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.

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

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.

They are more concerned with the unequal power relations with their employer that do now allow them to wave this contract.

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.