Suchergebnisse

ResumenA partir de un trabajo de campo en el estado malayo de Penang, los autores contribuyen a comprender la no declaración y la subestimación del trabajo informal femenino en las encuestas de población activa. Señalan los sesgos derivados de los métodos de recopilación de datos y, partiendo del concepto de agencia, demuestran que las propias mujeres actúan por motivos estratégicos: declarándose como amas de casa y considerando sus actividades remunerativas como prolongación de sus tareas domésticas evitan enfrentarse a la norma social de género preservando al mismo tiempo sus intereses en lo que respecta al trabajo fuera del hogar.

RésuméEn général, la collecte des données sur l'activité des femmes mène souvent à une sous‐déclaration et à une sous‐estimation de leur travail. Partant d'un travail de terrain dans l'Etat de Penang, en Malaisie, les auteurs contribuent à la théorisation de la sous‐déclaration des activités rémunérées des femmes dans les enquêtes officielles: si le travail des femmes est souvent dévalorisé, sa sous‐déclaration peut aussi découler de choix stratégiques et pragmatiques. En se déclarant comme femmes au foyer, elles évitent de contester les normes relatives aux rôles des sexes tout en préservant leurs intérêts par la poursuite d'un travail à l'extérieur du ménage.

Common methods to collect data on women's labour force participation frequently result in under‐reporting and under‐recording of their work. Based on fieldwork in Malaysia's Penang state, this article presents some of the difficulties associated with recording women's informal work. It contributes to theorization on the under‐reporting of women's remunerative activities in official surveys by arguing that while women's work is often devalued, under‐reporting may also be the result of women making strategic and pragmatic choices. By reporting themselves as "housewives", for example, they may avoid questioning their society's gendered norms while securing their own interests in work outside the home.

Through examining the experiences of Burmese migrant workers in Malaysia this paper analyses the complicated relationship between legal status and protection from violence and abuse. While legal status has often been promoted as a means to protect migrants, we suggest that legal status is actually pursued only at particular moments and on the basis of particular cost/benefit calculations made by migrants. Even as legal status offers some protection from state authorities, the linkage between legal status and employer sponsorship means that it also binds migrants to specific employers. Crucial to these calculations too is the cost of legal status for both migrants and employers, imbuing the relationship with financial risk on both sides and turning legal status into an expensive "commodity". Therefore, while migrant labour is often constructed as being "cheap", our study reveals that a key factor in the exploitation of migrants is that they are in fact so expensive to hire. Thus, as we argue here, it is important to look beyond a narrow focus on legal status and consider the basis on which such status is extended - especially as such status is increasingly predicated on a sponsoring employer and significant financial investments.