Women Working Worldwide: Taking on Global Capital

International Perspectives on Gender

Week 20

Structure of Lecture Introduction and Context Why Female Labour? Explaining Low Wages Women Organising: Trade Unions Consumer Power: Fair Trade Ethical Trade and Codes of Conduct Conclusions

Introduction and Context NIDL: clothing, textiles, electronics, agribusiness,

pharmaceuticals, customer services, care work Not all production in UK is high-value added, high

capital intensity, high pay Capital takes advantage of gender,

class and racial hierarchies UK Homeworking Men?

Why Female Labour? Demand for women workers Perceived by employers as highly skilled, reliable, willing

and ‘docile’ This means higher productivity than men but less likely to

complain or organize for higher wages Women’s skills and compliance assumed by employers to

be natural Elson and Pearson: dexterity and docility are socially

produced Women workers do

organise but face barriers

Higher productivity natural, not warranting reward Skills ‘saturated by sex’ Women cost more in other benefits, it evens out Women only need ‘pin money’, are ‘working for lipstick’ Women’s disadvantaged position in society is

systematically exploited by capital But why do women work for low wages?

- identify first with housework and childcare - lack sense of entitlement, don’t push - barriers to organising

Explaining Women’s Poor Relative Wages

Gendered Performance, Perception and Exit

Transnational Indian call centres: exceptions?

- Men and women as likely to be

employed

- No gender wage gap

- No perceived female or male skills But gender is at work:

- performing femininity

- only women see work as

‘technical’

- marriage = exit for women women

 

Pros ConsFinancial independence May give wage to family,

employment insecureImproved self-esteem Poor wagesChance to organise Poor working conditions,

health risksGreater decision-making Double-burden of workrole in household

Elson and Pearson: Impact contradictory

Impact of Women’s Employment in Transnational Production

Women Organising 1977: UN proclaimed 8 March day for

women’s rights and international peace:

International Women’s Day Origins in 8 March 1857 protest by

female clothing and textile workers in

New York 8 March 1908 15,0000 women marched in New York 1909: March 8 celebrated as national women’s day 1911: First International Women’s Day

Women and Trade Unions Collective bargaining can be an effective way to improve

wages and working conditions Strike by Turkish women pharmaceutical workers in won a

3-year collective agreement on pay and conditions Challenges: unions may be banned

union leaders may be harassed, dismissed

‘sweetheart’ unions may be established

union agenda may not reflect priorities of

women workers

employers may threaten to move production

Fair Trade From 3 products in 1994 to 3000+ Sales = £1.5 billion Fair Trade Mark: guarantees:

- agreed minimum prices

- agreed social premium

- direct purchase

- co-operation, information

- long-term, transparent trading

- access to credit advances

- democratic organization of farmers / workers

- sustainable production

- no labour abuses Evolved from fair trade shops

From Niche to Mainstream…

→ →

→ →

Challenges for Fair Trade I’ve queried commodification of producers’ lives and

landscapes in brand creation:

- over-simplification and ‘othering’

- no ‘reverse gaze’

Hutchens doubts fair trade empowers women producers:

- fair-trade standards include women but don’t address structural barriers they face

- organisations are male dominated

- fair trade premiums may not ‘trickle-down’

- ‘charity’ model for handicrafts belies partnership and limits competitiveness and market share

- gender inequalities seen as ‘cultural’ and ‘no-go’

Ethical Trade

Codes of Conduct: typically guaranteeing living wages, freedom of association and collective bargaining, safe working conditions etc.

Already covered by ILO Conventions but not enforced

Consumer pressure works; puts

brand reputation at risk

Forces companies to accept

responsibility down the

sub-contracting chains

Challenges for Ethical Trade Is monitoring and enforcement adequate?

Do workers know about the codes? Is freedom of association and collective bargaining excluded? Danger of ‘fairwashing’ ‘Home-grown’ codes likely to be weaker Can codes challenge ‘logic of capitalism’? … ‘the retail companies at the top of the subcontracting chains

are themselves creating the conditions that operate against attempts to implement their own codes of conduct’ (Hale and Shaw, 2001, p. 521)

Do codes put some out of work? Are they gender-sensitive?

Mis-recognition of workers ‘Home-grown’ FlorVerde code = good PR for Colombian cut flower industry but inadequate labour rights

Strategies of industry under pressure:- denial: smears, work important alternative to

cocaine- rebuttal: work redeems ‘backward’ peasant

producers Misrecognition (Fraser): disrespectful stereotyping and cultural domination used to ‘legitimate’ low wages

- limited acceptance: bring in FlorVerde (focus on environmental not labour standards, self-certified)

- displace workers’ problems to patriarchal, conflictual family (‘solution’ is conflict-management courses)

→

New Initiatives: the FairPhone

Conclusions NIDL targets female workers as highly productive, compliant

and willing to work for less than men Women’s lower status in society translates into a lower labour

market position (same for inequalities of class, ‘race’/ethnicity) Impact of employment on women’s status is contradictory Women workers are not docile; long history of organising but

face many barriers Consumer pressure can also raise wages and working

conditions via fair trade and ethical trade How involved are the workers themselves? How are they used

to sell the idea of fair trade? Are particular challenges for women taken into account? Danger of ‘fairwashing’ Can’t expect economic justice without cultural justice