The Social Relations Approach,empowerment and women factory workers in Malaysia

Method

We adopt a qualitative approach in exploring this issue. A rich body of feminist literature considers whether a qualitative approach allows women to be better understood on their own terms (see discussion in e.g. Westmarland, 2001). Quantitative research methods have been criticised for ignoring and excluding women (e.g. Oakley, 1974, 1998), for universalising the experience of men (Stanley and Wise, 1993) and for employing ‘male-stream’ methods to understand women’s experiences (Mies, 1983). A qualitative approach is more appropriate for feminist research because it gives emphasis to the meanings, values and experiences of the participants themselves (Duelli Klein, 1983; Graham, 1983), helping us to understand reality in natural settings. It places the researcher and the object of study on a more equal level (Oakley, 1974; Stanley and Wise, 1990) and is perceived as more open, compassionate and egalitarian (Risman, 1993). Finally, as women are argued to have a mode of thinking which is ‘contextual and narrative’ they may be more responsive to a qualitative approach (Davis, 1986).

Several NGOs which worked with women in Malaysia were contacted to determine the extent of their involvement with women factory workers. Initially, a web search was conducted in order to identify these organisations. NGOs in Kuala Lumpur were targeted. Compared with other regions, NGOs in the capital are likely to be the most prominent, most well-connected and attract the most publicity. Despite several NGOs being contacted, only two dealt closely with the issues under investigation. ² To preserve anonymity, they will be referred to as X and Y. X champions the cause of the marginalised and working class, and campaigns for laws and policies to redistribute wealth and reduce income disparity. It has a long history of organising political protests, marches and rallies to demand equal rights for the poor and vulnerable segments of the population, including factory and plantation workers. We have noted that a significant portion of these are female. Y meets our criteria more closely. It is dedicated to the rights of women workers and enjoys a long tradition of working with plantation, factory and domestic workers. It focuses on organising women workers and on advocacy and training. Both NGOs are small, with fewer than 10 permanent staff and heavily reliant on volunteers to assist with their work. They have been in existence for a long time (in the case of X, 10 years; in the case of Y, 30 years) and are publicly well known. Individually, they reached out to a few hundred women workers a year. Both are also left-leaning and reject current political structures as neglectful of the poor and vulnerable. In the light of their work, sphere of activity, reputation and experience, they are noteworthy. Observing how they operate gives us insight into the experiences of NGOs elsewhere in Malaysia operating in this field.

Data about the work of both NGOs were derived from secondary sources (media reports, NGO documents, organisational websites, etc.). The work of both NGOs was observed over the course of a week in November 2012. I travelled to various places to meet and speak with women factory workers, to understand their lifestyles, and the challenges they faced. In addition, one individual from X (S1) and three from Y (S2, S3 and M1) were interviewed. S1 is the ‘face’ of X; she exercises a coordinating role in X and represents it in its dealings with the public, workers and other organisations. S2 is a founding member of Y, S3 is a regular volunteer, whilst M1, a salaried employee, is responsible for Y’s ‘bread and butter’ issues. One lengthy face-to-face interview was conducted with S1 in March 2012 (26 March). Two telephone interviews were conducted with S2 in March 2012 (25 and 28 March) and a face-to-face interview took place with S2, S3 and M1 in November 2012 (8 November).

M1 had contacts in several factories in Kajang, a town 21 km from Kuala Lumpur. Kajang is a heavily industrialised region, as evidenced by a large variety of factories clustered together (food and beverage, electronics, garment, furniture, toiletries, etc.). M1 had built relationships with women workers in one of these factories (an electronics factory). Women formed the bulk of its workers (200 out of 300 workers, primarily of Indian origin). The vast majority are over 30 years old. Much of their work involved assembly and packing. An in-house union exists, with a membership of 60. In following M1 in her work, I spoke with women workers in this factory. In following S1, I conversed with women workers whom she visited and the union leaders she met. I also observed how M1 and S1 organised activities to bring women workers together. Notes were taken during meetings, discussions and other activities. Interviews with those representing the NGOs and with women workers themselves are presented (in the Data analysis section) to help us evaluate the extent to which the NGOs were able to empower the women workers they attempted to help.

Strategies organised around participatory agendas and needs identification

Kabeer asks: to what extent are NGO interventions organised around participatory modes of needs identification and prioritisation? In the Malaysian context, are women factory workers themselves able to articulate their needs and concerns? Do NGOs create space for their voice to be heard or do they impose their own priorities on the women (Kabeer, 1994: 230, 235)?

My findings suggest that both NGOs regarded the women they attempted to help as capable of making choices, expressing priorities and taking responsibility. They believed that these women should have the last word in determining and ascertaining their own needs. S1 stressed the utility of adopting open and interactive decision-making processes so that women could articulate their needs (interview, 26 March 2012):

It is they [women] themselves who need to be aware of their own problems … we cannot impose our views on them. It is their level of consciousness which is important; they decide what their issues are … some of the problems which women workers bring to our attention are: poor living accommodation, lack of water or electricity and low wages. The issues which they want us to take forward are taken by themselves by way of voting in a group …

The same approach is reflected in the work of Y. S2 laboured the point that she and M1 were previously factory workers (‘We worked for many years, between us we have covered numerous factories in many industries, electronics, manufacturing, garment, food!’), and were thus able to understand and empathise with women factory workers, and that their own suffering helped break down a ‘them’ and ‘us’ mentality between the NGO and the women. They thus shared many sociodemographic similarities with the women they attempted to help. S2 commented (interview, 8 November 2012):

Our previous experience gives us knowledge of the difficulties faced by women in the same position … we know what they are going through because we have been there ourselves … we know what goes on from first-hand experience … so we are able to stand in their shoes …

M1 argued that an important way of uncovering women’s needs was to keep in close contact with them and that was why she was perpetually ‘on my motorbike because I go from factory to factory to see these women …, every day …, and talk to them to find out what they need. I make friends with them, I tell them we are here for you’ (interview, 8 November 2012). She felt that when she was on their territory, the women felt more comfortable telling her what their needs and concerns were.

Strategies compensating for institutional failure

Kabeer asks how successful NGO interventions are in compensating for institutional failure (women excluded from credit facilities by banks, trade unions organised around male interests, public institutions unresponsive to women’s needs and priorities). What alternative forms of needs satisfaction do NGOs offer? She cautions against the gender biases which are often entrenched within the routine rules and procedures through which mainstream development agencies distribute resources (1994: 236). NGOs must be able to provide women with new kinds of resources, thereby signalling new potentials and possibilities, rather than merely reinforcing old roles and constraints (1994: 261). These resources may be tangible (e.g. organising women’s trade unions) and intangible (e.g. building the organisational capacity of women to press claims on public institutions).

In the Malaysian context, both NGOs sought to build the organisational capacity of women factory workers to assert claims against their employers. They adopted strategies which enabled women to meet together, share their experiences and learn about their rights. They organised drop-in centres, social events, adult learning literacy and numeracy classes. These events gave women opportunities to challenge perceptions about themselves and their acceptance of their place in the social order. They also allowed women to build alliances with other workers to collectively put pressure on employers. S2 revealed how free dinner parties acted as effective ice-breakers to enable women to talk about their lives and struggles at work. Some of their concerns are low and unpaid wages, poor working conditions, occupational diseases and harsh treatment by supervisors. In following these up, Y conducted workshops and training to educate women about their rights at work and to increase the capacity to help themselves:

S2: Our activities are wide ranging … we involve women in discussions, seminars, training programmes, we provide advice and counselling … we help women to take control. … If we don’t, then nothing will change, because workers are afraid … (interview, 25 March 2012)

S1 revealed that it was difficult to organise women workers; many are timid and prefer to ‘run away because they think they have no power’ but that X was keen to encourage collective action and mobilisation:

So we hold ‘kesedaraan’ (awareness) campaigns; we try to educate these workers of their rights, we train them to organise themselves, we provide support such as advocacy and we stand with them if they want to bring a legal action against their employers. (interview, 26 March 2012)

Y has drawn on drama and acting as a means of communication. These methods were an effective way of helping workers, many of whom are illiterate, to understand their legal rights. M1 described how drama has been successful in this regard:

Many workers, they do not know that they have a legal relationship with their employers. So we try to project this relationship as a boxing match. We put together a ‘boxing drama’ for workers to teach them what the work relationship is about … it is about negotiating your rights as a worker, and sometimes, you have to put up a fight … (interview, 8 November 2012)

M1 reported how she and her colleagues taught a group of Burmese women migrant workers about their employers’ health and safety obligations towards them, through visual aids:

We draw charts identifying how each body part – hand, wrist, lungs, eyes and nose – can be affected by fumes, gases and other toxic materials. Often the workers have no idea, they come to work with painful wrists, runny nose and watery eyes, but they don’t know why and what can be done about it. So we tell them, it may be related to work, and for them to see a doctor, and most importantly, that we can help them claim against their employer … (interview, 8 November 2012).

Thus, both NGOs focused on expanding intangible resources among the women they worked with. They believed in the importance of empowering women through communication of information, formation of networks and offering education and training to develop their confidence.

Strategies as consciousness-transforming

Kabeer emphasises the need for strategies which build a sense of empowerment in women and which transform their consciousness so that women can reflect, analyse and assess what has hitherto been taken for granted, to uncover the socially constructed and socially shared basis of apparently individual problems (1994: 245). Through building women’s sense of control (1994: 246), fostering new collective identities (1994: 247) and increasing women’s intangible resources (1994: 248), for example, NGOs can encourage women to analyse and question their reality and construct alternative ones.

Despite sustained efforts by both NGOs to transform women’s consciousness, there appeared to be great reticence on the part of the women themselves to believe that they can challenge the very system which they realise is responsible for boxing them in. M1 was especially sensitive to this:

We try hard to increase their confidence and knowledge, but women still live under a ‘veil of ignorance’ … they are not educated, many are illiterate and small minded. They think … their family, their children are the only things which matter … as long as they get paid … it does not matter that they are exploited at work … so although life is difficult they do not make an issue of this … to them it is part of their lives to be exploited, they simply accept it … (interview, 9 November 2012)

This reserve was also evident on the part of women which X targeted. S1 had organised ‘drop-in sessions’ for workers to seek help with problems at work. Through these centres, she hoped to encourage them to be more confident about challenging employers. The centres were organised after work. Despite X reminding workers who had previously attended that there were opportunities for follow-up, these workers did not attend. No new workers visited the centre either, despite X’s efforts at publicising the opportunity to do so.

There was optimism in M1’s eyes, however, when she relayed a story about a woman worker who she helped a few years ago bring a claim against her employer. Although retired, this ex-worker (V) continued to regard Y as a contact point for women who wanted to change their lives. During our meeting with her, she asked M1 to help a young mother who had suffered abuse at the hands of her husband. V said:

This young mother, she has packed the bags and wants to go to a women’s refuge. This is a very brave thing! She does not want to live with her abusive husband anymore. She wants to take control of her own life. She has a child who sees the abuse. I told her to wait here in my house for M1, because people like M1, they help women do that. (interview, 9 November 2012)

Although not strictly in the context of work, the stories of two other women (F and T), who had also fled abusive relationships, and who had settled into temporary accommodation provided by Y, is further evidence of Y’s efforts to change women’s mindsets. F said:

Do I feel like my life has changed since coming into contact with Y? maybe … I have learnt about independence, confidence and bravery. My husband beat me for many years before me and my children left him. I want now to do better for myself and for the children … (interview, 8 November 2012)

T remarked:

Our marriages are arranged when we are barely 10 years old. So we don’t go to school, we are sent to live with our future in-laws. We have no friends, no support. I did not know that my life could be different until I met M1 who gave us a place to stay, food to eat. I now have a job, thanks to her. I can earn a living and support my children. I also know what I am entitled to. I can imagine a future. Before I had no hope, but M1 said there is hope and we will teach you how … (interview, 8 November 2012).

Yet, instances like these are few and far between. The majority of the women in this case study remained fearful, as evidenced by my interviews with them, a mentality which is confirmed to me by those who attempted to help them. The NGOs were not able to change their mindsets; they had accepted their predicament as a fact of life. They neither appeared willing to question their subordinate status, nor did they contemplate the possibility that they can take control of their lives. This belief, perpetuated by institutional rules and practices and the way in which they embody male agency, needs and interests, is firmly entrenched in the minds of the women in the case study as shown by my brief conversations with them.

Strategies which emphasise new forms of collective awareness and association

Kabeer stresses that collective identity underpins most empowerment strategies. Given women’s disenfranchisement from sources of institutional power, their collective strength is their most important transformatory resource (1994: 253). Thus building up and strengthening networks and alliances among women is important. The NGOs relayed some of the ways in which they attempted to expand new forms of collective action among the women. Through their strategies, they tried to foster feelings of courage and solidarity, and an awareness that strength lies in numbers.

Getting unions to help strengthen the collective power of unorganised workers was an important strategy in X’s armoury. Yet the investigation also revealed that it was frustrating persuading unions to do so. S1 regularly contacted union leaders in local factories to help organise contract workers in these factories (many of whom are women). Since many activist NGOs were prohibited by employers from being on factory premises, because ‘they see us as trouble makers’, union leaders constituted an important contact point for X. One union leader responded to her in the following way:

I don’t want to get in trouble with the permanent workers. They will be angry with me if I try to help the contract workers. So I don’t want to rock the boat. My responsibility is to receive orders from the union bosses above, and to carry these out. I may be able to give you a contact among the contract workers, but I cannot get directly involved … (interview, 7 November 2012)

S1 remarked that these responses were not unusual, but it was clear that unions’ unwillingness to help had reduced the chances of women collectively rallying around their causes. Unions were the obvious route to help achieve this, but their cooperation could not always be counted upon.

M1 regularly organises meetings at a canteen near factories so that women can meet to discuss their difficulties. The workers are always informed beforehand of these meetings. Yet it was not uncommon for very few workers to turn up, reducing opportunities for collective action. Many workers simply waved to acknowledge our presence, but did not come near us. M1 remarked:

These women are not confident. Some of them are migrants and do not speak the language, so they keep themselves to themselves … they also face problems because their culture says they should not be bold … so they just accept their fate, rather than fight … (interview, 8 November 2012)

Even those women who had previously received help were reluctant to ‘come back to us to help other women’. M1 continued:

Many of these women, they come once or twice … and then disappear. Other women come to us with problems (unpaid wages, health issues) and we help them claim against the employer, but then they also disappear. So, it is very difficult to generate a collective attitude among these women. (interview, 8 November 2012)

One woman worker (K) who attended meetings M1 organised was particularly vocal. She was willing to speak at length about her experience of being ‘empowered’ and subsequently, her belief that acting in solidarity was crucial in bringing about change. She described Y as ‘my two eyes’. K relayed how Y had helped her:

I faced a lot of difficulties with unpaid salary. Y taught me where I could complain and took me to the labour office. My union does not care that we work long hours, earn low salaries and have to do complicated and difficult work. It is very close to the managers. It even warned us that if we went to Y to ask for help, it will make sure we are dismissed!!! (interview, 9 November 2012)

When questioned about the consciousness of her co-workers and their willingness to collectively challenge a system which legitimises their subordination, K underlined that this was an immensely difficult task:

I have tried so hard to tell my colleagues we need to fight together, then our employer will listen. But my colleagues they just give up. They don’t want to meet, we are not in one mind and heart. They are too scared to create trouble. When our employer threatens us, everyone backs off.

During the conversation with K, many other women workers saw us but did not stop to talk to us. When I asked one of them, B, why she would not stop to talk to M1 (whom she knew), she said:

I scared of the boss. He will be very angry if I mix with people outside the factory. I just work and go home, and don’t worry about anything else.

Both M1 and K then provided accounts of workers who Y had helped, but did not then stay in contact, diminishing the chances of collective action:

There was a worker who was dismissed unfairly. We helped her initiate legal proceedings against her employer. Suddenly she decided she did not want to continue … another worker whose salary was cut … we helped her get back the salary but we never heard from her again. … Lack of solidarity among these women prevented us from trying to mobilise them. They are too scared. Management keeps threatening them, so they don’t dare to fight back …

This fear and ambivalence, together with a wider perception that their interests are bound up with their own homes and children, play a large role in explaining why women workers have not rallied around a common agenda to the extent that Y would have liked to see.

Strategies which mobilise for change

Kabeer emphasises the importance of a commitment on the part of NGOs to strengthen women’s own ability to mobilise around their self-defined interests. Yet she cautions that NGOs tend to be accountable upwards to governments or donors, and consequently, operate around acceptable and predefined agendas (1994: 256, 262). Pressures to obtain donor funding can lead to an expansion of standardised and ill-thought out projects, detracting NGOs from prioritising the needs of their potential beneficiaries. More ominously, NGOs’ ability to operate often depends on containing their activities within a non-political agenda which does not challenge the structures which subordinate women (1994: 256). Thus it is important to ask, for example, to what extent NGOs defer to the aims, objectives and policies of their funders? Are they content to operate within the confines set by the state? How do NGOs deal with the ‘political’ implications of their work?

In my investigations, S2 raised concerns that donors often limit how funds can be spent and that sometimes, donor specifications detract Y from the work it wanted to do:

Our funding runs out in 3 months and this is worrying. We are a small NGO. We don’t get funding from the government … we live from hand to mouth. At times, we find we have no choice but to comply with the conditions imposed by foreign funders although what they say we must do is not what we want to do … (interview, 28 March 2012).

X, however, had decided to secure funds only from independent donors. When probed as to the reasons why, S1 explained that this was because many international donors ‘tend to tell us how we can spend the money’. She continued, ‘as a result, our funds are small, but this is a sacrifice we are willing to make because we believe that we, at local level, are the best people to determine how money ought to be utilised to help the workers’ (interview, 26 March 2012).

How do the two NGOs deal with state pressure to manage their activities around acceptable and predefined agendas? Despite the ever present possibility of state suppression of action perceived to threaten its authority, neither NGO appeared troubled by this. On the contrary, both asserted that their work in helping women factory workers should continue despite state resistance.

Despite the government not having clear policies on women in low-skilled occupations, S3 expressed hope about the future:

There is low level discourse on workers’ rights, the government is not sympathetic to these workers … they are more sympathetic to the concerns of employers … the whole political situation is very unhealthy, but we have hope … the last election has shown how people have been brave enough to challenge government … it almost lost, so the government is forced to concede to certain political demands … for us, we press on, there is still much work to do … (interview, 8 November 2012)

S1 was frustrated with the ambivalence of the government on the implementation of minimum wages, something X had campaigned for over many years. The government had promised to announce the adoption of minimum wages many times but this was perpetually delayed. She expressed disappointment with this, but said that it did not dampen her spirit to continue campaigning:

Everyone puts profit first, and ignores workers … the Minimum Wage Policy will now be implemented 1 January 2013 … firms are resisting this policy. Yet government is unwilling to take a strong position on this … if we don’t fight for workers, who will? (interview, 7 November 2012)