Conceal or Not? Management of Dehumanized Work Identity among Lower Caste Domestic Workers and Non-domestic Scavenging Workers

Abstract

The current study explored a social identity approach to understand the role of caste identity in the domestic labour market in India. Domestic and other non-domestic scavenging workers form an important human resource of the informal job market system. Earlier research in the context of these workers in India did not link with the critical social psychological viewpoints leading to macro-level interpretations only. Domestic work in India in itself is a low-status job having many psychological repercussions such as stigmatization and dehumanization. The focused group discussion is done with a group of domestic workers and non-domestic scavenging workers who are from lower caste background in order to understand the management of their dehumanized identity.

Keywords

Caste domestic workers dehumanization informal job sector non-domestic scavenging workers stigmatization social identity

Introduction

What if somebody comes to search the domestic jobs such as food preparation, cleaning and other activities and the owner finds that the person belongs to lower caste? The prevailing logic of purity and impurity dominantly present in the caste society of India increases the chances that the person may not get a job or may be appointed for some other purpose such as cleaning floors or removal of garbage, as it was also reported in a number of cases (e.g., Torgalkar, 2017). This came to the notice as an upper caste employer felt ditched after finding her domestic worker belonging to a lower caste. Earlier she was under the impression that her maid belongs to the Brahmin caste, because of which she engaged her in various activities like cooking and other religious rituals. The observable relationship between employee and employer is not structured in the domestic worker context, as it happens in the formal institutions or organizations, where employees’ perception of being belonging to any organization is clear and specified. In the domestic labour market, there is a blatant display of autocratic way of giving the command to the workers for doing some home task in a sporadic manner. The employee–employer relationship is reduced to the discretion of individual employers bounded by personal interests. This relationship has been observed to be moderated by the social structural aspects such as caste and gender (Raghuram, 2001; see also Swaminathan, 2015), religion and social class. Swaminathan (2015) noted that several empowering programmes to help women who are engaged in this kind of informal works are also the feminization of the responsibilities because of questionable assumption of poverty and the stipulated welfare programmes. One of the critical observations was about the designation of these workers which was never made decent, structured and secured.

The context of domestic workers in India portrays the reification of stereotypes which does not give way to the everyday resistance incurred by the workers in the form of social movements as it had happened in the context of industrial working class movement (Shah, 2004). Some of the previous literature highlighted the construction of discourses which signified the contestation to the outgroup construction of their self (e.g., Barua, Haukanes, & Waldrop, 2016; Fine, 1996). Usually, the employers of domestic workers disengage with the domestic task because of the nature of work considered to be low in status and sometimes as dirty work. Apart from domestic work, manual scavenging even after passing of “The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013,” is still practised in some parts of India extensively. The figures with exact numbers of such workers are quite controversial since government reports show fewer numbers of such manual scavengers but the actual figures are higher. However, a report of Socio-economic and Caste Census, 2011 (secc.gov.in) showed more than 180,000 households belonging to various states in India are earning their livelihood from this kind of dehumanized work. Maharashtra, a state in central part of India comprising highest number of manual scavengers with around 63,000 households, similarly Madhya Pradesh is the second in the rank of engaging manual scavengers with around 36,000 households, then Uttar Pradesh is the third in place with 21,000 such households indulge in manual scavenging (Venkat, 2016).

These numbers of manual scavengers in different states of India might get reduced after the Act, that is, “The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013” was passed, but a significant reduction is missing as reported in a number of cases of discriminations. For instance, in a most recent event in February 2018, in Shravanbelgola, Karnataka state employed about 300 manual scavengers to clean toilets, remove filths etc., from open defecation areas (Venkat, Sridevi, & Manuel, 2018). In Bengaluru, the media reported that two workers, who were unpaid for months, were allegedly forced to climb into sewer, and they died of asphyxiation caused by harmful gasses during manual cleaning of manholes ( Venkat, Sridevi, & Manuel, 2017 ). Similarly, the Safai Karamchari Andolan claims that during the years 2014 to 2016 more than 1,200 such workers in different parts of India had died from manual scavenging-related activities (Venkat et al., 2018).

In regard to socio-economic conditions of manual scavengers, most of the manual scavengers belong to Dalit communities of India and their economic status is said to be miserable. Manual scavengers are paid between ₹6,000 and 11,000 per month and most of them are contractual workers. Contractual workers are paid on daily basis and if they miss the job one day they lose the pay for that particular day. Apart from that being a contractual worker, manual scavengers cannot claim any other benefits, like medical, funds, retirement benefits etc., that may applicable to regular employees in the same grade. The minimum wage per day decided by the government for the category (unskilled labour) under which manual scavengers lie is ₹353 for A class cities, ₹294 for B class cities and ₹236 for C class cities, respectively (Ministry of Labour and Employment, 2015). This indicates that no contractual worker can earn more than ₹11,000 per month, even if they work for all 30 days in a month. This is a pay structure that government has decided for institutional scavenging, domestic sweeping or scavenging, that is, performed by women workers usually is much less even at ₹100 per month or less in some rural or semi-urban areas. These wages are not enough even to avail basic amenities like food, medicine and education.

Caste-based discrimination is an underlying cause of miserable and pitiable socio-economic degraded conditions of manual scavengers. Feudal system prevailing in India, force manual scavenging practice to continue by inheritance among people performing this work as well as upper castes to forcibly make workers of a particular caste to perform this work for themselves Human Rights Watch, 2014). Most of such manual scavengers belong to scheduled castes for which separate laws and regulations have been made by the Indian Government for their social upliftment and to raise their status equally with the upper caste. Yet this dehumanized work is performed by Dalits because of customary laws of society. This practice of societal discrimination could be stopped only with the strong and full commitment of civil societies and government. Local government agencies recruit workers as safai karmcharis (cleaning workers) from these specific castes belong to Dalits or scheduled castes to perform sweeping, scavenging and cleaning Human Rights Watch, 2014. This is a direct violation of laws made in support of stopping manual scavenging by particular castes of society and at least government bodies must try to escape from making discrimination based on caste.

Macro-level Human Resource Aspects: Informal Workforce and Labour

In the labour and industrial relations context, the meaning of work in informal economies is as significant as in the formal employment (Hayter, 2018). The role of a labour union is also more prominent in the organized sectors. The gradual spread of the marketizations commodified the very nature of labour leading to the rise of inequalities in both subtle and open ways. In one way, inequality has been legitimized under the garb of neoliberalism and capitalism. The growing identifications of labour problems such as unequal wages, long work hours and unhealthy work condition and insecurity called for balancing the workforce. However, the labour problem is both an economic and social problem leading to psychological repercussions. Narayanan (2015) uses NSSO (2011–2012) survey data on employment and unemployment and reported that (85.8%) of the labour force in India comprises informal workers. The division of labour or labour market segmentation is found to have its impact in the labours entry into informal (e.g., domestic and scavenging work) and formal sectors. Many of the workers, as Narayanan (2015) reported does not have free choice to enter into the formal sector, earn less and receive lower returns to their contribution or indigenous skills.

Kaufman (2010) critically approached this problem through rebalancing the institutions of capitalism to bring stability, efficiency, justice and human values.(Rani and Sen (2018) critically appraised the India’s growth rate of 7 per cent, which has not made much impact on the labour working conditions and quality of employment. In the context of informalization of the labour, the increasing trends of hiring of labour temporarily as labour in contract had limited the scope of collective bargaining and labour relations to the formal sectors, which eventually need to be strengthened. Hayter (2018) identified fundamental division between labour and capital where former is the subjugated and regulated by the latter due to the uneven accumulation of needed resources. The labour exploitation shows the imbalance of power relationship where one party controls the social, emotional and economic space of the other party. The domestic workers and non-domestic workers who engage in scavenging tasks forms large informal workforce in an organized sector laden with uncertainties and unhealthy work conditions (see Sarkar, 2015), lacks ownership and considered as unskilled in comparison to the structured formal workforce.

The workers who are mostly women from backward classes were, however, not even seem to come properly under the category of informal workforce (Bairagya, 2012) in various work areas such as agriculture, industries and services. They work as a manual labourers and are self-employed in the household jobs or outside as scavengers leading to the unstructured outcomes such as inequality in the wage, insecurity and casteism. The issues of human resources are just not limited to the work hours and wage discrepancies but other social psychological discriminations cannot be denied such as job loss (Sarkar, 2016) and the socio-economic effects of one’s caste belongingness. The permanent fear of being unemployed, lack of secure employment or alternative employment and missing representative voices or accountability led to reduced bargaining power and choices for these workers (Sarkar, 2016). As Indian society is based on the caste structuration, these workers have to bear the brunt of being in low socio-economic status, women and from lower caste, hence, restricting one’s agency towards social mobility and change. There are also issues of human capitals such as skills one possess; however, these workers’ indigenous skills are diluted in the larger market system impelling them to be deprived in the formal and specified informal domains. These workforces are unrecognized and neglected in the human resource domain and they form one of the large working group in India and other countries where both internal and cross-country migrations are rampant. Bairagya (2012) stated that the levels of education, gender and location may lead to the participation in the informal sector. Though this may be incomplete and debatable as domestic workers and non-domestic scavenging workers are very less educated or they have no education and sometimes in their locality they are deprived of the informal jobs. Lahoti and Swaminathan (2016) noted that there is no clear relationship between economic growth and an enlargement of economic opportunities for women due to some of the factors such as conservatism and patriarchal society where the gender and caste dimensions together were not explained much. The workers’ caste creates high variance in their deprivation process and this aspect is out of the noticeable range of progenitors linking employment growth with the economic growth.

The macro-level human resource issues such as employment growth and enhancement of skills, improving the quality of life and standards of living, education and technology, and migration from rural to the urban area have witnessed enormous research and policy implications. For example, some of the studies in the west even explored the role of the nudge in the policy-making for their better awareness and implementations (e.g., Benartzi et al., 2017). The enhancement of these workers in the above macro-level domains requires a better social movement to come to the societies cognizance and discourses. As these workers are observed to be deprived of their visibility at the policy level dominantly there are the efforts of the NGOs and trade union movement (e.g., Self-employed Women’s Association) engaged in the self-awareness programme about their plight. However, the increasing trend of marketing the labour, the growing capitalist market system and increasing neoliberal values among the middle class weakened the sociability of people to engage in the new working-class movement (also see Amin, 2002).

The domestic labour force is reported to be living in high poverty zone and in most of the cases they do not have a stable home to live, their children have very little chance of better education, poor health conditions and are psychologically vulnerable (see International Labour Conference, 2010). The condition is worse for the sectoral groups such as domestic workers and non-domestic scavenging workers from the lower caste background (Judge, 2014; Mehrotra, 2010; Palriwala & Neetha, 2011; Raksha, 2014). Chigateri, Zordi, and Ghosh (2016) observed that in the traditional Indian society, dominant caste Hindu families rarely allow lower caste Hindus or Muslims to work in their homes. It was noticed that in comparison to 4.2 million domestic workers in 2004 (NSSO, 61st round, 2004–2005), the current number is more than 20 million (see Government of India’s Domestic Workers’ Sector Skills Council).¹

As mentioned in Newslaundry.com

As there is an increase in the number of domestic workers due to urbanization, being from the lower caste background and engaging in a domestic work may lead either to the conclusion that caste affiliation does not have any role in the domestic work or it is somehow managed for the survival. The recent observation in Pune showed the grim picture of caste in the kitchen, thus, denying the weakening of caste structure in the domestic work context (Torgalkar, 2017). Thus, caste reality is still prevalent in different forms and people from the lower caste, such as Dalits has to face constant devaluation of their social identities in the form of social assaults and dehumanization.²

The denial of full humanness to others and reducing them to object, thus, inflicting cruelty and suffering (Haslam, 2006).

The way dehumanized identities are managed in the unstructured domestic worker context is the theme of this article.

The Context of the Study

The article adopts a social identity and self-categorization approach³

This approach explains about the members’ knowledge, emotion and value about their group together with the categorization of their self as ingroup or outgroup (e.g., Tajfel & Turner, 1986).

(Ashforth, Kreiner, Clark, & Fugagte, 2017; Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986) to understand the role of caste identity in the domestic labour market in India. The point of contention is that domestic workers plight added to caste, class and gender did not connect with the active Dalit movement⁴

Socio-political movement for emancipation and social change.

in India in the past. The social class context of these workers struggling for their daily survival, remained aloof and denuded by the everyday hassles, with no active social movement on a larger scale. However, there are instances in some part of India about the collective protest⁵

According to A.K. Roy (2002) report, thousands of unorganized sector workers in Tamil Nadu spread awareness about their plight and pending demands.

of workers in an unorganized sector (e.g., Roy, 2002). There are other organizations which work to address the plight of the domestic workers (e.g., Gharelu Kamgar Union, Jagori) but caste connection did not actively articulate in the form movements and protests. In any form, the protest of workers for livelihood and survival is a social class struggle showing that equality is missing in the social structure. This struggle for the workers right and future equality through social mobility is based on the authentic experience of the workers. It was noticed that members of domestic labour force usually is invisible and are forgotten individuals when it comes to the concrete policy design (Ghosh, 2014).⁶

Second United Nations Public Lecture by Dr Jayati Ghosh on “The invisible workers: Rights, Justice and Dignity for domestic workers” (2014)

These workers carry their labour identity as they engage in the unstructured domestic job. The situational predicament and spontaneous activation of devalued group identity put these workers into a consciousness trap of being destined to do this job. This acceptance of their current social status as devalued with impermeable boundary offer a direct challenge to the collective effort in changing their socio-economic conditions. However, the fragmentation of social movements for different purposes such as labour movement, Dalit movement, gender movement etc., may be shaping the collective consciousness of these workers but a grand approach to offer a holistic social change is not very clear.

The majority of the studies explored the socio-economic conditions of the domestic workers in India have utilized sociological approach (e.g., Barua et al., 2016, Raghuram, 2001). Some of the studies employed the political approach to observe the relation between the context of domestic workers and social movement (e.g., Roy, 2002). The missing picture of intergroup relations and the social psychological account⁷

Here, social psychological account entails the actors’ perspective of domestic workers from social identity and self-categorization perspective.

of domestic workers are less prominent in the interdisciplinary literature. The increasing urbanization has provided employment in terms of manual labours, domestic works and other small-scale jobs. The coming of the manual labourers in the urbane area has led to the migration of their families also to find the household job (see also Acharya, 2018). This shift from the rural to urban context has also changed the social relation and the interaction pattern. The historical taints attached to one’s identities especially those who belong to the lower castes background have resulted in tangible, social and moral outcomes (Ashforth & Kreiner, 1999). So, the arguments (e.g., Ahuja, 2016; Varshney, 2016⁸

Ashutosh Varshney (2016), discussed on “Caste and religion in the era of economic growth” organized by Observer Research Foundation, Delhi.

) about the vanishing castes or dilution of the casteism due to the increasing urbanization and economic wellbeing is simply the myth and denial of the actual reality of castes in India, especially, when it comes to the right of Dalit women. The current work explores two key research questions, 1. In what way caste affiliation intrude into the domestic work market and discriminate the workers? and 2. How domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers from the lower caste background manage their dehumanized identity?

Methodology and Data Analysis

The focus group discussion was done with a sample of six domestic workers⁹

Domestic workers in the present study are those women who work in the household. They do the tasks such as cleaning utensils and floors and sometime cook food in few homes.

(age range: 25–55 years) and seven non-domestic workers¹⁰

Here the use of the term non-domestic scavenging workers is those who does not work as maid in the house but engage in cleaning and scavenging the garbage outside the house.

(age range: 25–50 years) separately in Sonipat district Haryana. The domestic workers and non-domestic scavenging workers who were working in the household and outside, respectively, were approached through snowball sampling method. In the present study, all the participants engaged were women and belonging to lower castes (Harizans¹¹

Workers identified themselves as belonging to Harizan group. This recategorization of untouchables by Gandhi during pre-independence of India was contested by the leaders like Ambedkar who rather asserted calling these oppressed group as Dalits.

as per self-identifications; domestic workers were from Kanarji caste and non-domestic scavenging workers were from Balmiki caste). Domestic workers who were working in flats (homes) have migrated from Madhya Pradesh and were living with their children and spouse. Their husbands were working as labourer and mistri (service person who is engaged in guiding labourers in the construction work) in the building constructions earning around ₹200 per day (mistri) and ₹180 per day (labour). Domestic workers were earning around ₹5,000 per month and their children were studying in the government school of Barrotta village (Sonipat). They themselves have not completed primary level schooling and were working as domestic workers from last nine years approximately. Earlier they were working as a labourer in the building construction. Now they consider working as a domestic worker is better in comparison to working as a labourer. All the domestic workers are living nearby their workplace. On the other hand, non-domestic scavenging workers were from Haryana (with no or very little education). They were engaged in cleaning the floor of the building and scavenging, earning ₹6,000 per month. Some of their spouses were also doing the same job. All the non-domestic scavenging workers were from different villages near Sonipat, Haryana. Separate sets of questions for domestic workers and non-domestic workers were created. The questions were posed to the groups of workers in Hindi and the responses were analysed qualitatively. The spoken responses of the domestic and non-domestic workers were recorded and transcribed with the help of one observer¹²

The researcher is thankful to Monika Srivastava for being present during the focus group interview as an independent observer and going through the data.

both at the time of focus group discussion and at the time data analysis. The agreement was achieved on most of the facets of the obtained outcomes. The approach adopted was inductive and the data were revisited continuously and analysed through qualitative content analysis of the responses.

Result: Domestic Workers and Non-domestic Scavenging Workers

The condition of domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers who are engaged in the mentioned domestic and scavenging tasks is not driven by the free choice to do the job but forced labour with no clear mentioned criteria. The dominant argument as a counter to the forced labour is based on the conscious choice to do the job which is demeaning. However, in the larger socio-economic context in India, domestic working is caste based, if it pertains to cooking and other non-cleaning activities where the concept of purity and impurity is the deriving factor behind the dominant upper caste hiring of these workers (see Kanoi, 2017). The following themes emerged out from the responses of domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers.

Nature of Occupation and Caste

Demeaning Work

The daily routine of these domestic workers starts at 6 am till 1 pm and then in the evening shifts (4 pm to 7 pm). They get up at around 4 am and prepare their children for school and then go for their daily domestic duty. They do not get any leave on Sunday. No one gives them the leave and if the leave is taken there are chances of wage deduction.

Majboori hai to karna padta hai…kaam nahi karenge to khayenge kya?

Iss kaam me jhelna to padta hai

[we are helpless to go for the domestic work...if we will not work what we will eat?]

[we have to suffer in this work] (Domestic workers)

Domestic workers felt discrimination due to subdued status because of the nature of the job as compared to others. They described their work as demeaning where they have to face wage cut, scolding and threats of losing their job. They pointed to the fact of affirming to the employers’ demands if not, may lead to the hiring of someone else. They express their helplessness as:

Hum kahan doondhenge ghar

[where we will search home (to do the domestic work)] (Domestic workers)

Non-domestic scavenging workers are engaged in tasks such as cleaning of the corridors of the building, removing the garbage and filths. When explored, it was found that all the workers were from lower caste group and they do not have a proper place to take rest, eat food and drink water. They face caste-based humiliations and insults both at the levels of job and in the outer society. Since there is no provision for food for these workers, they bring milk from their home so that they may ask the householders/flat owner of the floor which they clean to prepare tea for them. That too is not easy and very much depends upon the mood and availability of the house owners. Sometimes house owners do not respond to the doorbell or avoid eye contact. It was also reported that some house owners give them tea in a disposable cups or the dirty cup or glass avoiding all kind of touch. These are cups or glass used again when tea or water is served.

Alag se cup rakhdenege

Dukh hota hai…jee kharab hota hai

mun to ek hi hai sabka

Jaat hamari aisi hai…insaan to hai…

Kaam karke to kharahe hai

Kisi se to cheen ken nahi kharahe hai

Aadat hogayi hai

[They keep the cup separately

It is sad…don’t feel like taking]

[Everyone’s mind or being is same…

our caste is like this. We are humans

we are surviving due to our work

we are not living our life through wrong deeds]

we are used to it now] (Non-domestic scavenging workers)

Exclusion

The non-domestic scavenging workers felt angry and sad when they confront caste and occupationally based insults from the outgroup for whom they work full time at such a low salary. However, they also felt habituated with this behaviour as it is not new. They described people behaviour as derogatory as they threw the garbage at the time of collection. Some of the workers felt like leaving this job which is actually not possible as they do not have the choice to uplift their position. One worker stated plainly as

Jaati ki wajah se bhed karte hai

[They discriminate because of caste] (Non-domestic scavenging worker)

Non-domestic scavenging workers described their daily forbearance with the exclusionary behaviour, for example,

Iss kaam me aisi-aisi baat sunnani padh jaati hai…

Daant bhi sunni pad hjaati hai..jaise…

Acha kaam nahi karte

Roj roj kaam karte hai. Daant padti hai

Aisa bolte hai ki ghar se bahar jao”

“Ek ek ladies har ek jagah lagi hai

Ek lady kitni safai kar sake hai

[In this work, we have to listen to unbearably the scolding of others, for example,

You don’t do good work]

[We work every day. We get scolding

They say that you go outside the building gate

Every lady worker is placed on different floors

How much one lady can clean] (Non-domestic scavenging worker)

One worker added about the negative non-verbal act of the people around them where they work. Most of them show escaping behaviour when they are confronted face-to-face in the lift of the building or in some other proximal surroundings. For example,

Jaise kuda le ke utarte hai

Wo apne aap hamse duur karlenge

Chuaa-chut hota hai

[when we get down along with the garbage

People distance themselves from us

Untouchability is there] (Non-domestic scavenging workers)

Social Psychological Repercussions

Everyday Humiliations

These workers were conscious that they do not have any respect from the society despite their hardworking and clearing the filths. They acknowledged that they are deprived of the respect both at the societal and at the family level. The only time they feel good while they are at work is when they are together. Otherwise, the overall experience is horrible (bahut bura). They feel that they are earning hard and not dependent upon any other person but still, people do not accept them and discriminate. As one worker spoke:

Hum kisi ke aage haath nahi pasare

[we are not begging in front of others] (Non-domestic scavenging worker)

However, they do not work as a domestic worker because they do not get the job.

Dusre ke ghar me kaam nahi karte hain

Kaam nahi milta hai aur ghar ka kaam karne nahi dete hai

[We don’t work in others house

We don’t get work and household works are not allowed] (Non-domestic scavenging workers)

Non-domestic scavenging workers affirmed that they have faced untouchability though some people talking to them only for their purpose or as some kind self-presentation act as a token for sympathy. These low-waged non-domestic workers pointed that no organization or social group approach them to understand their problem. On being asked about the change of the caste if possible, they affirmed, however, once anyone is ascribed to be of some caste-based social group, it is impossible to reverse it. It was stated that at every point of life they felt sad and humiliated because of untouchability.

Hopelessness and Concealment from Family

Both the domestic workers and non-domestic scavenging workers felt reluctant to share the nature of their job with their children, shows that their job may have a negative effect on the future aspiration of their children. One of the workers stated that

Bacho ko thode hi batayenge ki kisike ghar kaam karte hain

[we will not tell our children that we work in others house] (Domestic worker)

Since their children have enrolled in some primary schools nearby, they desire that their children should study further. However, their circumstances, as they felt, will roll back to their children too. The domestic workers who are from lower caste background face triple burden of casteism, patriarchy and being domestic worker making their lives miserable and hopeless. They deny that they face any discrimination based on their caste, however, they also spoke of caste-based prejudices and associated occupational stigma. The open acceptance is not observed as it happens among the middle class or the upper caste. Sometimes these workers are seen as a threat to one’s personal household matters and there were many instances that they were blamed for any items missing in the home (see John, Toppo, & Mochhary, 2017). This seems like subtle forms of microaggression¹³

“Everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership”. (Rivera & Sue, 2010)

directed towards these workers where their self and being is reduced to the objects of aggression and hostility (see also Sue et al., 2007).¹⁴

In an Asian-American context, Sue et al (2007) discussed about subtle racism directed towards Asian Americans.

On asking about their children, non-domestic scavenging workers were affirmative about the education depending upon the financial circumstances, which they feel as a one of the major barrier. They never tell their children the kind of job they do and their children rarely visit along with them. It was noticed elsewhere, in the context of domestic workers that their children are engaged in some labour work, younger children go for the government schools till the time they are ready to earn as a labourer or any other kind of informal works. These children worldviews are completely different from upper caste children and it was never noticed that they are intermingling or playing or studying along with them in the same spatial-temporal context. Non-domestic scavenging workers, however, also never disclose the nature of job completely in front of their children, for example:

Bacche log gussa honge

Bacchon ko kuch nahi batate

Hum nahi chahte ki bacche Karen

Hum batate hai ki safai kaa kaam karte hai…yeh nahi batate ki kudauthate hai

[Children will be angry

We don’t tell anything to our children

We don’t want that they should do the same

We tell that we do cleaning work…we don’t tell that lift garbage] (Non-domestic scavenging workers)

Negotiating with Dehumanized Work Identity

Denial of the Existence of Untouchability

When explored directly about the caste-based untouchability, it was observed that domestic workers quickly denied its existence. However, when the same questions were asked with non-domestic scavenging workers, they accepted it. For example,

Chuachut (untouchability) hota hi nahi

Bujurg (elderly) aadmi chuuachut karte the…ab nahi hai

[There is nothing like untouchability

Earlier elderly people used to practice untouchability…not now] (Domestic workers)

When explored further, it was noticed that they basically avoid telling their caste, as it may impact their job prospects in the domestic work setting. The meaning of caste affiliation is more pronounced in the outside world. The lower caste domestic workers deny its impact but it has a very intense role in their life. The consciousness of being from lower caste is belittled due to the everyday severity of poverty. The consciousness of being or affiliated from lower caste was seen more among the educated Dalits or Dalits who were active members of some social group movements and have projected their belief in some leaders. One assumption is that domestic workers denied of untouchability is more constructed by their task of doing a domestic work as compared with non-domestic scavenging workers.

Acceptance of Humiliation

In the context of domestic workers, it was expressed that people think they do not have any respect and anyone can override their sense of being. These workers are not engaged in the everyday interaction with their employers except the orders to do the task. They cannot share their experience as no one listens. As dialogue and listening to the daily plights of the worker may give a sense of empowerment which actually limited to their sharing within the group only without any active representative conveying their rights. This led to the silent workforce who bear both the verbal and monitory setbacks from their employer’s side. This is not limited to the employee and employer relationship. Their children suffer due to neglect, violence and prejudice from the other sources of everyday social relationships such as in the nearby grocery shops, by security guards etc. Some of the workers have accepted this daily discrimination because of their present situation as:

Ab humko acha lage na lage, kya fark padta hai

[Whether we like it or not doesn’t matter] (Domestic workers)

Non-concealment of Caste Identity

The discussion with non-domestic scavenging workers showed different approach from the domestic workers. They have no problem in pronouncing their caste if anyone asks, but it also showed that they face immense problem in getting out of their occupation, which is certainly bounded by their caste. They openly tell about their work without concealing their caste, if asked. This is obvious as these kind of jobs are straight linked to one’s caste. It was noticed from their responses that concealing does not work. No other caste is doing this scavenging job. The only change which could be observed is their migration from rural area to the urban area and engaged in similar occupations. As it was noticed that caste of the workers doing scavenging jobs, does not help them acquiring any new skills and restrict them to the impermeable boundary of their caste structure (e.g., Bhangis of Uttar Pradesh; see also Singh & Ziyauddin, 2009). These workers many times urge for the shift of cleaning job to any institution for better salary and respect. The non-domestic workers asserted their caste identity as:

Jaati kabhi nahi chupayenge…Jo de diya

Khul ke bolte hai

Jaati chipane ka kya fayeda

[We never concealed our caste…we have got this]

[We speak openly…Concealing caste is of no use] (Non-domestic scavenging workers)

The domestic workers and non-domestic scavenging workers who were explored about their caste identity revealing or concealment depended on the migratory patterns, nature of job and relation with the people around. In the mainstream and dominant discourses which gets internalized into the self-definition of the domestic workers seems to be denying the caste and its devaluation effect (Bairy, 2012; Gorringe, Jodhka, & Takhar, 2017). However, some of the theorists were of opinion that the perception of devaluation may decrease one’s self-worth and esteem leading them to announce their group affiliation more loudly in order to balance their psychological worth (e.g., Leach et al., 2010). Since domestic workers from the dominant caste, in the upper caste–class families are appointed as a caretaker, it seems that despite their poverty, they have an upper caste cultural capital to get jobs, which are denied unequivocally for the lower caste domestic workers. This was aptly captured by Du Boise (1935) in his conceptualization of psychological wage where White labourers had the psychological advantage over their Black counterpart despite the low pay. Extending the concept of psychological wage in the caste domain, Balagopal (2011) and later, Gorringe et al. (2017) pointed towards the “hidden reservation” which provides social and psychological capital to the upper caste counterparts. In the case of the domestic worker from the lower caste background, the consciousness of being from the humiliated castes is derailed due to lack of proper community healing, leader identifications and unawareness of various social movements.

The importance of the social activity in the form of community work and identity reconstruction acts as a healing workout for the members who derive their respect somehow in whatever work they are currently engaged in. However, in the case of Dalit domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers, it seems to be a self-management of their everyday degradations without much social support. It was observed through the focus group interviews that the only space for the emotional ht sharededness and leisure time was derived from the everyday interaction with the fellow workers, despite, their being overburden with their own family and occupational tasks. This may also work as forum for management of work conflicts and humiliations, the expression of which in the actual work context, get suppressed or pushed into the mode of denials. These denials may be due to lack of other job opportunities and the need of work to sustain their livelihoods. For the upper caste domestic workers, it may be inferred that the consciousness plays a very important part in the affiliation to the caste organization, community networks and identity works which in turn provides social and symbolic capitals (see Jeffrey, 2001). However, this worked contrary to the workers belonging to the lower castes. The occupation of workers in the domestic tasks, in turn, demobilizes their caste-based collective pride¹⁵

Collective pride here taken as a positive group emotion based on one’s identification with group cause, leaders and social movement.

and show a contrary picture, not as a historical social group which is struggling for the emancipation and social change. Their day-to-day struggle with poverty and debasement of identity, disqualify them as an active constructor of new identity. On one side they have the anger which is channelized in a different way as compared to the educated and better socially placed counterpart. Their educated counterpart is more consciousness and actively involved in the struggle for social right. On the other hand, these workers have justified and accepted their social status. Though, the data are limited whether this psychological giving up spreads equally in other social contexts. Their psychological worth gets minimized to the level where they are not the active enough to openly voice their concern for the equality of caste-based identity. They are more a victim of social class circumstances which is well connected to their historical affiliation with the caste hierarchy.

There is also evidence of the development of “oppositional cultural repertoires”, for example, acting upper caste or class, embedded in the workers “hidden transcript” showing the “everyday forms of resistance” (see Barua et al., 2016; Scott, 1985, 1990), but in a limited way. They need to have mobilization for consciousness raising, legal literacy, gender and caste awareness together with the development of skill (Chigateri et al., 2016). The withholding of identity such as caste affiliations and being a domestic worker is difficult to be followed, as it pops up in various cultural practices. It was observed that various workers despite their effort in the domestic job do not get recognition and required self-respect. Their identity as domestic workers present their self in a stigmatized format to the outer world and the concealment does not help them to get out of their lower status categorization.

The demand–supply together with the act of ingratiation develops the meaningful identity for these workers. The context of negotiating the meaning of work identity through various social psychological contracts, overall, does not raise the domestic workers’ social status and sometimes it seems as an act of denial of the larger social reality. The Manual Workers Act (Regulation and Employment and Conditions of Work Act) (1982, 2004) taken cognizant of the plight of the concerned workers by adopting the minimum wage norms (see Neetha, 2008), though the rampant shifting of the rural population and urbanization usually made the situation more unstructured (see Acharya, 2018). Acharya (2018) also focused on the wage differences among skilled and unskilled workers which were noted to have increased but the gap was high between the formal and manual workers showing that latter is in less demand. However, this information may be different in the context of domestic and non-domestic workers as their demand is high but due to its unstructured nature, the wage of these workers are highly comprised (Hanu, 2017). The increasing migration and demand of the workers in the context of continuous urbanization have created a rough and temporary situation where workers have to face continuous exploitation and oppression.

The identity of being domestic workers denotes their permanent structuration of self in the public domain. Though it is also a matter of fact that identities are not stagnant and it changes. However, their nature of the job, lack of education and community and family expectations weaken the whole essence of collective consciousness. As Butler (1988) pointed to the doing, dramatizing and reproducing a historical situation (p. 521), the occupational identity of the workers embodied both their caste and gender. This social reality of the worker contributed immensely in creating a structural level hindrance to social change.

Conclusion: Management of Dehumanized and Powerless Identity

The context of domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers is laden with emotional and socio-economic vulnerability which in turn affects self-esteem and efficacy to survive. The activation of group identity of being a worker together with other identity complexity impels workers to adopt several methods to sustain their self-esteem from the outgroup threats. These workers try to make their social identities more meaningful through the categorical commonality such as identification with their social group and outgroup rejection. It was noticed that many workers display oppositional culture by criticizing their employers and engaging in gossips. Various social movements displayed the rejection of the classism and casteism of their employers and altering their consciousness as not system justifying but assertions of their identity.

However, this was more prominent in case of Dalit and other social class-based movements. At the individual level, some of the researchers (e.g., Cohen, 1991) identified three types of methods to cope with the imposed stigmatization. Accordingly, these workers presented their self through external, internal and cognitive coping. External coping method emphasizes the mobilization of their community members through active affiliation sharededness. This include participating in all the cultural practices, attending their community social functions, staying connected to them and identifying with their group leaders. This provides active social platform to cope with their daily hassles and humiliations, through the negotiation of social boundaries and social distance from one another (Lan, 2003).

The lack of consideration of emotions of these workers as emotionless being by their employers is compensated through in-group affiliation comprising valuing one’s group, having knowledge of the history of humiliations and emotional affiliation with the members of the group (see Tajfel, 1981). Second, the mechanization of the workers by the employers led to internal coping which is an act of identity management when domestic workers see themselves as active member of group fulfiling the needs of their employers which they find difficult or disgusting to perform. Though this act of repetitions of one’s occupation rigidify their perception of being low status with little scope for social mobility. Third coping strategy identifies cognitive alteration, or an act of reframing the situation which threatened their self-esteem. For example, domestic workers may justify their employers’ behaviour as an act of kindness. This is more or less an extension of self to the outgroup and affirming it as it is. Cognitive altering by the workers also corresponds to the re-categorization process and how its meaning gets altered among different social groups, both in gaze of self and in public.

A very workable example is about the work of an organization such as Mujeres Unidasy Activas that both empowers domestic workers and help them to find well-paid job. This example may help in designing new avenues to provide clear help to the migratory workers to get better job. However, this is applicable to the domestic workers but better approach for the non-domestic scavenging workers is missing. In 2010, International Labour Conference, proposed report on the decent work for domestic workers. This may help domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers to gain both self-respectable lives by cracking the caste-based barriers with more sense of the social and political meaning of their existence.

This article argued about the caste of the prospective domestic worker which snatches his/her social class mobility in the domestic labour market and limits their social choice. The argument also presented that casteism is a persistent phenomenon and even if the worker migrates from his/her village to avoid caste-based humiliation and dehumanization, the casteism does not leave the person. Regarding the first argument, social class mobility is one important functional part of social change; however, being domestic and non-domestic scavenging worker is mere appropriation of one’s current social standing. These workers in India are section of the society who are deprived and disadvantaged group both at the economic and at the social level. So, not being included in the domestic labour market due to one’s caste may not bring worth social change. The argument here scores that if the person does not belong to Dalit or lower caste groups, may find some space in the domestic household works. Though the nature of the domestic tasks will be limited to scavenging and not beyond that, for example, cooking food, acting as nanny or babysitters. Further, the gender of these workers perpetuates the violence as reported in various ways in different part of the country (see Neetha, 2009; Srinivasan & Ponnuswam, 2013).

Since these workers belong to lower socio-economic status, their social choices in terms of education, social networking, buying preferences etc., are limited. It is inferred from few studies that people from lower social class background may have more interdependent choices as compared with their high social class employers (e.g., Stephens, Markus, & Townsend, 2007). In case of these workers’ choices are more dominated by the exploitative behaviour of employer where the choices are somewhere limited and regulated. Some of the examples cited (Barua et al., 2016) the narratives of domestic workers where they were given limited choice in sitting, eating and using restrooms. It was quite evident that these workers do not have choice over their rightful space. Regarding the second argument, the hope of the migrant domestic workers to avoid the caste-based humiliations in their native village (see Paik, 2014) was accepted in a mixed manner by the workers. Srinivasan and Ponnuswam (2013) noted that the situational causes may also be leading to the forced labour where women and children are most vulnerable.

The question arises whether “the person from lower caste background has to conceal his/her identity in order to get the domestic job?” It was noted in the responses of the workers that domestic workers take open stance to assert their identity, if explored by their employers. However, telling about one’s caste affiliation has many psychological repercussions such as stigmatization and prejudices. This eventually affects their everyday interactions and with their identity as domestic workers. These workers and their children face everyday discrimination of being avoided in social gathering such as family functions. It is also noted that children of domestic workers become invisible outgroups and does not intermingle with the children of the employer. There social space seems to be different in which playing method, use of objects and artefacts, and everyday discourses are different. Thus, the above two arguments fit into the exclusion of domestic worker from the domestic work itself because of their low status identity defying the utopian meaning of social contact.

The present study came out with three broader themes based on the responses of domestic and non-domestic scavenging workers. These themes are themselves limited to the certain context and future research need to expand the qualitative approach to the large sample. As qualitative data are needed to understand the dehumanization of workers from the lower caste background across the country, future research can also see the nature of work carried on by these workers and how they manage their triple identities separately and an intersection, of being lower caste, women and workers engaged in demeaning jobs. These workers have been noticed through the number of worker movement programmes across the world but their subjective experience has not been carried forward at the better policy levels. The dearth of focused movements and missing role of leadership to carry forward their social movement has not been highlighted in the research. It is important to notice that many time workers’ movement has been going into the number of directions and the research still has not able to see the point of the inter-sectionality of these movements. The idea is how the working class movement offers the grand approach to submerge other embedded social identities is an essential part of understanding the role of domestic and others workers as an important human resource in a better way.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Acharya

(2018).Wages of manual workers in India: A comparison across states and industries. Indian Journal of Labour Economics . Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-018-0104-9

Ahuja

(2016).Why caste matters less in urban India. The Hindu Business line .

Amin

A. T. M. N.

(2002). The informal sector in Asia from the decent work perspective . Geneva: ILO.

Ashforth

B. E.

Kreiner

G. E.

(1999). How can you do it? Dirty work and the challenge of constructing a positive identity. The Academy of Management Review , 24(3), 413–434.

Ashforth

B. E.

Kreiner

G. E.

Clark

M. A.

Fugate

(2017). Congruence work in stigmatized occupations: A managerial lens on employee fit with dirty work. Journal of Organizational Behaviour , 38(8), 1260–1279.

Ashforth

B. E.

Mael

(1989). Social identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review ,14(1), 20–39.

Bairagya

(2012). Employment in India’s informal sector: Size, patterns, growth and determinant. Journal of Asia Pacific Economy , 17(4), 593–615.

Bairy

(2012). Beyond Governmentality: Caste-ing the Brahmin. Seminar, 633. Retrieved http://www.indiaseminar.com/2012/633/633_ramesh_bairy_t_s.htm.

Balagopal

(2011). Ear to the ground: Selected writings on class and caste . New Delhi:Navayana.

10.

Barua

Haukanes

Waldrop

(2016). Maid in India: Negotiating and contesting the boundaries of domestic work. Forum for Development Studies , 43(3), 415–436.

11.

Benartzi

Beshears

Milkman

K. L.

Sunstein

C. R.

Thaler

R.H.

Shankar

Galing

(2017). Should governments invest more in nudging? Psychological Science , 28(8),1041–1055.

12.

Butler

(1988). Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal , 40(4), 519–531.

13.

Chigateri

Zardi

Ghosh

(2016). Locating the processes of policy change in the context of anti-rape and domestic workers’ mobilizations in India . Geneva:UNRISD.

14.

Cohen

(1991). Women of color in white households: Coping strategies of live-in domestic workers. Qualitative Sociology , 14(2), 197–215.

15.

Bois

W. E.

(1935). Black Reconstruction . New York:Harcourt, Brace and Company .

16.

Fine

G. A.

(1996). Justifying work: Occupational rhetorics as resources in restaurant kitchens. Administrative Science Quarterly , 41,90–115.

17.

Ghosh

(March 2014). The invisible workers: Rights, Justice and Dignity for domestic workers . 2nd United Nations Public Lecture, New Delhi.

18.

Gorringe

Jodhka

S. S.

Takhar

O. K.

(2017). Caste: Experiences in South Asia and beyond. Contemporary South Asia , 25(3), 230–237.

19.

Hanu

(2017). Situation of domestic workers in India: What needs to change? The invisible lawyer. Retrieved from http://www.lawyerscollective.org/the-invisible-lawyer/situation-domestic-workers-india-needs-change.

20.

Haslam

(2006).Dehumanization: An Integrative Review. Personality and Social Psychology Review , 10(3), 252–264.

21.

Hayter

(2018). Industrial relations in emerging economies. In S.

Hayter

Lee

(Eds.), Industrial relations in emerging economies: The quest for inclusive development (pp. 1–26). Cheltenham, UK:Edward Elgar Publishing.

22.

Human Rights Watch. (2014 August). Cleaning human waste: “Manual scavenging,” caste, and discrimination in India. Retrieved from http://4dj7dt2ychlw3310xlowzop2.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/india0814_ForUpload.pdf.

23.

International Labour Conference.(2010). Decent work for domestic workers. Report IV (1). Geneva:International Labour Office.

24.

Jeffrey

(2001). A fist is stronger than five fingers: Caste and dominance in rural North India. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers , 26(2), 217–236.

25.

John

Toppo

Mochhary

(2017). Noida’s domestic workers take on the ‘madams’ . Sabrang:Hate Hurts, Harmony Works.

26.

Judge

P. S.

(2014). Mapping social exclusion in India: Caste, religion and borderlands . Delhi:Cambridge University Press.

27.

Kanoi

(2017). Dalit women domestic workers of Jamshedpur speaks: Caste, gender, work conundrum (Unpublished Masters Dissertation).Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Guwahati.

28.

Kaufman

(2010). The theoretical foundation of industrial relations and its implications for labour economics and human resource management. Industrial and Labour Relations Review , 64(1), 74–108.

29.

Lahoti

Swaminathan

(2016). Economic development and women labour force participation in India. Feminist Economics ,22(2) , 168–195.

30.

Lan

(2003).Negotiating social boundaries and private zones: The micropolitics of employing migrant domestic workers. Social Problems ,50(4),525–549.

31.

Leach

C. W.

Mosquera

P. M. R.

Vliek

M. L. W.

Hirt

(2010). Group Devaluation and Group Identification. Journal of Social Issues , 66(3), 535–552.

32.

Mehrotra

S.T.

(2010). A report on domestic workers: Conditions, right and responsibilities (JAGORI) . Delhi:Gignate G-Press.

33.

Ministry of Labor Employment(2015). Order . Retrieved from https://clc.gov.in/clc/clcold/estb/pdf/VDA1.pdf

34.

Narayanan

(2015). Informal employment in India: Voluntary choice or a result of labour market segmentation?. Indian Journal of Labour Economics , 58(1), 119–167.

35.

Neetha

(2008). Regulating domestic work. Economic and Political Weekly , 43(37), 26–28.

36.

Neetha

(2009). Contours of domestic service: Characteristics, work relations and regulation. The Indian Journal of Labour Economics , 52(3), 489–506.

37.

Paik

(2014). Dalit Women’s education in modern India: Double discrimination . New York:Routledge.

38.

Palriwala

Neetha

(2011). The absence of state laws: Domestic workers in India. Canadian Journal of Women and Law , 23, 97–119.

39.

Raghuram

(2001). Caste and gender in the organisation of paid domestic work in India. Work, Employment & Society , 15(3), 607–617.

40.

Raksha

(2014). Excluded and marginalized: Patterns of deprivation of scavengers. In P. S.

Judge

(Ed.), Mapping social exclusion in India: Caste, religion and borderlands (pp.146–163).Delhi:Cambridge University Press.

41.

Rani

Sen

(2018).Labour relations and inclusive growth in India: New forms of voice. In S.

Hayter

Lee

(Eds.), Industrial relations in emerging economies: The quest for inclusive development (pßßp. 27–68). Cheltenham, UK:Edward Elgar Publishing.

42.

Rivera

D. P.

Sue

D. W.

(2010). Microaggression: More than just race. Psychology Today . Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/microaggressions-in-everyday-life/201011/microaggressions-more-just-race

43.

Roy

A. K.

(2002). Voice of the unorganised sector: Workers’ rally in Tamil Nadu. Economic & Political Weekly , 37(40), 4105–4107.

44.

Sarkar

(2015). Decent work deficit in domestic work: A focus on part-time women workers in Delhi. Indian Journal of Labour Economics , 58(3), 503–520.

45.

Scott

(1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance . New Haven:Yale University Press.

46.

Scott

(1990). Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts . New Haven:Yale University Press.

47.

Shah

(2004). Social movements in India . Delhi:SAGE Publications

48.

Singh

R. K.

Ziyauddin (2009). Manual scavenging as social exclusion: A case study. Economic & Political Weekly , XLIV(26), 521–523.

49.

Srinivasan

Ponnuswam

(2013). The domestic workers faced by domestic violence. International Journal of Applied Management Research, 5 . Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2389351.

50.

Stephens

N. M.

Markus

H. R.

Townsend

S. S. M.

(2007). Choice as an act of meaning: The case of social class. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 93(5), 814–830.

51.

Sue

D. W.

Capodilupo

C. M.

Torino

G. C.

Bucceri

G. M.

Holder

A. M. B.

Nadal

K. L.

Esquilin

(2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist , 62(4), 271–286.

52.

Swaminathan

(2015). The formal creation of informality, and therefore, gender injustice: illustrations from India’s social sector. Indian Journal of Labour Economics , 58(1), 23–42.

53.

Tajfel

(1981). Human groups and social identity . Cambridge. UK:Cambridge University Press.

54.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In S.

Worchel

W. G.

Austin

(Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd edition, pp. 7–240). Chicago:Nelson-Hall Publishers.

55.

Torgalkar

(2017. Caste and the kitchen: Domestic workers in Pune allege systematic discrimination. The Wire .

56.

Venkat

(2016April 7). Manual scavenging still a reality. The Hindu (New Delhi). Retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/manual-scavenging-still-a-reality-socioeconomic-caste-census/article7400578.ece

57.

Venkat

Sridevi

Manuel

(2017 March 26). The life of labour: Despite law prohibiting it manual scavenging continues to claim lives .Retrieved from https://thewire.in/labour/manual-scavenging-in-india-2017.

58.

Venkat

Sridevi

Manuel

(2018 February 11). The life of labour: Manual scavenging in Karnataka, flip side of formalising the Indian economy .Retrieved from https://thewire.in/labour/manual-scavenging-in-india-2017