Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Globalization, Democracy and the Capabilities Approach to Labour Law: Making the Case for Domestic Workers in India

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Recognition of the Rights of Domestic Workers in India

  • 175 Accesses

Abstract

The recent global financial crisis has triggered renewed thinking around the globalization of the world economy and the systems of market regulation best suited to its governance. The present-day globalization is rooted in neoliberal economic thought—strongly associated with the deregulation of labour laws and an accompanying erosion of social protections. Important concerns have been raised about this system of market ordering, particularly its implications for work security and equitable income distribution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Rodrik (2011, p. ix), Davidov and Langille (2011).

  2. 2.

    Brishen Rodgers has articulated three ‘concepts’ of workplace freedom of association—social democrat, civil libertarian and neoliberal. He has defined neoliberalism as ‘the view that the state is legitimate just insofar as it creates policies and systems of market ordering’. See Rodgers (2016).

  3. 3.

    Deakin (2011).

  4. 4.

    Davidov and Langille, supra note 1, at 2.

  5. 5.

    Rodrik, supra note 1, at ix; Davidov and Langille, supra note 1, at 2.

  6. 6.

    Rodrik, supra note 1, at xv.

  7. 7.

    Langille (2011).

  8. 8.

    Davidov and Langille, supra note 1, at 2.

  9. 9.

    Id.

  10. 10.

    Arthurs (2011).

  11. 11.

    See generally, Agarwala (2013).

  12. 12.

    See Langille, supra note 7.

  13. 13.

    See Arthurs, supra note 10, at 21.

  14. 14.

    See Atleson et al. (2008).

  15. 15.

    See Kofman and Raghuram (2009).

  16. 16.

    See Langille, supra note 7.

  17. 17.

    Rodrik, supra note 1, at xvi.

  18. 18.

    Id. at xviii.

  19. 19.

    Rodrik’s ‘tri-lemma’ refers to the trade-offs that he describes in his book, The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy as between three phenomena—increasing global economic integration (which he refers to as ‘hyper-globalization’), national sovereignty and democracy. According to him, modern-day states may choose to have only two of these—all three cannot exist simultaneously.

  20. 20.

    Id.

  21. 21.

    Id. at xix.

  22. 22.

    Id. at xvii.

  23. 23.

    Davidov and Langille, supra note 1, at 1.

  24. 24.

    Kolben (2011).

  25. 25.

    Kolben (2010); See generally, Sen (2000a).

  26. 26.

    Arthurs, supra note 10, at 18.

  27. 27.

    Id. at 29.

  28. 28.

    United Nations Development Programme (2015). See also, Sen (2000b).

  29. 29.

    Kolben, supra note 25, at 386–88.

  30. 30.

    Id. at 361–62.

  31. 31.

    United Nations Development Programme (2015), supra note 28, at 84.

  32. 32.

    Id.

  33. 33.

    Carr and Chen (2004); See also, United Nations Development Programme (2015), supra note 28, at 9.

  34. 34.

    Carr and Chen (2001).

  35. 35.

    Id. at 2–3.

  36. 36.

    Chen (2007).

  37. 37.

    Id. at 2.

  38. 38.

    Id. at 3; The Unorganized Workers Social Security Act, L. No. 33 of 2008, § 2 (n) (India|IN 2008).

  39. 39.

    Id.; See Atleson et al. (2008), supra note 14, at 837.

  40. 40.

    Carr and Chen (2004), supra note 33, at 3.

  41. 41.

    Id. at 16.

  42. 42.

    Id.

  43. 43.

    Id. at 2.

  44. 44.

    United Nations Development Programme (2015), supra note 28, at 77; Carr and Chen (2004), supra note 33, at 15.

  45. 45.

    Mahajan (2013); See also, Neetha (2008).

  46. 46.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011).

  47. 47.

    Neetha (2008), supra note 45, at 27.

  48. 48.

    Mahajan (2013), supra note 45, at 82.

  49. 49.

    Id. at 87.

  50. 50.

    Id. at 88.

  51. 51.

    Albin (2012).

  52. 52.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 99.

  53. 53.

    Albin (2012), supra note 51, at 231.

  54. 54.

    United Nations Development Programme (2015), supra note 28, at 9. Note: The increased labour force participation of women in India has in turn, boosted employment in the domestic service sectors; See, Kamala Sankaran et al., infra note 66, at 1.

  55. 55.

    Fudge (2014).

  56. 56.

    Atleson et al. (2008), supra note 14, at 836; See also, Fudge (2014), supra note 55, at 5.

  57. 57.

    Fudge (2014), supra note 55, at 9.

  58. 58.

    International Labour Office and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, Indispensable yet Unprotected: Working Conditions of Indian Domestic Workers at Home and Abroad 16 (ILO 2015).

  59. 59.

    Bernstein (2012).

  60. 60.

    Studies have documented the preference amongst poor women in India for domestic work—both because it provides flexibility to shoulder the burden of employment together with their own domestic responsibilities, as well as the gender dimension of this work, wherein they perceive it to be the kind of work they are familiar with; See Neetha (2008).

  61. 61.

    See generally, Thomas (2010).

  62. 62.

    Kofman and Raghuram (2009), supra note 15, at 8–9.

  63. 63.

    Fudge (2014), supra note 55, at 10; See Parreñas (2015).

  64. 64.

    Kofman and Raghuram (2009), supra note 15, at 1.

  65. 65.

    International Labour Office and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, supra note 58, at 14.

  66. 66.

    Sankaran et al. (2007); See also, Neetha (2008), supra note 51, at 27. Note: The route from Jharkhand to New Delhi is said to be the most frequent one, See International Labour Office (2015), supra note 64, at 16.

  67. 67.

    Albin (2012), supra note 51, at 231.

  68. 68.

    Mundlak (2012).

  69. 69.

    Albin (2012), supra note 51, at 231.

  70. 70.

    Id. at 244–45.

  71. 71.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 100.

  72. 72.

    Ray and Qayum (2010).

  73. 73.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 107.

  74. 74.

    Albin (2012), supra note 51, at 233.

  75. 75.

    Rangaswami v. Registrar of Trade Unions, AIR 1962 Mad 231; Bangalore Water Supply and Sewage Board v. Rajappa, AIR 1978 SC 548; See also, Neetha and Palriwala (2011).

  76. 76.

    Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189): Convention concerning decent work for domestic workers.

  77. 77.

    Albin (2012), supra note 51, at 247.

  78. 78.

    Id.

  79. 79.

    Director General Labour Welfare (2011).

  80. 80.

    Mahajan (2013), supra note 45, at 90.

  81. 81.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 114.

  82. 82.

    Tsikata (2012).

  83. 83.

    International Labour Office and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, supra note 58, at 14. Note: Data from the National Human Rights Commission 2002–03 shows that ninety per cent of trafficking in India is internal; Note: The UN Human Rights Commission has declared domestic work as a form of modern slavery, See Kamala Sankaran et al. supra note 66, at 1.

  84. 84.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 109–11.

  85. 85.

    Id. at 110–11.

  86. 86.

    Neetha (2008), supra note 45, at 27.

  87. 87.

    United Nations Development Programme (2015), supra note 28.

  88. 88.

    Deakin, supra note 3, at 157.

  89. 89.

    Langille, supra note 7, at 103–5.

  90. 90.

    Id. at 106.

  91. 91.

    Id. at 108.

  92. 92.

    Id. at 102.

  93. 93.

    See Sen, supra note 25.

  94. 94.

    Langille, supra note 7, at 111.

  95. 95.

    See Sen, supra note 25, at 3.

  96. 96.

    Id.

  97. 97.

    Id. at 4.

  98. 98.

    Id. at 87.

  99. 99.

    Id. at 7.

  100. 100.

    Langille, supra note 7, at 111. Note: Langille argues that there is a fundamental overlap between human freedom and human capital, which facilitates its application to labour law.

  101. 101.

    Deakin, supra note 3, at 157.

  102. 102.

    Langille, supra note 7, at 116.

  103. 103.

    Deakin, supra note 3, at 157.

  104. 104.

    See Sen, supra note 25, at 5; See Routh (2014).

  105. 105.

    See Sen, supra note 25, at 5.

  106. 106.

    Kolben, supra note 25, at 381.

  107. 107.

    Routh (2014), supra note 104, at 103. Note: This is a direct reference to the ‘integrated institutions approach’ in Dreze and Sen (2002). This manner of applying the integrated institutions approach to construct ‘social dialogue’ as it relates to the issues of informal workers has been conducted by Routh in his work on informal waste-pickers in India. He proposes this as an alternative to member-based collective action to facilitate social dialogue, See Routh (2014).

  108. 108.

    Neetha (2008), supra note 45, at 26; International Labour Office and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, supra note 58, at 14.

  109. 109.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 3.

  110. 110.

    The Maharashtra Domestic Workers Welfare Board Act, 2008.

  111. 111.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 3.

  112. 112.

    The Tamil Nadu Manual Worker (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Work) Act, 1982.

  113. 113.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 3.

  114. 114.

    Neetha (2008), supra note 45, at 26; Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 3.

  115. 115.

    International Labour Office and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, supra note 58, at 16.

  116. 116.

    Kofman and Raghuram (2009), supra note 15, at 17. Note: This includes insurance coverage for workplace harassment, theft of jewellery and death due to gender-related medical issues.

  117. 117.

    India has an Inter-State Migrant Workers Act of 1979 that has been considered to be inadequate for the regulation of domestic workers and requires amendment to specifically include them within its purview.

  118. 118.

    The Domestic Workers Conditions of Service Bill, 1959, The All India Domestic Servants Bill, 1959.

  119. 119.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 98.

  120. 120.

    The Domestic Workers (Conditions of Service) Bill, 1972.

  121. 121.

    The Domestic Workers (Conditions of Service) Bill, 1977.

  122. 122.

    The House Workers (Conditions of Service) Bill, 1989.

  123. 123.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 2. Note: This bill envisaged employer contribution to a ‘House Workers Welfare Fund’.

  124. 124.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 98–99.

  125. 125.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 1.

  126. 126.

    The Unorganized Workers Social Security Act, 2008 section 2 (n).

  127. 127.

    National Domestic Workers Welfare Trust and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr., No. Writ Petition (Civil) No(s). 160/2003 (Supreme Court of India).

  128. 128.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 3.

  129. 129.

    National Domestic Workers Welfare Trust and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr., infra note 134.

  130. 130.

    Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY).

  131. 131.

    Mahanta and Gupta (2015); See also, Director General Labour Welfare (2011), supra note 79, at 4.

  132. 132.

    The Sexual Harrassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

  133. 133.

    The Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Bill, 2010 did not initially cover domestic workers.

  134. 134.

    The Domestic Workers (Registration, Social Security and Welfare) Bill, 2008.

  135. 135.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 2.

  136. 136.

    The Domestic Worker (Regulation of Employment, Condition of Work, Social Security and Welfare) Bill, 2008.

  137. 137.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 2.

  138. 138.

    Neetha, supra note 51, at 28; Mahanta and Gupta, supra note 131, at 4.

  139. 139.

    The Hindu (2014), The New Indian Express (2013), The Times of India (2013), The Guardian (2015).

  140. 140.

    Chamberlain (2012).

  141. 141.

    AAP Manifesto: Delhi Assembly Election, 2015, 32.

  142. 142.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 113–15.

  143. 143.

    See Kolben, supra note 26.

  144. 144.

    See Rodrik, supra note 1.

  145. 145.

    Mahanta and Gupta, supra note 131, at 2.

  146. 146.

    Director General Labour Welfare (2011), supra note 79, at 1.

  147. 147.

    International Labour Office and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, supra note 58, at 15.

  148. 148.

    Draft National Policy on Domestic Workers, § 1.2., supra note 79.

  149. 149.

    Id.

  150. 150.

    Deakin (2013).

  151. 151.

    Id. at 11.

  152. 152.

    Draft National Policy on Domestic Workers § 4.1., supra note 79.

  153. 153.

    Id. § 4.2 and 4.3.

  154. 154.

    Id. § 4.4.

  155. 155.

    Id. § 4.6.

  156. 156.

    Id. § 4.8.

  157. 157.

    Id. § 4.7.

  158. 158.

    Id. § 4.5.

  159. 159.

    Id. § 5.2.

  160. 160.

    Langille, supra note 7, at 119; See Browne et al. (2002).

  161. 161.

    See Sen, supra note 25, at 11–145.

  162. 162.

    Browne et al. (2002), supra note 160.

  163. 163.

    Deakin, supra note 3, at 162.

  164. 164.

    Id. at 164.

  165. 165.

    Id.

  166. 166.

    Draft National Policy on Domestic Workers, § 4.4., supra note 79.

  167. 167.

    Mahanta and Gupta, supra note 131, at 2.

  168. 168.

    Lester (2011).

  169. 169.

    Kolben, supra note 25, at 380.

  170. 170.

    Lester (2011), supra note 168, at 329.

  171. 171.

    Neetha and Palriwala (2011), supra note 46, at 113–15.

  172. 172.

    Sankaran et al., supra note 66, at 3.

  173. 173.

    Draft National Policy on Domestic Workers, § 4.3., supra note 79.

  174. 174.

    Id. § 5.2.

  175. 175.

    Kolben, supra note 25, at 381–88.

  176. 176.

    The Guardian (2017).

  177. 177.

    The Economic Times (2018).

References

  • AAP Manifesto. (2015). 70-point action plan, Delhi assembly election. Retrieved January 16, 2019, from https://aamaadmiparty.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/AAP-Manifesto-2015_70-Pt-Action-Plan.compressed.pdf.

  • Agarwala, R. (2013). Informal labour, formal politics, and dignified discontent in India. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albin, E. (2012). From “domestic servant” to “domestic worker”. In J. Fudge et al. (Eds.), Challenging the legal boundaries of work regulation (pp. 231, 248). Oñati International Series in Law and Society, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthurs, H. (2011). Labour law after labour. In G. Davidov & B. Langille (Eds.), The idea of labour law (pp. 13, 23). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atleson, J., Compa, L., Rittich, K., Sharpe, C., & Weiss M. S. (2008). International labour law: Cases and materials on workers’ rights in the global economy. Thomson West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, S. (2012). Sector-based collective bargaining regimes and gender segregation: A case study of self-employed home childcare workers in Quebec. In J. Fudge, et al. (Eds.), Challenging the legal boundaries of work regulation (pp. 213). Oñati International Series in Law and Society, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, J., Deakin, S., & Wilkinson, F. (2002). Capabilities, social rights and European market integration (Working Paper 253). Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, M., & Chen, M. A. (2001). Globalization and the informal economy: How global trade and investment impact the working poor. Women in Informal Employment Globalizing and Organizing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, M., & Chen, M. (2004). Globalization, social exclusion and work: With special reference to informal employment and gender (Working Paper 20). World Commission on Social Dimension of Globalization, International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M. A. (2007). Rethinking the informal economy: Linkages with the formal economy and the formal regulatory environment (DESA Working Paper 46). UN/DESA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidov, G., & Langille, B. (2011). Understanding labor law: A timeless idea, a timed-out idea, or an idea whose time has now come? In G. Davidov & B. Langille (Eds.), The idea of labour law. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deakin, S. (2011). The contribution of labour law to economic and human development. In G. Davidov & B. Langille (Eds.), The idea of labour law (pp. 156, 167). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deakin, S. (2013). Addressing labour market segmentation: The role of labour law (Working Paper 52). DIALOGUE, International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Director General Labour Welfare. (2011). Final report of the task force on domestic workers: Realising decent work. Ministry of Labour and Employment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreze, J., & Sen, A. K. (2002). India: Development and participation. USA: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fudge, J. (2014). Feminist reflections on the scope of labour law: Domestic work, social reproduction, and jurisdiction. Feminist Legal Studies, 22(1): 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ILO (International Labour Office). (2015). Fundamental principles and rights at work branch (FUNDAMENTALS). In Indispensable yet unprotected: Working conditions of Indian domestic workers at home and abroad. Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kofman, E., & Raghuram, P. (2009, July). The implications of migration for gender and care regimes in the South. Social Policy and Development Programme Paper No. 41, UNRISD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolben, K. (2010). A development approach to trade and labour regimes. Wake Forest Law Review, 45, 355–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolben, K. (2011). Transnational labour regulation and the limits of governance. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 12(2), 403–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langille, B. (2011). Labour law’s theory of justice. In G. Davidov & B. Langille (Eds.), The idea of labour law (pp. 101, 110). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester, G. (2011). Beyond collective bargaining: Modern unions as agents of social solidarity. In G. Davidov & B. Langille (Eds.), The idea of labour law. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, N. (2013). The invisible care givers: Domestic workers in Mumbai and their struggle for unionizations. Women’s Policy Journal of Harvard, 10, 81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahanta, U., & Gupta, I. (2015). The road ahead for domestic workers in India: Legal and policy challenges, Law Policy Brief, 1(9). O.P. Jindal Global University. Retrieved January 16, 2019, from http://www.jgls.edu.in/sites/default/files/law-and-policy-brief-sep-2015-issue-9.pdf.

  • Mundlak, G. (2012). The wages of care-worker: From structure to agency. In J. Fudge, et al. (Eds.), Challenging the legal boundaries of work regulation (p. 189). Oñati International Series in Law and Society, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neetha, N. (2008). Regulating domestic work. Economic and Political Weekly, 26–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neetha, N., & Palriwala, R. (2011). The absence of state law: Domestic workers in India. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 23(1), 97–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parreñas, R. S. (2015). Servants of globalization: Migration and domestic work (2nd ed.). Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, R., & Qayum, S. (2010). Cultures of servitude: Modernity, domesticity and class in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, B. (2016). Three liberal conceptions of workplace freedom of association. Berkeley Journal of Employment & Labor Law, 37(2), 177–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. (2011). The globalization paradox: Democracy and the future of the world economy. W. W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Routh, S. (2014). Enhancing capabilities through labour law: Informal workers in India (p. 103). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sankaran, K., Sinha, S., & Madhav, R. (2007). WIEGO law pilot project on the informal economy: Domestic worker-background document.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (2000a). Development as freedom. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (2000b). Work and rights. International Labour Review, 139(2), 119–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economic Times. (2018) Labour ministry revives national policy to increase domestic helps’ wages.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Guardian. (2012). The Delhi child servant scandal that has outraged India.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Guardian. (2015). Saudi diplomat accused of raping two maids uses immunity to leave India.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Guardian. (2017). Routine abuse of Delhi’s maids laid bare as class divide spills into violence.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Hindu. (2014). Abused domestic help says she is being pressurized.

    Google Scholar 

  • The New Indian Express. (2013). Domestic workers in India face horrific abuses: Human rights watch.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Times of India. (2013). Female domestic helps vulnerable to abuse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C. (2010). Effects of globalization in Mexico, 1980–2000: Labour migration as an unintended consequence. In A. Blackett & C. Lévesque (Eds.), Social regionalism in the global economy. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsikata, D. (2012). Employment agencies and domestic work in Ghana. In J. Fudge, et al. (Eds.), Challenging the legal boundaries of work regulation (p. 252). Oñati International Series in Law and Society, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Programme. (2015). Work for human development (Human development report).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ph.D. Candidate, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Tvisha Shroff

Authors
  1. Tvisha Shroff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tvisha Shroff .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India

    Upasana Mahanta

  2. Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India

    Indranath Gupta

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Shroff, T. (2019). Globalization, Democracy and the Capabilities Approach to Labour Law: Making the Case for Domestic Workers in India. In: Mahanta, U., Gupta, I. (eds) Recognition of the Rights of Domestic Workers in India. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5764-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5764-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5763-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5764-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation