In some Asian societies, the idea of the foreign maid has become a social norm. Even among the not so wealthy Hong Kongers, Singaporeans, and the Taiwanese, hiring domestic help from the Philippines, Indonesia, and other Southeast Asian countries have become commonplace given the busy work schedules that prevent the young and the elderly to be taken care of within the family. Certain Southeast Asian government have only been too happy to see their maids working hard outside the country because the governments benefit enormously from lowered unemployment and higher remittance income.
Yet, the growing number of maids working in other countries have been accompanied by incidents that show just how precarious it is to be working as a maid. Stories of bosses abusing maids physically and emotionally occasionally pop up in the news, highlighting the lack of systematic legal structures that can help these temporary workers far away from home. Yet, only days after pictures of maids with burn marks, bodily injuries, and purple marks on their faces show up on the news, people simply finish their soul-searching, blissfully blaming a few bad bosses while pretending maids live happily in their workplaces.
Such a way of thinking cannot be further from the truth. Yes, it is possible to blame a few bad bosses for all the maid abuse, but that does not change the fact that the employer-employee relationship for a maid is completely lopsided, with the boss holding all the cards for dictating the terms of how the maid work and even where the maid lives. The maid has little power to fight back, given that not only is she unfamiliar with how things work in the country of employment, she fears that she can easily be replaced by another maid who is only too willing to do her job.
Frankly, it is difficult to imagine how power relations can be corrected under the current system. Maids, lacking political power and social presence in their host countries, largely remain an invisible minority there. Any opposition to working conditions, short of anything criminal, will earn them unfavorable reviews that lead to their lacking similar employment opportunities in the future to earn as money they do now. Any sustained social movements among the maids are disrupted by the fact that they are monitored by their employers, whom they live with, and lack of permanent residency in their host countries, preventing the formation of long-term grassroots movements.
It is difficult to expect host country NGOs and governments to be much help on improving maid rights either. Given that many citizens have fond memories of growing up with maids, the tendency is not to question the idea of the society systematically hiring maids, but again, to blame a few bad individuals. Governments are loathed to move against restricting maids, given that the alternative is costly and politically difficult reforms of the social welfare system, confronting the challenging situation of finding a professionally trained labor force that can replace cheap foreign maids in large numbers.
Indeed, the only way for maid abuse to truly stop is for the sending country to grow out of poverty that forces the country to send maids abroad in the first place. Without a doubt, if a country has enough well-paying jobs, then there is no need for its citizens to move abroad only to work as maids, perfectly knowing the social isolation, indignity, and potential abuses they endure from their foreign employers. Maids work abroad not because they love what they do, but they are desperate to make a living, knowing that it is significantly more difficult and less lucrative to do so as unskilled laborers in their home countries.
Unfortunately, today maids sending countries do little but posturing for better treatment of their laborers abroad, without systematically examining why their laborers move abroad in the first place. Even while the likes of President Duterte of the Philippines manhandles Qatar over bad treatment of workers there, Filipino maids by the tens of thousands stream out of the country looking for similar kind of jobs in other countries. Such inconsistent behavior only earns ridicule from a foreign audience and entrenches a feeling of self-pity among the laborers while abroad.
Perhaps instead of maids demanding better treatment in foreign countries in futile fights, they need to demand better governance in their home countries, leading to economic developments that rid them of the need to become maids in the first place. In this process, there needs to be more highlighting of how maid-sending countries' governments have systematically failed the people by clinging to a perverse incentive to continue exporting cheap labor abroad. Without organized movements to change the mentality and behavior of sending country governments and have them focus on domestic development, rather than exporting labor, as a sustained economic solution, it is difficult to see the end of maid abuses happening again in the future.
Yet, the growing number of maids working in other countries have been accompanied by incidents that show just how precarious it is to be working as a maid. Stories of bosses abusing maids physically and emotionally occasionally pop up in the news, highlighting the lack of systematic legal structures that can help these temporary workers far away from home. Yet, only days after pictures of maids with burn marks, bodily injuries, and purple marks on their faces show up on the news, people simply finish their soul-searching, blissfully blaming a few bad bosses while pretending maids live happily in their workplaces.
Such a way of thinking cannot be further from the truth. Yes, it is possible to blame a few bad bosses for all the maid abuse, but that does not change the fact that the employer-employee relationship for a maid is completely lopsided, with the boss holding all the cards for dictating the terms of how the maid work and even where the maid lives. The maid has little power to fight back, given that not only is she unfamiliar with how things work in the country of employment, she fears that she can easily be replaced by another maid who is only too willing to do her job.
Frankly, it is difficult to imagine how power relations can be corrected under the current system. Maids, lacking political power and social presence in their host countries, largely remain an invisible minority there. Any opposition to working conditions, short of anything criminal, will earn them unfavorable reviews that lead to their lacking similar employment opportunities in the future to earn as money they do now. Any sustained social movements among the maids are disrupted by the fact that they are monitored by their employers, whom they live with, and lack of permanent residency in their host countries, preventing the formation of long-term grassroots movements.
It is difficult to expect host country NGOs and governments to be much help on improving maid rights either. Given that many citizens have fond memories of growing up with maids, the tendency is not to question the idea of the society systematically hiring maids, but again, to blame a few bad individuals. Governments are loathed to move against restricting maids, given that the alternative is costly and politically difficult reforms of the social welfare system, confronting the challenging situation of finding a professionally trained labor force that can replace cheap foreign maids in large numbers.
Indeed, the only way for maid abuse to truly stop is for the sending country to grow out of poverty that forces the country to send maids abroad in the first place. Without a doubt, if a country has enough well-paying jobs, then there is no need for its citizens to move abroad only to work as maids, perfectly knowing the social isolation, indignity, and potential abuses they endure from their foreign employers. Maids work abroad not because they love what they do, but they are desperate to make a living, knowing that it is significantly more difficult and less lucrative to do so as unskilled laborers in their home countries.
Unfortunately, today maids sending countries do little but posturing for better treatment of their laborers abroad, without systematically examining why their laborers move abroad in the first place. Even while the likes of President Duterte of the Philippines manhandles Qatar over bad treatment of workers there, Filipino maids by the tens of thousands stream out of the country looking for similar kind of jobs in other countries. Such inconsistent behavior only earns ridicule from a foreign audience and entrenches a feeling of self-pity among the laborers while abroad.
Perhaps instead of maids demanding better treatment in foreign countries in futile fights, they need to demand better governance in their home countries, leading to economic developments that rid them of the need to become maids in the first place. In this process, there needs to be more highlighting of how maid-sending countries' governments have systematically failed the people by clinging to a perverse incentive to continue exporting cheap labor abroad. Without organized movements to change the mentality and behavior of sending country governments and have them focus on domestic development, rather than exporting labor, as a sustained economic solution, it is difficult to see the end of maid abuses happening again in the future.
Comments
Post a Comment