Exploring Female Migrant Domestic Workers lives in Amman – Jordan
For some time now, the debate on the violations of the rights of female migrant domestic workers has involved many actors. Embassies, relevant ministries and NGOs have conducted numerous meetings and spent quite a bit of money on regional and local programs to protect domestic workers from abuse by employers. However, what has been strikingly absent is the voice and experience of these workers.
In 2008, as part of fulfilling my MA requirements at the Institute of Social Studies I delved into the lives of a number of female migrant domestic workers in my hometown, Amman. This research was based on two months of in depth interviews with workers and employers, which was helped considerably by my years of experience and familiarity with the relevant social structure and codes of behavior in Amman.
Whenever a brochure, a fact sheet, or an article in a newspaper or magazine about female migrant domestic workers is picked up, the reader will automatically assume that its content will focus on the abuse of the workers by their employers. This piece, however, is concerned with the ability of the workers to protect themselves and ensure better life conditions without directly resorting to the formal protection measures. Underlying this investigation is the assumption that since there is a disconnect between the efforts made by policy-makers and the real lives of the women, the latter have their own protective measures that they are forced to employ.
Indeed, I was agonized by the stories of abuse of female domestic workers, but I was also appalled at the generalized representation of Jordanian employers as evil and exploitative, and/or sexual predators. After much thought, I decided to explore these workers’ agency in the milieu of their relationships with their employers, to understand the interplays between the two parties away from the common labels usually given to them.
Formal protection measures
I will not list the actions taken by governments and NGOs to protect female migrant domestic workers, such as the Special Working Contract (SWC) and the contingency plans of having asylums for runaways and abused workers. I have found that the implementation of the formal measures is dependent on the employers’ perceptions, and that differences among workers make some groups more prone to violation of rights than others.
I also found that employers tend to give differential treatment to workers depending on their nationality. During the interviews, the employers’ reactions were mixed; some preferred Filipinas for their “culture” or “religion”, others preferred Sri Lankans for their “subordination” or because they are “easier to control”.
“We hired Sri Lankans for seven years then finally decided to get a Filipina. At that time I took up working again, and I needed someone who did not need training and constant attention. Before the Filipina came we painted her room and installed new curtains.”
“We do not hire Filipinas anymore, because they are too demanding. They are strong, because they know that they are better than the others. We went back to Sri Lankans”
The idea that Filipinos are more aware of their rights and hence more demanding might solve the problem for this group but it’s only making employers switch to other groups; Sri Lankans and sometimes Indonesians. This further stresses the role of employers’ perceptions and the differences among domestic workers in shaping their circumstances.
We often come across examples of sentences such as “employers rarely allow” the workers to leave the house, not only in the media but also in scholarly work. Advocates emphasize the right to the weekly day off and generalize it as a major violation when the worker spends all her time in the household. All the while, some workers have other ideas of their needs such as wanting to stay home in order to save money. Some even consider their working house a safe haven that protects them from strange men and immoral behavior that takes place outside.
In regards to the contract, a number of the workers said “It is just a paper!” that they do not see as something their employers take seriously. They are more concerned with the unequal power relations with their employer that do now allow them to wave this contract. Thus they resort to their own methods that do not place them in a position of defiance vis a vis their employer.
These methods vary. Some workers understand the gender dynamics of the household and utilize them.
“Here in Jordan, I notice that the man is easier to talk to even though we are supposed to talk to the madam because we are girls and to avoid any problems you have to be direct with your madam. For example, four months I was without my salary. I told my madam first I need money to pay for my daughter’s school. Two weeks passed and nothing happened. Then one day when the family was all leaving the house, I caught sir at the door when madam was already in the car. I told him I need my money please. That is when I got the salary immediately! After that, if I needed an advance on my salary, I always asked him!”
One example showed how shaming the employer produced better outcomes;
“When I came, she only paid me 100 dollars but her sister in-law pays Soma 150 dollars. So I tell madam, why you don’t pay me like your sister-in-law? You don’t have money like her? Then I tell Soma in front of madam that I do not get what she does so madam was jealous and started paying me!”
A number of workers assigned special meaning to gaining the employers’ trust;
“everybody gave me money (for medicine, bills, x-rays, MRI, and flight ticket to Sri Lanka) because they know that I care about them. I call every one of them on their birthday and also call on Christmas and Easter”.
Other means domestic workers resort to so they can improve their living conditions include basing their negotiation on valid and socially acceptable reasons, utilizing the children’s attachment, anticipating the needs of the employer, bending the truth, and, as a last resort; running away.
Sometimes one approach is to employ household and communal networks. Other times, the workers choose to rely on individual strengths.
Solidarity
Household and communal networks resorted to can be horizontal, in the form of solidarity between the workers themselves so they can refuse humiliating work and protect each other, or vertical, where employers and workers team up together in many instances to ensure a better outcome for themselves and the household as a whole;
“When the boy does something wrong or smokes a cigarette or drinks the black label, Madam asks me to talk to him because he doesn’t listen to her. More importantly, we hide it from Sir because he will start smacking everything in the house if he finds out, and he cannot control his temper”.
Some workers depend on their friends and family who do not live with them for support and for ways to improve their lives.
“She uses her pay check to give the doorman money to go buy her several cell phones. Then she sells them to the neighbouring workers and makes a profit out of it and also gives the doorman commission”.
This is an example of drawing on external networks for economic benefits.
Rising Individuality
Solidarity among workers is not always the case. An example is Suscilla, who prefers to be alone and not depend on any of her friends. Suscilla explained to me that it is better to be on your own because then the girls will be too involved in your life and start wanting and expecting things from you. In this case, the worker understands the bleak side of networking, which can be “stifling” and tie her to relationships which “do not always give rise to trustworthiness [but] may detract from productivity” (Silver, 2008:555).
In conclusion it is vital to note that this research did not intend to focus on individual (or collective) freedom while neglecting the importance of state protection. I am not sitting behind the presumption that present day global inequalities must be accepted and dealt with on a personal and micro level only. Nor am I excusing the injustices that take place while showing how these women have their own ways to better their lives. On the contrary, this research is actually pinpointing them as proof that current protection is not solving the problem, but exploring these workers role also provides us with insights about dynamics of power and power relations.
*Hiba Kandalaft pursued an MA in Women, Gender and Development at the Institute of Social Studies where she worked on this research. Her thesis was published in a book by LAP Lambert Academic Publishing in September 2010. She currently resides in Amman.
