Introduction to the special issue: Organizing domestic work: The limits of regulations in the wake of the ILO Domestic Workers Convention

IF 0.6 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
Cati Coe, Alana Lee Glaser
{"title":"Introduction to the special issue: Organizing domestic work: The limits of regulations in the wake of the ILO Domestic Workers Convention","authors":"Cati Coe,&nbsp;Alana Lee Glaser","doi":"10.1111/awr.12278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 2011, the International Labour Organization adopted a new Domestic Workers Convention, a change that generated struggles internationally around recognizing domestic labor as a form of work. Recognition as a worker is meant to redress the particularities that render the exploitation of domestic workers so intimate, painful, and naturalized. A decade after the Convention's passage is a reasonable period in which to assess its impact, as the papers in the special issue do in a variety of sites. The introduction discusses the limitations of the regulation of work in changing domestic workers' conditions. First, labor studies scholars have shown how contracts can cement inequalities. Second, attempts to standardize domestic labor through work contracts and the law rely on liberalism's supposedly unparalleled capacity to correct historical harms and perfect human relations. Moreover, studies in legal pluralism highlight the ways that informal work is organized according to social conventions. Forms of resistance by domestic workers indicate that they use a sense of rights based both on their status as workers and from other social domains to negotiate employment conditions. This leads us to the conclusion that all forms of energy expended, both paid and unpaid, should be considered forms of work.</p>","PeriodicalId":43035,"journal":{"name":"Anthropology of Work Review","volume":"45 2","pages":"59-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropology of Work Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/awr.12278","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 2011, the International Labour Organization adopted a new Domestic Workers Convention, a change that generated struggles internationally around recognizing domestic labor as a form of work. Recognition as a worker is meant to redress the particularities that render the exploitation of domestic workers so intimate, painful, and naturalized. A decade after the Convention's passage is a reasonable period in which to assess its impact, as the papers in the special issue do in a variety of sites. The introduction discusses the limitations of the regulation of work in changing domestic workers' conditions. First, labor studies scholars have shown how contracts can cement inequalities. Second, attempts to standardize domestic labor through work contracts and the law rely on liberalism's supposedly unparalleled capacity to correct historical harms and perfect human relations. Moreover, studies in legal pluralism highlight the ways that informal work is organized according to social conventions. Forms of resistance by domestic workers indicate that they use a sense of rights based both on their status as workers and from other social domains to negotiate employment conditions. This leads us to the conclusion that all forms of energy expended, both paid and unpaid, should be considered forms of work.

特刊导言:组织家务劳动:国际劳工组织《家庭工人公约》后条例的局限性
2011年,国际劳工组织(International Labour Organization)通过了一项新的《家庭佣工公约》(Domestic Workers Convention),这一变化在国际上引发了围绕承认家庭佣工是一种工作形式的斗争。承认家庭佣工的身份是为了纠正使对家庭佣工的剥削变得如此亲密、痛苦和自然的特殊性。《公约》通过十年后是评估其影响的合理时期,正如本期特刊中的论文在各种地点所做的那样。引言部分讨论了在改变家庭佣工条件方面对工作的管制的局限性。首先,劳动研究学者已经证明了契约是如何巩固不平等的。其次,通过劳动合同和法律规范家务劳动的尝试依赖于自由主义被认为无与伦比的纠正历史伤害和完善人际关系的能力。此外,法律多元主义的研究强调了根据社会习俗组织非正式工作的方式。家庭佣工的抵抗形式表明,他们利用基于其作为工人和来自其他社会领域的地位的权利意识来谈判就业条件。这使我们得出结论,所有形式的能量消耗,无论是有偿的还是无偿的,都应被视为工作的形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
15.40%
发文量
15
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信