Psychological Harrassment at Work in Domestic Workers

Abstract

Introduction. For decades, domestic work has been seen as the pathway to women’s inclusion in the workforce. Women in the labor sector often involves poor working conditions, abuse and exploitation in order to reinforce the subordinate position which historically has been assigned to women. Domestic employment, because of its frequent division based on gender, tends to have more issues of exclusion, and it perpuates dependency relationships between workers and employers (Aguilar, 2010). Objective. The objective of this study is to describe behavior of psychological harassment as it is perceived by domestic workers in San Juan Bautista Tuxtepec, Oaxaca. In addition, the study attempts to determine whether socio-emographic variables such as age, education level, marital status, number of children, and labor variables like number of days worked, hours of daily service and seniority are conditions that increase one’s risk of suffering psychological harassment. Method. The design used in this study was cross-sectional, quantitative, descriptive, exploratory and used intentional sampling. The participants consisted of 110 domestic workers with an average age of 33.61. A Cisneros Barometer adaptation (Figaldo and Piñuel, 2004) was administered. Results. The results showed a high incidence of psychological harassment, especially in the “profesional contempt isolation” dimension (n=108). Regarding the socio-demographic variables, significant differences were found in professional discredit, rejection and violation of privacy, degradation andnone-isolation with respect to the marital status of participants. The results were F(107,2)=6.28; p>0.001, F(107,2)=7.10; p>0.001, F(107,2)=3.32; p>0.05 y F(107,2)=3.14; p>0.05, respectively. Regarding the labor variables, there were significant differences in professional discredit, rejection and violation of privacy, degradation and none- solation with labor. Those results were F(107,2)=2.95; p>0.05, F(107,2)=3.01; p>0.05, F(107,2)=4.85; p>0.05 y F(107,2)=2.73; p>0.05, respectively. Discussion. This study is consistent with the literature which confirms that employee discrimination and mistreatment is widespread in this sector. However, it is difficult to estimate the prevalence of such behavior due to the lack of methods for reporting it. The private nature of the work, the lack of legal protections, and restrictions on freedom of movement of domestic workers all present obstacles to reporting workplace abuse.