Topinformationen

Participatory Research Project: Social Security Needs for Domestic Workers

Executive Summary of the collaborative research project between the Research Network for Domestic Worker Rights (RN-DWR) and the International Domestic Worker Federation (IDWF)

Domestic workers have been left out of labour provisions in nearly half the world’s countries. Though with the passage of the ILO Convention 189 concerning decent work for domestic workers in June 2011, this is changing. Many member states are starting to bring their legislation into line with the provisions of the Convention. One major area in this regard is the extension of social security protection to domestic workers, in accordance with Article 14.1. Experiences from countries that already provide social security provisions for domestic workers show, however, that in many cases, when given the option, domestic workers still prefer not to be formally employed. Assuming that they do not really benefit from the type of protection provided, they hesitate to pay into the social security mechanism.

To develop sound social security provisions and mechanisms that domestic workers would voluntarily contribute to and genuinely benefit from, it is thus important to gain a better understanding of the social security needs of domestic workers. To this end, the Research Network on Domestic Worker Rights conducted a participatory research project in partnership with the International Domestic Worker Network. In a pilot phase (August 2012 – August 2013) the project focuses on two countries, in which basic social security provisions for domestic workers have been existing for some years now: the Republic of South Africa and the Netherlands.

The project aimed at developing close research collaboration among researchers, domestic workers, trade unions and domestic workers’ organisations. By training domestic workers to conduct qualitative interviews with their peers, the project gathered meaningful findings on the social security needs of domestic workers. It furthermore sought to document the reflexive, participatory research process in order to develop a research manual that could also be used for other research questions and be replicated independently by domestic worker organizations.

The research project took on the goal of representing the needs of domestic workers very much through their own eyes, and expressed perspectives in their own voice. As such, a participatory research approach was adopted in which domestic workers, along with experts in social security, helped shape the content and formulation of the questionnaire used for the semi-structured interviews.

The process has been divided into five phases:

Phase 1 – Developing the questionnaire: Based on literature in the field and a review of methodological approaches, a questionnaire on the social security needs of domestic workers has been drafted and discussed by those domestic workers in the Netherlands and South Africa who later conducted the interviews. Furthermore, the draft questionnaire and implementation instructions were sent to a review committee.

Phase 2 – Training of interviewers: The local research coordinators in each country trained a small group of domestic workers to conduct the interviews.  In both cases, the trainers worked with existing domestic worker organizations to select interviewers with established leadership  and language competencies. Affiliated research and advocacy organizations reviewed the questionnaire for local relevance and culturally appropriate questions.

Phase 3 – Peer-to-peer interviews: The trained domestic workers conducted interviews with a sample of domestic workers in South Africa and the Netherlands. The interviewers have been awarded certificates for participating in the research project.   Affiliated researchers and assistants transcribed the interviews and coded them for thematic content.

Phase 4 – Developing a research manual: The research process is documented in a manual. This tool kit intends to encourage other researchers and domestic workers organizations to experiment with similar approaches.

Over the course of the research, this participatory approach proved to be highly valuable, enriching the research results and having a meaningful impact on the domestic workers who participated. Putting the tools of research in the hands of domestic workers builds their capacity to apply the same interview skills in all aspects of their work, be it with employers, academics, other workers, organizations, or politicians.

Phase 5 – Analysis and presentation of the Data: Interview transcripts were returned to the Research Network for analysis. A team of researchers engaged in the review process to establish the most relevant themes and findings.

Results: Domestic Worker's Social Security Needs in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands, domestic workers were often not aware of social security and did not have a clear conceptualization, but most interviewees put forward a feeling of entitlement to health insurance, parental protection, employment security and retirement. 

The absence of social security - or the lack of knowledge about it - carries with it a permanent insecurity about the future. Domestic workers in this study described the fear of job loss and illness and often pointed out the interrelatedness of these two issues. If a domestic worker is sick and cannot go to work, he or she is threatened with losing his or her job. At the same time, she usually does not receive paid sick leave, unemployment aid, when losing a job, and medical treatment to make her better quickly. This is also connected to a strong dependence on employers and to the continuation of work even in times of severe sickness or care taking responsibilities as the following quote illustrates: “I am here illegal, so sometimes if my child is sick, they told me: 'you cannot leave the job, you haven't finished. I feel sad because it is not easy to work in this condition.“ (NL 10: 90-92).

Officially, some social security regulations in the Netherlands apply as well for undocumented domestic workers. They have the right to 16 weeks of pregnancy leave, paid disaster leave (calamiteitenverlof) and paid short care leave (kortdurend zorgverlof). Furthermore, the employer has to continue to pay wages during the first two years of illness (FNV Bondgenoten). This holds for informal domestic workers, too, but only if a domestic worker works three or more days for the same employer. As our study displayed, this change in the social security laws poses a huge barrier to the access of social security for domestic workers, as most of them work for a variety of employers.

Additionally, most undocumented domestic workers participating in the study did not seem to know about these rights within the Dutch system. Despite feeling entitled to some abstract rights to social security, they all believed they did not have those rights in fact as undocumented workers. Undocumented domestic workers often compared themselves to other groups such as EU citizens working as domestic workers or employees of agencies providing domestic services, who do have those rights. They often highlighted the lacking access to the legal system due to their illegal status. For some, the union takes over this role as a complaint mechanism.

Employers play a significant and ambivalent role in providing or hindering the access to social security for domestic workers. Based on negotiations with employers, in some cases undocumented domestic workers have also gained access to vacation pay, sick leave, vacation, etc. However, even though domestic workers- even the ones working informally - have rights to some aspects of social security, access is then not based on rights, but on the good will of the employer and the ability to negotiate by the domestic worker. Whereas sick leave is partly common, sick pay is hardly granted.

Other informal solutions to social security refer to family resources. As domestic workers explained that during times of job losses, she has received funding from family members in her home country. Another person plans to rely on the family in the home country for retirement. Personal networks of friends and within churches in the Netherlands also help individual domestic workers in difficult financial situations. Some interviewed domestic workers have access to some aspects of social security via their home countries.

Results: Domestic Worker's Social Security Needs in the South Africa

The South African legislative framework provides protection for basic conditions of employment, unemployment insurance, maternity leave, basic minimum wages, and skills development. The first and most comprehensive protection for domestic workers in the post-1994 transition to democracy took form as the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, which applies to all employers and workers and regulates leave, working hours, employment contracts, deductions, pay slips, and termination.  Domestic workers in South Africa are also protected by the right to organize and the Skills Development Act, which seeks to improve occupational skills for domestic workers across full and part time employment contexts.  South Africa’s legislative framework for domestic workers is considered one of the most comprehensive in the world.

Interviews conducted with 20 domestic workers on social security benefits reflected four key findings:  1) the concept of “social security” and its protections was not reflected in domestic workers’ perceptions of their existing rights; 2) Domestic workers most often referenced unemployment insurance and maternity benefits as the most relevant and important aspect of their protection; 3) Basic health coverage and pension planning, while technically available, did not appear accessible for domestic workers; 4) The nature of domestic work in South Africa limits access to social security protections because of the frequency of part-time work for several employers.

The  South African  Constitution enshrines the right of  social security  in  very  broad  terms, “everyone  has  a  right  to  have  access  to social  security, including  appropriate  social  assistance.” The South Africa government has identified a three-pillar approach to social security provisioning, namely: the non-contributory pillar, the contributory pillar and the private voluntary pillar. Even though this protection is central to the Constitution, the term “social security” is not often utilized in South Africa by domestic workers.  Importantly, it was only in 1993 that the post-apartheid transitional democratic government extended benefits to all races.  As a result, social security as a conceptual protection central to international standards and ILO Convention 189 needed to be clarified by breaking the framework down into particular protections, including health care and long-term pension.

Participants in this research associated “unemployment insurance” and “maternity benefits” as the protections most readily available and important in their daily lives.   In 2003, the South African government ratified the Unemployment Insurance Fund Act (UIF), which protects domestic workers from unfair severance by assuring income during transitional periods. For participants in this study, the UIF repeatedly arose as the most relevant and vital aspect of protections.  Domestic workers wanted to know that they would be protected if an employer imposed an unfair dismissal. Similarly, they generally appeared familiar with the terms of the protection. According to one domestic worker, “in South Africa, the UIF [is]  in the Department of labor. I am not contributing it is the employer who has to deduct 1 percentage of my salary and she send it, so I do not pay; she deduct it from my salary.”  This domestic worker reflected a clarity about how the long-term benefits of enrollment justified the existing deductions in her current salary.   

Domestic workers are covered under basic health care in South Africa’s public system. Yet, as the interviews repeatedly illustrated, such coverage limits domestic workers to public hospitals where the ability to access medical care takes far “too long.”  While they are able to access public health systems, domestic workers found the system inadequate to meet their needs. Many relied upon employers’ benevolence to pay for access to private doctors and medical systems. This creates an ongoing inequality and reinforces levels of social security according to the nature of employers’ willingness to invest in wider protections for domestic workers, vs. a more equitable state framework. 

The same principles applied to long-term retirement and pension planning.  In the current system, such investment is not required of employers.  Thus, domestic workers’ experience of long-term security as an investment made on a regular basis from their current employment coverage generally appeared out of reach.  A few domestic workers reflected awareness of the particular plans their employers had established, yet these responses were in the minority.  The majority of domestic workers in South Africa lack long-term pension protections. This limitation is likely to continue without legislative requirements for employer investment in retirement funds. 

Interviews with domestic workers in South Africa also revealed how the existing legislative protections are inaccessible when domestic workers are employed in several household contexts.  In this national context, the status of working as a “char” part-time employee for several households is becoming a more frequent employment relationship.  Yet, this limits access to key protections which require full-time employment in one household.  While domestic workers are technically eligible for such protections when their total hours reach full-time status, the realities of registration, coordination and transient employment limit such access, leaving domestic workers outside of the existing protections. 

Migrant domestic workers who are not citizens of South Africa face similar obstacles.  This employment trend is increasing, as South Africa currently receives more migrants than any other country in the world.  While international instruments protect such workers in terms of basic human rights, non-citizen domestic workers in South Africa face serious obstacles to accessing these rights because of ongoing xenophobic attitudes, power relations in the household employment context and an overarching anti-immigrant social and political context that places disproportionate impact on immigrant informal workers.

The ideological concepts underpinning social security promote continued, regular investment toward a long-term benefit and insurance for moments of unanticipated need.  Domestic workers in this study generally understood this concept, yet felt that it is not possible in the existing South African system of domestic worker employment relations.  The South African context demonstrates that even in a national system with extensive legislative protections formally in place, access, enforcement and equitable application challenge domestic workers’ abilities to attain social security protections.

Solutions for improved Access to Social Security

Domestic workers interviewed in the study would like to contribute to social security. Some suggested to regularize undocumented people, in order to create access for everybody, others demanded that also undocumented migrants should be able to contribute to the social security systems. Currently, domestic workers rely on their family and themselves (saving money) for social security, which is often not sufficient. Many domestic workers want to leave their provision and try to find other jobs or get a education in order to be able to work in a different field. However, this is limited by the legal status of many domestic workers.

In order to provide sufficient social security for everybody, the contribution based systems, such as the health system, the pension system and the unemployment insurance should be accessible to anybody without regard to the legal status. It is especially important that access to doctors is provided in such a way that undocumented migrant workers neither have to fear discovery and deportation nor extensive costs that they cannot cover. Some domestic workers reported NGO programs which provide assistance to undocumented in case of sickness.

Domestic workers also have to be informed about their rights (e.g. through a campaign), as many of them do not know that certain rights also apply to them.

Domestic workers also asked for some more regulation, to provide them with rules that they can refer to and that puts them on equal footing with other workers.

Acknowledgements

The project has been funded by the International Labour Organisation-ACTRAV and coordinated by the International Center for Development and Decent Work (ICDD). We extend our gratitude to Laura Castro and Kim Leland, who served as graduate assistants in the analysis of this project. Our greatest acknowledgement goes to the domestic worker co-researchers and interviewees without whom the whole project would have been meaningless. They invested significant amounts of their ‘free’ time.

Link to executive summary of the study 

Manual on participatory research