This chapter brings together, and compares, the research findings of two case studies: Jordan and Bangladesh. In exploring refugee status, vulnerability and (working) rights, we examine how refugee protection is allocated in these two states, both of which, as hosts to large numbers of protection seekers, play important roles in the international refugee regime. Jordan and Bangladesh both deal with deeply protracted refugee situations, but neither have formal ties to international refugee law, although they both engage with some of the norms of the Refugee Convention. In both contexts, the rights of refugees are often unclear, and remain perpetually uncertain. The assigning of various labels to them is a politicised process, which varies over time and by nationality, leading to a precarious status for protection seekers. Based on extensive desk-based research and fieldwork in 2021 and 2022, we relay how refugee status, vulnerability and working rights are dealt with in each context and explore the themes of precarity and (in)formality. Subsequently, we undertake a comparative analysis of the two case studies, exploring contrasts and similarities, and identify the key lessons that can be taken from them, particularly in terms of expanding labour market access for protection seekers.