Magdalena Leon1
Although Colombian law has required since 1977 that social security be provided to domestic workers, compliance with this requirement has been non-existent. The struggle to secure this protection for domestic workers is now occurring in a sociopolitical context which has been greatly affected by the crisis of the 80s. That crisis has caused a reduction in the collective and individual bargaining power of the working class, a shrinking demand for employees from the low-income population, and an increase in domestic work positions. It is within this context that the invisible and socially undervalued group of domestic workers is fighting for its rights. This paper discusses that struggle and the research-action project (hereafter referred to as "the Project").2
In order to trace the dimensions of the problem, these questions had to be raised: How many domestic workers are there? What is their relationship to the female labor force? Is the number of domestic workers increasing or decreasing? Is there a tendency for domestic service to disappear as a function of the development and modernization of society?
There is no doubt that domestic work accounts for a very large percentage of the work performed by females. According to official statistics, during the last three decades, the number of live-in domestic workers diminished drastically3. Some have interpreted this statistic as evidence of the "modernization" of the occupational structure. The world of numbers, however, contains many traps for the unaware. It is safe to say, for example, that not all women who work as domestic workers have been counted in official statistics as such4. Moreover, the decline can be better explained by the transformation occurring within the occupation of domestic worker, than by a decrease in numbers of domestic workers. Whereas, before, most domestic workers lived in the employer's home, increasingly, the domestic worker now works on a day-to-day basis in her employer's home. These workers may not always be included in official statistics.
In fact, the economic crisis of the 80s caused many poor women to offer their services as domestic workers, especially by the day, as a way to survive. Further, the decline in wages of the middle classes has obliged many middle class women to return to the work force and to seek domestic help. Between 1978 and 1985, in the largest cities of the country, the number of domestic workers actually remained stable.5 As of 1985, one of four working women worked as a maid. Thus, domestic workers represent a large percentage of poor urban women.
To bring about change, what role should the State play? What role does lobbying play? What role does public opinion play in making the problem visible and pressing for change? The answers to these questions are not simple.
There are many structural difficulties in creating a political will for change. The State serves a limited social function, and has an hierarchical and rigid institutional and patriarchal apparatus. How is political will created in the face of such obstacles? Organizing women is, without doubt, one way in which a change can be promoted. The power of women's organizations can be used to create a larger political movement which can bring about change.
Public opinion can also be galvanized to effect this change. Favorable public opinion facilitates social movements which can change attitudes and behaviors, and can further change public opinion so that it becomes a force in formulating and implementing policies.
The experience analyzed here demonstrates how domestic workers were able to organize around the issue of adequate health care, and force the State to respond to their demands.
a struggle which emerged from everyday life
In the beginning, domestic workers were motivated to organize and pressure government entities, because of the poor health conditions which accompanied their work. As a general rule, domestic workers had no health insurance, maternity coverage, disability insurance or pension system. Workers were not granted sick leave nor did they have money with which to pay doctors or buy medicines. Becoming ill or pregnant was synonymous with being out of a job. As one older domestic worker said "I am old and sick and I can't work and I have no protection". It is not unusual to hear women beggars and those who wander the streets with mental problems tell stories of their past work as domestic workers.
When domestic workers do receive medical benefits from their employer, the employer considers that she is doing the maid a favor, or paying her "in kind". Thus, the right to health care is converted into one more tool which is used to reinforce the dependency of domestic workers on their employers.
The research-action project undertaken to challenge this system used participatory methodology to study and support the struggle of women domestic workers who were trying to gain the right to social security. The organizing experience followed neither a paradigm of "top down" or "bottom up" organizing, but rather followed a middle route and was supported by feminist ideology.
a brief history of the struggle
The first time social security for domestic workers was publicly discussed was in 1977, when a group of maids demonstrated in the streets and parks of Bogota, outside of an academic meeting. Their demonstration didn't make much news. It wasn't until 1983, in fact, during the National Meeting of Domestic Workers, that the issue was again discussed.6 That same year, for the first time, domestic workers were included in the country's social security system. This provision passed unnoticed, however, and the government entity responsible for enforcing it tried to conceal it. This explains why workers didn't discover their rights, nor employers their obligations, and why the State failed to sanction non-compliance by employers.
About this time, officials of the Institute of Social Security, who regularly assisted workers with health problems, "discovered" the law and applied pressure privately for compliance with it. This had no effect whatever. It was at this point that a campaign to revive the law was begun, to make the government, the public and the unions aware of it.
On May 1, 1985, to celebrate Labor Day, a meeting was organized in Bogota by the Project and the domestic workers union7 for the purpose of discussing health conditions, disseminating information about the existing laws and stimulating collective action to press for enforcement of them. Participants in the meeting decided to exercise pressure by carrying out a public rally on August 25 of the same year. For the first time in the history of the country, more than 200 domestic workers met in a public space. For the first time, also, news of the demonstration was covered on television and in a newspaper with wide national circulation.
The rally became a street party. In the midst of music, dance and food, workers' rights were enunciated with enthusiasm and emotion. Workers spontaneously spoke by microphone telling their thoughts and individual experiences, and their collective demands. Union representatives spread the word about the legislation and the Project disseminated information about its limited and discriminatory character. One enthusiastic participant proposed to continue the campaign by bringing the women's demands before the President of the Republic through a demonstration in Bolivar Plaza (the political center of the country). The Project accepted the challenge to support the audacious initiative with three strategies: 1. coordination of public education committees which had been formed during the rally; 2. campaigns for public support; and 3. formulation of demands together with union leaders.
The event took place on Sunday, October 27, 1985 with ample participation by domestic workers, even though the weather was poor. A letter to the President denouncing health conditions of domestic workers and the non-compliance of the state and employers with existing social security laws was presented. The letter also demanded that the necessary regulations to enforce compliance with the law be enacted. Leaders made informal speeches, the Project explained its role and the union became known.
The political situation of the country was a special one at that time. The government of President Betancur, which had called itself the government of "Democratic Expansion" and which had opened a space for popular participation, had entered into its final phase amidst unpopularity. The government decreed a "social year" to recuperate ground lost to public opinion and to finish its term on a better note. Thus, the political situation pointed to success. Nevertheless, the response of the state was silence. The public was initially surprised by the demands and within the union, only a superficial enthusiasm was generated. The union had acquired more visibility, however, both publicly and among its own membership.
In 1985, the Project was ready to be initiated in various neighborhoods of Bogota. Small "base groups" were formed to discuss labor laws and to permit domestic workers to meet socially and share their experiences. This approach was replicated throughout other regions. Small mobilization and organization efforts began from these base groups, and, as they grew, the need for inter-regional communication also grew.
The city of Baranquilla serves as an example of the local advances that were made. In this city, in November, 1986, a base group carried out a "March of the Aprons" for the right to social security and vacations. The event brought together 180 domestic workers who marched through the central streets of the city, then met in a park. Given the parochial nature of the city and the social invisibility of domestic workers, the march, which was widely covered in the news media, represented a veritable bombshell. Furthermore, preparing for the march, carrying it out and following it up were fundamental for the group's integration. The result was a sense of cohesion and the emergence of group leaders.
The Project continued with the campaign. During 1986 it worked behind closed doors on a program of basic training and educational activities8. When health conditions were discussed, Project participants learned that laws existed but not the political will to implement them. This was the culture in which the fight for social security was to continue.
In August, 1986, the national government changed. With the new president, the politics of "Democratic Expansion" changed to the politics of the "Struggle Against Absolute Poverty", and within this new context the 1987 campaign was launched.
In Bogota, the Project did not continue working with the committees which had worked on the 1985 demonstration, nor did it work to guide the awakening grassroots movement; these activities were considered to be the union's work. Unfortunately, the union did not take up the task and the relationship between the union and the Project came to a standstill9.
In April, 1987, however, the Project sponsored two events which were of singular importance for the advancement of the campaign's objectives: the National Colloquium and the March of April 5. The National Colloquium was organized as a response to the request from the small base groups which had been working with the Project for interregional communication and sought to facilitate the sharing of experiences among different groups throughout the country. Using a participatory methodology, participants discussed their lives as women, as domestic workers and as agents of change10. Other regional groups not linked to the Project attended along with union representatives and workers from government-run employment programs.
The event gave participants the opportunity to inform themselves about the national situation, the advances and setbacks in their organizing and the different types of discrimination they experienced. Also the women were able to join forces, formulate collective demands and form bonds of friendship. The Colloquium stood out as a significant motivating event for the regional groups of the Project, and the commitment generated there was later reflected in their work.
On April 5, the groups that had attended the Colloquium joined in a march for social security in Bogota, organized by the Project and sponsored by the domestic workers of Bogota, who later formed a "Committee of Home Workers". The march was a new strategy to pressure the administration, which, in its first days, had announced that within its "Fight Against Absolute Poverty Program" social security coverage for domestic workers would be created. This announcement, although important, suffered from legal inconsistencies which actually hurt the interests of the workers. The Project took on the task of revealing these inconsistencies to the government, the public and the base groups. Discussions between the State, the Committee of Housewives and grassroots groups centered on the fact that social security already existed and the government could not thereby announce that it was going to create it. What was needed, and demanded, was the political will of the government to comply with and enforce the existing law.
The public education committees, which had been formed during the 1985 demonstration, in addition to carrying out activities similar to those of that demonstration, undertook greater responsibility and leadership11 and in this way the preparation for the April 5 march helped to consolidate the base groups.
The march went through the central streets of the city and once again ended in Bolivar Plaza. This time too, a letter to the new President of the Republic was signed. The letter said: "We are united, not to ask for favors, but to demand our rights and to inform you that we will persist in the search for solutions to our problems"12. The coverage of the event in the news media was enormous (11 radio programs, the two principal Bogota newspapers and other minor ones, the regional press, and two notices on television).
The State did not accept the challenge to speak directly with the union. The Project thus took the initiative to pressure officials who were actually in charge of developing social security policies. Three months after the march, the government announced that among the projects it was going to present to the legislature was a reform package to make social security viable for domestic workers.
The Committee of Housewives continued to meet. Attendance during planning and organization sessions of the Committee reflected the discipline and commitment of its members. Participants learned to cooperate and gained self confidence by expressing their opinions. Nevertheless, the Committee's efforts did not generate large numbers of participants in the event. The Committee had wanted to see the whole membership in the street. It was necessary to discuss the difficulties of mobilizing domestic workers, and in this way help the Committee understand the complexity of collective action and its growing responsibility as a leader.
Regional representation at the march helped to strengthen the national campaign, because when the groups went home, they continued to work on the grassroots level in their own communities13. The theme of the march, "Domestic workers are also Colombia", while meant to denounce the discrimination suffered by domestic workers, also had a positive message. It meant that "we are also citizens", "we are also human beings", "we are also workers of this country" and "we also have rights and obligations".14
The State responded. The Minister of Labor proposed a bill to Congress. After a difficult journey through the legislative branch, and after six months of work, the bill became a Law of the Republic. One more time, during this process, a dynamic lobbying campaign was carried out with the participation of the Bogota Committee and the groups from the other cities.
No doubt the government's presentation of the bill was a direct result of the pressures exercised by the union and supported by the Project since 1985 through demonstrations, marches and other activities, such as making and selling calendars and Christmas cards, carrying out press campaigns, writing letters to members of Congress, etc. All of these efforts together made success ultimately possible.
questions for the future
The year 1988 began with the legislative project approved, public opinion mobilized and the Committee in Bogota proud of its victory. Although the Committee's structure is weak, it is determined not to lose ground. Regional groups continue moving forward as well and at the end of 1987 and beginning of 1988 carried out "Regional Colloquia" to stimulate their work.
Nevertheless, on the legal level the triumph is not complete. Rules and regulations must be enacted to enforce the law and political will must be stimulated to implement it. We must ask ourselves if this new legal instrument is going to become obsolete because of non-compliance as happened with the law enacted in 1977.
Public opinion can be a dynamic factor for changes in attitudes and behavior to prevent the law's failure. More importantly, the union, although weak, can also be a strong factor in the short and medium term to bring the legal victory to a practical level.
Other questions remain: What will happen as a result of the conflicts which exist within the base groups? On the one hand these groups depend on the Project, but on the other, they are acting independently as new social actors. What conditions and strategies are required for this contradiction to be resolved in favor of building solid organizations?
Dynamic organizing efforts continue today and reflect the everyday experiences of individuals. As long as these efforts emphasize grassroots participation they will continue to represent and promote the interests of the domestic workers.