In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

2 Overcoming Elite Resistance Demands for equal rights in Latin America today take place in a formally democratic political context and a broadly neoliberal, or market-oriented, economic context (aside from Cuba). On the one hand, democratization has allowed marginalized groups such as women’s and indigenous movements to organize and demand more rights.1 Indeed, the last two decades have seen impressive gains in women’s and indigenous rights, especially on the legal level, even if proactive enforcement has been slower to come. On the other hand, as discussed in chapter 1, structural economic changes and neoliberal policies have changed the composition of the labor force. The informal sector has become more dominant, encompassing almost half of the economically active population in the region, with implications for the political power of organized labor (Barrett 2001; Carnes 2008; Centeno and Portes 2006; Cook 2007; Portes and Hoffmann 2003; Roberts 2002). These changes have taken place within the context of deep class differences and highly unequal opportunities and outcomes , despite some recent improvements in both inequality and poverty (see Blofield 2011a, 2011d; CEPAL 2009; López-Calva and Lustig 2010), and within the context of the shift to the left.2 These socioeconomic and political contexts pose both opportunities and constraints for disadvantaged groups. The central question here is whether and how the political system addresses the interests of groups that are multiply disadvantaged . Domestic workers exemplify such a group, as their specific shared identity is through the nature of their labor, which is poorly remunerated; in addition, virtually all are women and many are from ethnic or visible minorities that have been historically underrepresented and discriminated against. While domestic workers’ organizations have demanded social attention and equal labor rights in many countries for decades, political actors in the region have been extremely reluctant to respond to these demands. Increasing the 40 care work and class position and rights of domestic workers involves a decline in the position of employers, and such a change goes against the interests of political elites themselves and their better-organized middle- and upper-class constituents. Moreover , the political participation of many legislators, especially female legislators given traditional gender roles, is based on having domestic workers at home. The workers, then, are not represented in Congress or in executive agencies, while their employers are. Hence, there is an inherent conflict of interest among politicians in extending more rights to the workers, and the political system is, as a point of departure, unlikely to be responsive to the concerns of domestic workers. In addition, as discussed in chapter 1, women’s work within the household—whether paid or unpaid—has not historically been seen by elites or enshrined in the labor codes as “real work” deserving of the same rights as other forms of labor. Finally, racism among some elites may make them less likely to view domestic workers who are darker skinned or from different ethnic groups as their social equals and deserving of the same rights. This may be exacerbated if some of these workers are immigrants. Resistance to extending rights—whether in the form of active opposition or indifference—is likely to be broad and steadfast, and most political elites will tend to either ignore such concerns or table legislative bills addressing them. Even ostensible allies such as feminists and labor unions are likely to focus on the interests of their more advantaged, organized members first (Strolovitch 2006). Therefore, it is important to ask how such issues make it onto the political agenda and get passed, and when they do not achieve success, why. Put differently, when do domestic workers’ interests win over those of their more powerful employers? While elite resistance to change can explain much of the overall lack of reform in the region to date, I argue that mobilization by domestic workers’ organizations, a network of social and political allies, and political “windows of opportunity,” mostly linked to left-wing executive and legislative allies, can result in legal reform. There is no single path to reform; smaller, piecemeal reforms tend to require less mobilization and pressure than equal rights reform that includes work hours. The key struggle for advocates has been to make the issue visible and to get it onto the political agenda. Once the issue gets to a plenary debate and goes up for a vote, it is very likely to be approved. With executive support, which to date has rarely been forthcoming, agenda setting and reform can be...

Share