Abstract
This paper is a critical commentary on the organizational challenges for collectivization of domestic workers (DWs) who constitute a core part of India’s informal economy. Building upon field research among DWs working in a mega-city and in multiple homes, we explore three challenges—the transformation of labor NGOs to ‘unions,’ the ‘place’ of the union and the ‘place’ of the worker in organizing DWs. While the first challenge deals with the form of the collective that best enables the transformation of subjectivity and consciousness of DWs from ‘servant’ to ‘worker,’ the latter two emerge from the structure of work of DWs—the fact that they are dispersed among multiple employers, and the possibilities offered by large apartment complexes for DW unions to work in concert with the state to guarantee worker rights.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
There are other terms that are in use in popular discourse to refer to DWs. We use the term DW in our research to refer to the workers who are the subjects of our study, since this is what many of the workers and the collective organization (the union) itself use as their self-representation. Further, almost all the other terms that are frequently used to refer to DWs (almost always by others) are problematic in some manner or another. These include ‘domestic help,’ ‘maids’ and ‘servants.’ Part of our research therefore attends to language and the context of use of such terms by the workers, employers and the general public. We will treat DW therefore as a category of work and workers that is historically and ideologically produced within the political economic and socio-cultural contexts of work and labor in a society.
For this study, the term ‘informal’ is taken to mean any work that is “unregulated and unprotected.” Thus, any worker (self-employed or waged) doing informal work is an informal worker, and the increasing trend in the ratio of informal to formal work is the informalization of the economy (cite). Most estimates of the workforce in India place informal sector workers at around 92% of the workforce (NCEUS 2007).
These data on DWs in India were given by the minister of state of labour and Employment in replying to a debate in Lok Sabha (27.04.2015; accessed on the Lok Sabha website on Friday, February 17, 2017).
Ghosh argues that the low Female Labour Participation Rates are only an apparent phenomenon, since it hides the high rates of domestic duties and allied activities (no. 93 of NSSO) within. Naidu too advances a similar argument.
Although we introduce and use the term ‘domestic worker’ (DW) throughout this paper, we use the term consciously as a category-in-the-making in terms of, both, their legal recognition by the state, and their own consciousness.
In a separate paper, we will engage with the other side of these enabling conditions—the DW as worker. There, we tackle what it means for a DW to think of herself as a ‘worker,’ and how the facts of precarity, patriarchy and informality shape the DW’s sense of ‘worker’.
Most of the microfinance and social entrepreneurs now call their ‘target’ groups or ‘beneficiaries’ as clients.
Most DWs in our study are from Dalit communities.
Pseudonyms for DWs have been used for DWs.
The 2016 notification on minimum wages is above the market wages.
References
Chan CKC (2012) Community-based organizations for migrant workers’ rights: the emergence of labour NGOs in China. Commun Dev J 48(1):6–22
Chen MA (2011) Recognizing domestic workers, regulating domestic work: conceptual, measurement, and regulatory challenges. Canad J Women Law 23(1):167–184
Chen MA, Raveendran G (2012) Urban employment in India: recent trends and patterns. Margin J Appl Econ Res 6(2):159–179
Chigateri S (2007) Articulations of injustice and the recognition–redistribution debate: locating caste, class and gender in paid domestic work in India. Law Soc Justice Glob Dev J 1:1–19
Chigateri S, Zaidi M, Ghosh A (2016) Locating the processes of policy change in the context of anti-rape and domestic worker mobilisations in India. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva
Elster J (1986) Three challenges to class. In: Roemer John (ed) Analytical marxism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 141–161
Gallin D (2001) Propositions on trade unions and informal employment in times of globalisation. Antipode 33(3):531–549
George S (2013) Towards recognition through professionalisation. Econ Polit Week 48(43):69–76
Ghosh J (2016) https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/jul/16/womens-workforce-participation-declining-india
Joseph R, Lobo R, Natrajan B (2018) Between ‘Bakshseesh’ and ‘Bonus’: precarity, class, and collective action among domestic workers in Bengaluru. Econ Polit Week LIII(45):38–45
Kamath L, Vijayabaskar M (2009) Limits and possibilities of middle class associations as urban collective actors. Econ Polit Week 44(26/27):368–376
Kothari U (1997) Women’s paid domestic work and rural transformation: a study in south Gujarat. Econ Polit Week 32(17):WS5–WS12
Naidu S (2016) Domestic labour and female labour force participation. Econ Polit Week L1(44 & 45):101–108
NCEUS (2007) Report on commission of work and promotion of livelihoods in the unorganised sector, National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector
Neetha N, Palriwala R (2011) The absence of state law: domestic workers in India. Canad J Women Law 23(1):97–120
Rai S (2013) Gender and (international) political eocnomy. In: Waylen G (ed) The Oxford handbook of gender and politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 263–288
Razavi S (2013) Households, families, and social reproduction. In: Waylen G (ed) The Oxford handbook of gender and politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 289–312
Resnick SA, Wolff RD (1989) Knowledge and class: a Marxian critique of political economy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
RoyChowdhury S (2005) Labour activism and women in the unorganised sector: garment export industry in Bangalore. Econ Polit Week 40(22/23):2250–2255
Sankaran K (2013) Domestic work, unpaid work and wage rates. Econ Polit Week 48(43):85–89
Sanyal K, Bhattacharyya R (2009) Beyond the factory: globalisation, informalisation of production and the new locations of labour. Econ Polit Week 44(22):35–44
Sharma S (2016) Of Rasoi ka Kaam/Bathroom ka Kaam perspectives of women domestic workers. Econ Polit Week 51(7):52–61
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all domestic workers and union leadership who participated in our study, especially from Domestic Workers Rights Union (DWRU), Stree Jagruti Samiti (SJS), Manekelasa Karmikara Union (Makayu) and Foundation for Educational Innovations in Asia (FEDINA). Research for this paper was supported by the Azim Premji Foundation Research grant.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Joseph, R., Natrajan, B. & Lobo, R. Domestic workers and the challenges of collectivization: labor NGOs, neighborhoods, apartment complexes. Decision 46, 99–109 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-019-00211-y
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-019-00211-y