if mistakes occur.”

The proposal also comes as the administration has sought to fire political appointees from previous administrations without just cause. Since last year, the White House has been attempting to remove US Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook over alleged mortgage fraud.

Cook challenged the decision in federal court, which ruled that the president did not have the authority to fire her. The White House appealed, and the case is now before the Supreme Court.

While the court has not yet issued a ruling, a decision in the president’s favour would make it easier to remove political appointees who do not align with a given administration’s agenda.