LABOUR, Capital and Society 44:1 (2011)
Organizing Labour in the Informal Economy:
Institutional Forms & Relationships
Christine Bonner (1) and Dave Spooner (2)
Abstract
A multitude of grassroots organizational forms and
approaches have emerged in response to challenges and limitations
faced by informal workers and their organizations, reflecting
contextual and sector specific factors. This article examines the
relationships between informal workers’ organizations, trade unions
and NGOs, thereby demonstrating the importance of relationship
building to increase visibility, influence and institutional power.
Trade unions are particularly important and the article points
to signs of a shift within the international trade union movement
towards more supportive policy and practice. Also evident are
national and international structures indicating a need to scale up
into larger organizations to engage governments and to make an
impact on global developments affecting informal workers’ lives.
In looking at these organizational forms the article concludes that
there is no one organizational form or strategy that fits all, but that
a flexible, multi faceted approach to organizing is required.
Introduction
Over the past twenty years informal workers, especially
in the South, have become more organized, visible and vocal in
demanding rights, better conditions and livelihoods. Alongside this
the international trade union movement, NGOs and development
agencies have been paying more attention to the needs of informal
workers. In particular the “Resolution Concerning Decent Work
on the Informal Economy” adopted at the International Labour
Conference (ILC) in 2002 (ILO, 2002a) has increased awareness of
the need to organize informal workers and spurred policy changes
in the international trade union movement. However, whilst most
would agree that organization is necessary there is not yet consensus
amongst trade unionists nor amongst researchers and commentators
on the feasibility or desirability of organizing informal workers into
trade unions, or indeed what other possible organizational forms,
strategies and relationships would best enable informal workers
to achieve voice and visibility and the power to change their lives
(Lindell, 2010).
This article examines some of the diverse forms of organization in the informal economy and the relationships being
built amongst informal worker organizations themselves, and with
trade unions, other worker and non-governmental organizations
(NGO). From this it suggests that there is no single appropriate
organizational form, approach or strategy, but rather that a range
of organizational forms and a multi-faceted approach is required.
It further suggests that given the challenges and limitations faced
by informal workers and their organizations, it is important that
they gain the support of, and form strategic and tactical alliances
with, a range of organizations in order to increase their visibility
and voice. Trade unions are key actors in this, together with NGOs
of various kinds. Within this framework it is crucial that informal
workers are agents rather than subjects; to move from dependency
to independence and to speak for themselves through their elected
representatives. This requires the development of membershipbased
organizations (MBO) which are “those in which the members
elect their leaders and which operate on democratic principles that
hold their elected officers accountable to the general membership”.
(Chen et al, 2007: 4).
The challenges and limitations informal workers’
organizations face are very real. Some are common across sector
and country whilst others are more sector-specific. Some challenges
result from the gender composition and segmentation of the informal
workforce where women form the bulk of those employed in sectors
with the least income, security and status (ILO, 2002b). Others relate
to exclusion from the legal frameworks protecting formal workersde
jure or de facto-around which they can organize, or, conversely,
over-regulation and consequent harassment by authorities. Selfemployed
workers in particular are excluded from protection by
virtue of their lack of an employment relationship, and the perception
that they are not workers. Workplaces are usually unconventional,
being scattered and individualised and lacking a central point or
collective employer, around which organization can coalesce, or
they are difficult to reach being far flung or mobile. Many informal
workers have multiple or seasonal jobs whilst others are migrant
workers working under the radar. A majority are poor and focused
on survival. Their organizations struggle to collect membership dues
and they lack the financial resources to sustain effective organization.
It is not surprising that many trade unions are reluctant to become
involved in directly organizing informal workers having neither the
experience nor resources required to do so.
This article is based on the experiences and writings of
the authors resulting from their work with the Women in Informal
Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO) network.
This includes extensive interaction with organizations of informal
workers at grassroots meetings, conferences and workshops, and
reading of reports, documents, correspondence of, and about, such
organizations, especially those of street and market vendors, homebased
workers, domestic workers and waste pickers, i.e. workers
who extract and sell recyclable materials from waste and who are
called by many different names, such as rag–pickers, reclaimers,
recyclers etc. A debate about naming is ongoing amongst the workers
themselves (Samson, 2009). These direct sources are supplemented
by information and reports from the International Labour
Organization (ILO), the International Trade Union Confederation
(ITUC) and global union federations, as well as academic writers
and commentators in the field.
The article firstly gives an overview of different organizational
forms in the informal economy from local through to international,
focusing on two illustrative examples-domestic workers and
waste pickers. It then analyses the relationships between informal
worker organizations and other worker and non-governmental
organizations, drawing out the importance of alliance-building and
support. Despite misgivings by some, many within the international
trade union movement feel strongly that the trade union movement
should and can promote and practically support organizing informal
workers. We examine this more closely, looking at the background,
and recent developments in support of informal workers within the
international trade union movement, drawing on our interaction with,
and recent documents of, trade unions and global union federations
organizing, supporting or discussing organizing informal workers.
Institutional Forms in the Informal Economy
Informal workers organize in varied forms and in ways
appropriate to their circumstances. Their organizations are growing
in number and scale despite the limitations they face. Drawing
especially on the authors’ personal engagements with informal
economy worker organizations and their recording of organizational
forms, as well as writings of others active in the field, we provide
an overview of the different organizational forms within the
informal economy, with a closer look at the situation in two sectors:
domestic workers and waste pickers. This provides a background
for developing an understanding of the organizational forms and
relationships that are most likely to lead to effective and sustained
organizations of informal workers.
How workers choose to organize, the detailed organizational
form, structure and characteristics results from a complex mixture
of contextual factors: political, economic, legal, organizational and
sector, as well as inside and outside agency. Pat Horn, International
Coordinator of StreetNet International, suggests that the political
environment is key to an understanding of the way in which the
structure, perspectives, characteristics and organizational forms are
determined in particular countries:
Where there have been national liberation struggles,
the organisation of informal workers will often adopt
perspectives and characteristics arising from those
struggles (e.g. the Gandhian perspective of SEWA; the
socialist perspective of many informal economy workers’
associations in post-colonial African countries; the social
movement perspective of waste pickers’ cooperative
movements in Latin American countries with active
anti-neo-liberal popular struggles) and corresponding
organisational forms. (Horn, 2008:45)
With informal employment making up more than 60 per cent
of women’s employment (ILO, 2002a), and women’s location in the
most precarious segments of the informal economy, gender is another
important determinant. A significant number of informal workers’
organizations are led by women. Some women workers have chosen
to organize as women only. They may begin by organizing around
their interests as women and then as workers, or may consciously
focus on women as workers from the start, as is the case of the
Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) in India (Gallin and
Horn, 2005) or the waste pickers cooperative, Coopcarmo, in Brazil
(Samson, 2009). In mixed organizations patriarchy is the norm and
women struggle to assert their right to equality as members and
leaders. The predominance of men in the most powerful leadership
positions in the mainstream trade union movement at all levels is
persistent, despite positive action taken to promote gender equality
and improve representation of women in leadership positions and
negotiating teams. This is attributed to a number of interlocking
factors such as prejudice, lack of confidence on the part of women,
the burden of domestic chores, the subordinate position of women in
the labour force as well as the masculine culture and rigid practices
of trade unions (ILO and ITUC 2000; ITUC 2009; ETUC 2011).
This contributes to male centred agendas giving lower priority to
issues and perspectives of particular importance to women.
Local and national organizations
Informal workers’ organizations are diverse. Many are
MBOs such as unions, associations, cooperatives and self-help
groups. Others are hybrid or mixed formations that lie somewhere
between an MBO and an NGO. They are diverse in terms of both
size and coverage, ranging from small, fragile local organizations,
to national federations and alliances, to regional and international
networks and federations – both inside and outside the formal trade
union movement.
Inside the union movement there are unions whose
members consist only of informal workers as well as unions that
have membership of both formal and informal workers. Some were
created by informal workers themselves and others by formal unions
reaching out to organize informal workers. Some were conceived
and supported by external actors such as women’s organizations,
migrant workers’ organizations and NGOs. There are also many
forms of association, outside of the union movement by choice, lack
of information or opportunity, or because of legal restrictions. Many
groups of self-employed workers form cooperatives to collectively
buy, sell or produce their goods or to provide a service to their
members. Some are registered but many operate informally or
may have the legal status of an association or society but operate
as cooperatives. There are many other forms of membership-based
organization, sometimes independent and sometimes interlinked
with NGOs, community based organizations (CBO) or faith based
organizations, which often combine the features and strategies of
both MBOs and NGOs in different mixes. Some are short lived,
emerging or reviving in response to an immediate problem, but
fading away when the issue is resolved or subsides while others
have sustained themselves against all odds.
Increasingly we see informal workers’ organizations uniting
at city or national levels to engage with authorities on policy,
regulatory change, and to campaign more effectively, achieving
successful outcomes from time to time. These are generally sector
specific national alliances such as the Kenyan National Alliance
of Street Vendors and Informal Traders (KENASVIT) (primarily
associations and city alliances) or the city wide alliance Asociación
de Recicladores de Bogotá (ARB). Pune India provides a less
common example of cross sector organizing. Trade unions of street
vendors, waste pickers, domestic workers, head-loaders, construction
workers, and drivers of auto-rickshaws and motor tricycle vehicles
have formed a city-wide Manual Labourers’ Association that is
de facto recognised by the municipal authorities as the bargaining
counterpart for issues related to the informal economy.
Aside from organizing challenges common to informal
workers’ organizations, the different sectors of the informal
economy face sector-specific problems and organizational histories.
These have given rise to a tendency towards different forms of
organization and differing strategies emerging most strongly. Here
we examine the situation within two sectors: domestic workers and
waste pickers.
Domestic workers’ organizing challenges centre on the
lack of recognition of and respect for domestic workers as valuable
workers. This is compounded by gender discrimination, low wages,
long hours, isolation and control by employers. These challenges
have been well documented (ILO, 2010a; IRENE and IUF, 2008;
ITUC, 2010a). Where there is coverage under labour law, it is either
inferior to that of other workers or in most cases largely ignored and
unenforced (ILO, 2010 a).
In response, a range of organizational forms have emerged,
primarily focused on the struggle of domestic workers for worker
and human rights. Domestic workers have a long history of
organizing into trade unions in many countries but these have often
failed to sustain themselves or to grow substantially, whether as selforganized
domestic workers’ unions or as a sector within a formal
service sector union. Migration has also become an increasingly
important factor.
In recent years there has been an upsurge in organizing,
propelled by labour market changes such as the increased numbers of
migrant domestic workers filling gaps in care provision (ITUC, 2010a;
ETUC, 2005); public awareness of the situation of domestic workers
through NGO effort and through new mobilizing opportunities such as
the tripartite negotiations for an ILO Convention on Domestic Work
in 2010 and 2011. Migrant women domestic workers are one of the
newest groups to engage in organizing activities. This organisation
usually begins on the basis of their shared status as migrant women
and later progresses to encompass their status as workers, through
NGOs or into varying community based groups. Another common
base for organizing is through the formation of faith based groups,
which in the initial stages can provide cover for domestic workers
to meet with the approval of their employer. These different groups
develop a form of organization which may be membership-based,
but without a formal membership mechanism and dues collection
system, or they may be more akin to a community based, multipurpose
organization or a non-worker controlled NGO. They provide
a safe place where domestic workers can share experiences, develop
confidence and leadership skills and act as a launching-pad for
transitioning to a fully-fledged union or MBO and to the formation of
wider alliances or federations. Cooperatives do not feature strongly
amongst domestic workers but with the increasing presence of
exploitative recruitment and placement agencies, domestic workers’
cooperatives are beginning to emerge as placement services with a
difference, having democratic structures and a political and social
purpose (Bonner, 2010).
There are differences between regions and countries. Latin
America probably has the most well established unions, especially
in Brazil with thirty-five unions forming the National Federation
of Domestic Workers (FENATRAD), with supportive NGOs in
many countries. In Africa, domestic workers are more likely to
be organized into mixed sector unions. Membership has tended to
be very small, unstable, financially unviable and neglected by the
predominantly male union leadership. The recent upsurge in interest
in organizing domestic workers has been somewhat succesful.
For example, the Kenya Union of Domestic, Hotel, Education
Institutions, Hospitals and Allied Workers’ Union (KUDHEIHA),
organized over 10,500 domestic workers in the space of a year
with the support of the International Union of Food, Agricultural,
Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers (IUF) and
the Solidarity Center, a non-profit organization, linked to the AFL-CIO
(United States National Centre), that assists workers around
the world to build democratic and independent unions. Another
important factor in this success was the strong support given by
the union general secretary (IDWN, 2009). In Asia, the organizing
efforts of domestic workers has developed rapidly over the past few
years, into unions or through NGOs and faith based movements.
Increasing migration between Asian countries has seen the growth
of unions of domestic workers organizing according to nationality,
especially in Hong Kong. In Europe there are established unions of
domestic workers or unions with a domestic workers’ sector, which
have formal collective bargaining agreements, as well as a growing
number of migrant workers’ groups. In the United States the upsurge
has been amongst migrant domestic workers organizing as migrant
women and workers. One limitation on unionization is that the
National Labor Relations Act does not apply to domestic workers,
effectively preventing them from forming or making the transition
to a trade union (ITUC, 2010c).
An example from the USA of a “new” organizational
form and strategy is provided by the Mujeres Unidas Y Activas
(MUA) or Women United and Active, in California. Arising out
of community organizing, it was formed by immigrant women to
provide a support group where they could share experiences and
become empowered to collectively fight for immigrant, women and
workers’ rights. Women who approach the organization for support
are encouraged to become members and attend weekly meetings.
Later they are invited to attend MUA training programmes. MUA’s
strategies combine solidarity activities, mobilization, advocacy,
legal assistance, training and leadership development. MUA was
a founder member of the National Domestic Workers’ Alliance
(NDWA), formed in 2007. The aim in forming the Alliance was to
collectively bring public attention to the plight of domestic workers;
to bring respect and recognition; improve workplace conditions and
consolidate the voice and power of domestic workers as a workforce.
The benefits of national organizing are summarised by organizers of
alliance members:
“The coming together of these organizations has
exponentially increased the capacity, visibility and
influence of domestic workers as a sector in the social
justice movement……… In addition, other sectors,
including the labour movement, are beginning to recognize
the strategic role this workforce plays in rebuilding the
labour movement.” (Mercado and Poo, 2009: 4).
Similarly, the organizing efforts of waste pickers have
become progressively noteworthy. Significant membership-based
organizations of waste pickers are concentrated in Latin America
and in India. Waste pickers have different challenges from those
of domestic workers, although the issues of recognition, respect
and valuing of their work are similar. Being self-employed means
they fall entirely outside of labour protection and face unfriendly
spatial, environmental, health and other city regulations, with
consequent harassment. They also face increasing competition
from big business through privatization, and displacement by
new technologies such as incineration. Their immediate concerns
and strategic focus is on the struggle for the right to a livelihood
through access to recyclable materials. Additionally, they seek to
increase income through collective selling and avoiding the use of
middlemen. However, they are also involved in the bigger struggles
against privatization, incineration and for integration into municipal
solid waste management systems. Therefore cooperatives, especially
in Latin America are the dominant form of organization at the base,
where they have had some success in gaining recognition by their
respective municipalities, and have agreements regarding access to
recyclables, rent free sorting, compressing and baling facilities. In
India there is greater variety of organizational forms such as unions
of waste pickers, waste pickers as a sector within an informal union,
cooperatives as part of an integrated union-cooperative strategy,
self–help groups, groups formed by welfare or environmental justice
NGOs and even worker controlled companies (Samson, 2009). In
the cities of Asia and Africa waste pickers can be found on dumps
and streets but little is documented about the state of organizing.
Initial research commissioned by WIEGO to identify organizations
of waste pickers in four Kenyan cities located 350 waste picker
groups. However these were mainly small, self-help community
based groups and projects rather than well-established, independent
MBOs (Kuria and Muasya, 2010). Despite this there are nascent
national networks being formed in both South Africa and Kenya
which may aid in the development of more grounded MBOs and
136
support for engagement with municipalities.
Like domestic workers waste pickers have seen the need to
scale up through federating and forming national associations, and
international alliances or networks. Colombia, Brazil, Peru, Chile,
Bolivia and Ecuador all have national alliances or associations
that focus on struggles for policy and legislative change but also
have a social and political role. For example, Brazil has a national
movement, the Movimento Nacional do Catadores de Materiais
Recicláveis (MNCR) or National Movement of Collectors of
Recyclable Materials, that has been particularly successful in
obtaining policy and legislative changes assisted by the support of
the Workers’ Party and of (ex) President Lula. The Movement is
composed of MBOs only and is fiercely committed to leadership by
waste pickers and non-hierarchical forms of organization. It does
however, work with, and have the support of NGOs. India too has
a national alliance, Alliance of Indian Waste pickers (AIW), made
up of thirty five organizations, both membership-based and NGOs,
and although still informally organized it has already made its
presence felt through putting demands forward to ministries, with
some success, and backing this up with collective demonstrations
and publicity.
These examples illustrate how a range of factors differentially
affect the organizational form and strategy within sectors; that no
one type of organization fits all circumstances and can best address
local issues and goals of increased visibility, voice and power to
effect change. Gender is an important factor in the organizational
form chosen by domestic workers (migrant and religious groups) as
is their legal status in most cases as employees (trade unions). For
waste pickers their status as self-employed inclines them towards
cooperatives, and in Brazil the formation of a federated structure
explicitly named “Movement” reflects their social movement
political and organizational history and their identity as political as
well as economic actors. Both groups find a need to scale up, to
increase their visibility and tackle issues at a national as well as
local level. The organizing activities of domestic workers and waste
pickers have extended to include significant developments at the
international level.
International organizing
International organizing is playing an increasingly important
137
role for both waste pickers and domestic workers. In November 2006,
NGOs initiated and supported an international conference called
“Respect and Rights: Protection for domestic workers!”, which
was held in the Netherlands under the auspices of the Netherlands
National Trade Union Federation (FNV). This led to the formation
of the International Domestic Worker Network (IDWN) with its
organizational base in the IUF, and with WIEGO providing technical,
fund raising and personnel support. It has an active international
steering committee composed of women representatives from
domestic workers’ unions and networks from Asia, Africa, Latin
America, USA and the Caribbean. This developing Network has
focused on mobilizing around the campaign for the ILO Domestic
Workers Convention (C189), which was adopted at the International
Labour Conference (ILC) in June 2011. The ILO Convention
campaign has provided an opportunity to garner funds and support
from a range of people and organizations. The ILO Convention also
serves to raise the visibility of domestic workers globally, as well as
developing women leaders who can speak and negotiate effectively
in international forums. Following the adoption of the Convention,
the Network is turning its attention to formalizing its constitution
and structures as a membership-based global organization.
Waste pickers on the other hand, coming from different
organizing traditions, are grappling with deciding what kind of
global organization they want and how to implement it. At the
regional level, waste picker organizations from four countries took
the first steps towards forming a Latin American Waste Picker
Network (Red Latinoamericana de Reciclardores (REDLACRE)
in 2005. The Network now has representation from 12 countries
including recently from the Caribbean. Although there is variety in
the composition of national organizations within the Network, all
are MBOs, with NGOs strictly playing a technical support role. The
focus is on sharing of information and experiences to learn from each
other on organizational and technical issues, and solidarity actions.
On the global level, the first World Congress in 2008, “Waste pickers
without Frontiers” (WIEGO: 2008), strengthened their worldwide
connections, extending into Africa and Asia, and producing several
international meetings to plan collective activity and discuss
global institutional structure. One important global activity is the
participation by waste pickers (and their allies) in the United Nations
Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC) negotiations. This forum
138
has allowed waste pickers to elevate their international visibility
and advocate for alternative funding mechanisms in support of just
solutions to climate change (Inclusive Cities, n.d.).
Home-based workers as well as street and market vendors
are also organizing internationally. Home-based workers have
formed two sub-regional networks, HomeNet South Asia, and
HomeNet South East Asia, with the possibility of moving towards
a global network over the next few years. National HomeNets are
a mix of MBOs and NGOs. Street and market vendors have the
best established international alliance, StreetNet International, with
membership restricted to MBOs, active democratic governance
structures and with a quota system to ensure gender equality in its
leadership. The model adopted is akin to an international union
federation (StreetNet International, n.d).
In a WIEGO workshop held in Bangkok on March 2011,
MBO representatives from different sectors of the informal
economy expressed common views on the role and advantages of
international organizing: it provides recognition, increases visibility,
allows informal workers through their representatives to influence
international policy and thus national policy, promotes information
exchange, learning and solidarity across the sector globally and
can provide practical support to national organizations by assisting
with fund raising, access to international supportive groups such as
WIEGO, and education and capacity building (Mitullah, 2010).
This range of institutional forms in the given sector examples
demonstrates that informal workers are adopting multi-faceted and
multi-scale approaches to organizing based on their circumstances and
needs. At the base key strategic issues influencing form are whether
their priority is livelihood development, where cooperatives are a
likely choice, or a struggle for rights with unions and associations
being the dominant forms. In reality many organizations of informal
workers integrate both forms. How, where and when organizations
develop is deeply influenced by legal, political, social factors
as well as sector specific issues. At an international level there is
commonality of purpose but differences of form and development
pace, influenced by international opportunities, cultural, social and
gender influences. There is a commonly shared strong sense that
informal workers should represent themselves and thus that MBOs
are the desired institutional form. Finally, the type of supportive
relationships and alliances they build are important in determining
139
organizational form and in particular organizational success and
sustainability. In the next section we look at this more closely.
Relationships between Institutional Forms
Many organizations of informal workers are small and
fragile, still developing or newly constituted. Falling outside of the
mainstream industrial relations systems or policy setting forums they
have limited credibility with, and access to, those in power. MBOs
have found a need to form relationships between themselves such as
between cooperatives and unions as well as differing relationships
or alliances with other organizations to access resources, increase
their visibility, run successful campaigns and gain representative
voice and influence.
Trade Unions and Informal Worker Cooperatives
With the growth of the informal economy, organizations are
increasingly experiencing the need to straddle the realms of both
union and cooperative. SEWA for example uses a twin strategy of
“struggle” and “development”. It is a trade union (struggle for rights)
yet has over 100 cooperatives run by its members combined into
a federation of cooperatives (livelihood development). Similarly,
KKPKP (Trade Union of Waste pickers, India), with 6,000 mainly
women members, formed a savings and credit cooperative, scrap
shop cooperatives to sell recyclable materials at a better price and a
solid waste doorstep collection cooperative to integrate waste pickers
into the local solid waste management system (Samson, 2009).
Domestic workers’ unions are beginning to set up cooperatives
to act as a collective rather than commercial placement agency,
provide training and negotiate better wages. In Trinidad and Tobago
the National Union of Domestic Employees (NUDE) has recently
formed a service workers’ cooperative and has negotiated higher
pay. This has helped increase the membership of the union.
The view that trade unions and cooperatives need to work
together to provide for the dual needs of informal, self-employed
workers –livelihoods and rights- is recognised at an international
level. The ILO initiated a programme, SYNDICOOP, jointly
designed and implemented by the ILO, International Confederation
of Free Trade unions (ICFTU) (now ITUC) and the International
Cooperative Alliance (ICA). They ran pilots in East and South
Africa, 2004-2006. The aim was to improve the working and
140
living conditions of unprotected informal economy workers in
selected African countries, through pilot projects aimed at creating
decent employment and income. This was to be achieved through
strengthening the capacity of national and local level trade unions
and cooperative organizations to work together constructively in
the informal economy. The project was hailed as a success, but has
not been widely replicated as was the plan (ILO, 2005). There is,
however a growing interest by those organizing in the informal
economy to promote coops as a democratic organizational form that
can meet the economic needs of self-employed informal workers,
whilst at the same time linking with, or being part of the union
movement, to provide a vehicle to achieve rights and protections.
Informal Worker Organizations and Trade Unions
In a growing number of countries, national trade union centres
(also known as federations) play an important role in organizing and
representing informal economy workers both directly and indirectly.
All across the African continent there are numerous examples of
this. National centres have established new unions or associations
(Angola, Mozambique), supported and encouraged affiliated unions
to organize informal workers (Ghana, Nigeria), built alliances with
non-union associations of informal workers (Swaziland, Zambia,
Zimbabwe). In the case of Zambia and Zimbabwe national associations
of informal worker have associate membership of the trade union
national centres, or have a memorandum of understanding, which
entitles them to representatives at union meetings, and to participate
in discussions, but with limited constitutional democratic rights.
This close cooperation between national union centres and
informal workers’ organizations significantly enhances informal
workers’ effectiveness in representation, defence of workers’ rights,
and international visibility and support including recognition by
local and national governments; a means for informal workers to
exercise their rights in respect of ILO Convention 87 (Freedom
of Association) and Convention 98 (the right to organize and
bargain collectively); and a means for informal workers to affiliate
internationally and enjoy international solidarity, amongst others
(Horn, 2008). With the support of national and international trade
union organizations informal workers have been able to influence
negotiations on international standards at the ILO and where informal
workers’ organizations and unions work together on campaigns
141
and solidarity activities their effectiveness is enhanced, such as in
StreetNet International’s ‘World Class Cities for All Campaign’. In
South Africa prior to the FIFA World Cup, a multi- sector campaign
committee was formed, including municipal, building and transport
workers’ unions, the Congress of South African Trade Unions
(COSATU) and NGOs.
Turning to the sector cases we see very differing relationships
between organizations and trade unions. As noted above, trade
unionism amongst domestic workers is not uncommon. Although
governments and employers have not always recognized domestic
workers as workers, unions have accepted their (majority) status
as employees and workers. However, as domestic workers are
mainly women, there are often underlying tensions within mixed
sector unions where invariably the leadership is composed largely
of men who fail to prioritize organizing domestic workers or adopt
a patronizing attitude towards them. Similar attitudes are present
within the leadership of national centres to which domestic workers’
unions may be associated hampering the development of domestic
workers’ unions and women’s leadership. However, as a result of the
campaign for an ILO Convention domestic workers have garnered
more support for organization building from unions and national
union centres as well as from ITUC, particularly promoted by the
ITUC Women’s Committee. The Hong Kong Confederation of
Trade Union (HKCTU) has been proactive in helping build domestic
workers’ unions led by women officers. However, because of the
multiplicity of migrant domestic workers from different countries,
and NGOs supporting the different groups, they have organized
into separate nationality based unions. Taking up the issues of a
common minimum wage and the campaign for an ILO Convention,
the HKCTU was able to bring local and migrant domestic workers’
unions together into one federation, the Federation of Asian Domestic
Workers Unions (FADWU).
There is little evidence of national centres assisting waste
pickers to organize, apart from SEWA, which now has the status of
a national centre in India, and isolated examples in Latin America
such as the Union de Clasificadores de Residuos Urbanos Solidos
(Urban Solid Waste Recyclers’ Union) in Uruguay. This union is
also affiliated with the national centre and has mounted a collective
struggle with a union of municipal workers against privatization of
the dump (Samson, 2009). Waste pickers are self -employed and do
142
not historically have a close relationship with trade unions. In Brazil,
as in many Latin American countries, trade unions are regarded as
being bureaucratic and having political affiliations. Therefore, waste
pickers have generally chosen to remain independent of the union
movements (Horn, 2008).
International networks of informal worker organizations
and nascent networks have differing relationships with the trade
union movement, according to country and sector but closely linked
to the relationships at national level. So the International Domestic
Workers’ Network has a close relationship and is partly integrated
into the trade union movement through its organizational base in the
IUF. This strong link and backing from a global union federation has
opened doors within ITUC and the ILO, enhanced IDWN’s status as
the legitimate representative of domestic workers globally within the
unions, with NGOs and with governments thus positively impacting
on their lobbying and advocacy efforts for government support for
a convention.
The developing global network of waste pickers has not
yet built a relationship or garnered support from the trade union
movement. But they have a growing interest in working with the
labour movement following an exploratory meeting with ILOACTRAV
(Workers’ Bureau), and discussions held at the UNFCCC
negotiations in Copenhagen with ITUC concerning common interests
on climate change and green jobs. However, as discussed below,
waste pickers in Latin America and now globally have garnered
significant support from relationships and alliances with NGOs.
Other sector networks also have differing relationships with
trade unions. Originally, home-based workers had some international
success with the adoption of the ILO Convention on Homework (C
177) in 1996. This was achieved through a collaborative effort led
by SEWA, with other organizations of home-based workers who
formed HomeNet International (which subsequently collapsed),
global union federations such as the IUF , and were supported by
researchers. Relationships between the HomeNets in Asia and the
union movement are now limited, although they include some trade
unions (e.g. SEWA in India, Nepal Home Based Workers Union
(NHBWU)) in their networks. StreetNet International, on the other
hand works with trade union national centres in many countries, has
conducted joint organizing projects with the global union federations,
Union Network International (UNI) and Public Services International
143
(PSI), and is recognized by ITUC and the ILO as an important player
in the organization of informal workers. It has been given status at
the ILC and has been invited to the last two ITUC Congresses. This
may be partially explained by the linkages of StreetNet founders
to the trade union movement, but also by the growing number of
unions of vendors, particularly in West Africa and to some extent in
Latin America. This has raised the profile and provided increasing
acceptance of their status as workers amongst trade unionists, which
has translated in Africa in particular to a broader recognition of
vendors and their problems, concrete organizing activities, access to
tri-partite and other negotiating forums.
Membership-Based Organizations and NGOs
NGOs are often important agents and catalysts in the
development of MBOs. In areas where MBOs have little influence,
profile or organizational strength, NGOs may attempt to fill the
vacuum – either by advocating or campaigning on the workers’
behalf, providing support and advice, and/or establishing a workers’
group or association.
At first glance, the differences between the MBOs
organizing informal workers and NGOs are obvious. An MBO with
a defined membership and leaders elected by, and accountable to
members, can legitimately claim to represent, and negotiate on
behalf of, informal workers. An NGO, on the other hand, has no such
democratic mandate. In reality, however, the distinction is less clear,
particularly in some sectors where workers may depend on external
groups to provide the necessary organizational skills, experience
and financial resources. This ambiguity is especially evident where
the NGO begins to organize groups of workers resulting in a hybrid
organizational form.
There are many examples of MBOs being initiated and
supported by NGOs in their early development, which go on to
become self-sustaining independent MBOs under the democratic
control and policies of their members. In Brazil the initiatives and
support of NGOs was a critical factor in catalyzing the formation,
development, and sustaining of organizations of catadores (Dias
and Alves, 2008). At a continental level the REDLACRE has
developed with the support of the AVINA Foundation amongst
others. More recently WIEGO is providing support for global and
regional networking. This support includes assistance with funds
144
through joint projects, capacity building, the opportunity to share
information, experiences and knowledge through cross-sector
meetings and media, and support for global engagement such as at
the UNFCCC negotiations. Here a strong alliance has been forged
with environmental justice groups campaigning against incineration
and promoting recycling (Global Alliance of Waste pickers and
Allies), the key partner being the Global Anti Incineration Alliance
(GAIA).
Domestic workers are often supported in the initial stages
of development by NGOs who start off advocating on behalf of
domestic workers, leading to the formation of organized groups
which ideally become independent, self-sustaining MBOs. Due to
resource constraints, skills and capacity limitations and the often
inability to collect regular and sufficient membership dues or to
raise funds without assistance or a mediating organization, one finds
that sometimes the transformation to an independent MBO never
takes place or is incomplete and a situation of dependency on, or
dominance of, the NGO persists. This often leads to resentment on
the part of domestic workers who repeatedly raise the importance of
self- representation and independence.
We are a women’s organization, organized by women
household workers, and not managed by an NGO. They
give us solidarity and we grew through their help, which
we very much appreciate. But we manage ourselves. Our
weak point is our financial situation; our resources are
always very limited. However, everyone always does
what she can, and it is this solidarity by many individuals
which makes our organization strong. (Basilia Catari
Torres, National Federation of Household Workers of
Bolivia, IRENE and IUF: 43)
NGOs are often a very important source of support for
informal workers and fill important gaps in organizational skills,
access to resources and institutional influence. In many cases,
without their initial or on-going support some MBOs would certainly
cease to exist. Elizabeth Tang of the HKCTU noted that, “our
close collaboration with NGOs in building the Federation of Asian
Domestic Workers Unions has been key, especially NGOs that work
closely with migrant workers in Hong Kong.” (WIEGO Workshop,
Bangkok, March 2011).
145
For high profile international campaigns various organizations
combine as in the case of the domestic workers’ campaign for an
ILO convention. In this case the IDWN joined hands with, and had
the support of, the international union movement and local and
high profile NGOs dealing with child labour, slavery, human rights,
migration as well as faith based organizations.
NGOs play a critical role bringing their advocacy, media,
fund raising skills as well as an ability to facilitate engagement
across a wide range of organizations. A willingness and ability
of informal workers organizations to join hands with other
supportive organizations, whilst retaining or gaining organizational
independence and leadership, democratic decision making processes
and setting their own agenda, appears to offer the best opportunity
for success and sustainability. In particular, the support of the trade
union movement at different levels can provide legitimacy and
influence and access to institutional power.
International Trade Union Developments
Trade unions remain the most important representatives
of workers worldwide. As we have seen, many informal workers’
organizations have opted to organize as, transform into or align with,
trade unions. Internationally this has not been without a struggle. In
recent years international union bodies have adopted more supportive
policies, but uncertainty as to the importance or feasibility of
implementation remains. Many unions and MBOs already organizing
informal workers have been actively pressing ITUC and affiliates to
take a more active role in supporting informal workers’ organizing
efforts. Given its importance for such unions/MBOs, this section
takes a closer look at the development of international policies and
strategies on organizing informal workers.
The struggle of informal workers for recognition by the
international trade union movement is a long standing one. SEWA
has been an important force in this. When SEWA was founded in the
early 1970s one of its first battles was for recognition as a trade union
in Gujarat State, but it took three decades for it to be recognised in
India as a national centre. Internationally, a breakthrough took place
in 1983 when the IUF accepted SEWA into affiliation, giving SEWA
recognition as a legitimate trade union centre and its self-employed
members recognition as workers with a rightful place in the trade
union movement. Over twenty years later, in 2006, SEWA became
146
an affiliate of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
(ICFTU), which merged to become ITUC in the same year. This
gives SEWA a voice in the highest trade union body, with SEWA
General Secretary being elected as one of ITUC’s Vice Presidents at
ITUC’s 2010 Congress.
SEWA has over the years combined with other national
union centres and networks organizing informal workers, to influence
the policies and practical organizing activities of the international
trade union movement. In 2003 SEWA co-organized and hosted an
international conference “Combining our Efforts” bringing together
60 participants from 35 trade unions and other informal economy
workers’ organizations already organizing workers in the informal
economy. This led to the formation of the International Coordinating
Committee (ICC) on Organizing Workers in the Informal Economy.
Represented on the Committee were SEWA, Ghana Trades Union
Congress, Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), Confederación
Revolucionaria de Obreros y Campesinos (CROC), ORIT (the
former Inter-American regional organization of ICFTU), along with
StreetNet International and HomeNet South-East Asia. This was
followed three years later by a second international “Combining our
Efforts” conference in Accra, Ghana; side meetings at the annual ILC
in Geneva and commissioning of education materials for organizers.
Whilst the ICC is no longer functional the trade union centres
involved continue to put pressure on ITUC to be more pro-active
in their support for informal workers’ organizing. In 2010 SEWA,
the Ghana Trades Union Congress and CROC jointly submitted a
resolution to the ITUC Congress calling for a programme of action
and a platform for organizing informal workers within ITUC. The
resolution did not reach the floor. Instead a general clause was
included in the composite resolution on organizing, calling upon
trade unions to “meet the challenge of organizing all workers within
their respective jurisdictions without distinction as to employment
status” (ITUC, 2010 b). Although this did not meet the expectations
of the group, it further raised the profile and provided an impetus
for the development of more active programmes in the regions and
internationally, something that ITUC committed to at its founding
Congress when adopting its constitution which states: “… shall
initiate and support action to increase the representativeness of trade
unions through the recruitment of women and men working in the
informal as well as the formal economy, through extension of full
147
rights and protection to those performing precarious and unprotected
work, and through lending assistance to organizing strategies and
campaigns” (ITUC, 2006).
ITUC policy was developed in more detail at its General
Council meeting in February 2011, when it adopted a resolution
calling for a range of actions to “respond to the urgency and the
gravity of the situation faced by the hundreds of millions of workers
in precarious and informal work worldwide” (ITUC, 2011). These
include demands for social protection, higher minimum wages,
labour inspection, property rights, training opportunities, and the
regulation of temporary work and labour migration agencies. It
proposes a meeting of affiliates, regional organizations and global
union federations to discuss the transformation of precarious
and informal work into secure, decent work and implementation
activities, including setting up an informal network of affiliates and
global union federations to promote this.
The global union federations are increasingly paying attention
to the organization of informal workers as their affiliates report on
shrinking formal workforces and increased casual and precarious
work arrangements in the north as well as the south. The IUF, with
its early recognition, its practical support for organizing domestic
workers and its open minded approach provides the best example of
the positive role that can be played by global union federations. The
International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) began showing
an interest in informal transport workers when it commissioned case
studies on organizing informal transport workers in 2006. The ITF
2010 Congress declared “…there is a need to recognise and work
with other forms of worker organization which precarious workers
have developed among themselves, and to link them to the trade
union movement. The ITF will develop a 2011-14 strategic plan to
develop networks of organizations, which could include both unions
and associations, which act on behalf of workers whose livelihoods
come from precarious or informal work in the transport sector” (ITF,
2010: 4). The Building Workers’ International (BWI) too supports
organizing projects among informal forest products workers and
construction workers. In India for example, the BWI’s Global Wood
and Forestry Programme supports a project organizing among Kendu
and Sal leaf-pickers (Kendu for wrapping bidi cigarettes; Sal used
for making plates, bowls etc), led by state-wide affiliated unions of
informal leaf workers. And the role of the PSI and UNI in working
148
with StreetNet International has been mentioned above.
These global union federations are increasingly recognizing
the importance of building links and cooperation with associations
of informal workers, but do not necessarily have the capacity to
provide direct support to a myriad of small, under-resourced and
often precarious organizations. For them to provide meaningful
support and assistance, it is becoming necessary to encourage the
development of national, regional and international networks and
alliances of informal workers with whom they (and their national
affiliated trade unions) can engage more effectively.
Conclusion
The growth and intensification of informal work and
new informal work arrangements has stimulated new organizing
approaches. Informal workers have adapted traditional worker
organizations such as unions, and strategies such as collective
bargaining, to suit their circumstances. They have developed different
and more flexible organizational forms, led by informal workers
themselves, and are forging new alliances and relationships. As
the world’s labour force faces increasingly informal and precarious
employment, the trade union movement has to confront questions
about its future. How can the labour movement be reorganized to
include and represent the majority of the world’s workers- those in
informal work? Will the organizational forms being developed by
informal workers become predominant? Are we seeing the emerging
characteristics of an international trade union movement appropriate
for a twenty-first century global economy?
A labour movement fully inclusive of workers in the
informal economy might look very different. Firstly, the leadership
profile would be transformed. Informal workers’ organizations
would surely demand full membership of trade unions and of
national trade union centres (or other national worker bodies), rather
than a form of associate membership, leading to representatives of
informal workers gaining the majority voice on many executive
committees, and assuming positions of leadership not only in their
own organizations but in federations nationally and internationally.
And, given the gender composition of the informal workforce,
unions would have to ensure gender equality and active promotion of
women leadership. Whenever women workers organize, the issues
of autonomy and leadership are crucial, requiring the development of
149
political space where independent and creative initiatives recognize
the specific problems of women workers and focus on their needs
and sensitivities (Gallin and Horn, 2005).
There would be no single organizational form or approach,
but a flexible and multi-faceted, multi-scale set of interlocking
organizational forms, built on successful models and activities,
and capable of identifying and seizing openings and opportunities.
Relationships and tactical (short term) or strategic (longer term)
alliances would be important and constructed with a wide range
of organizations, helping to leverage resources, provide support
and maximize influence and impact on local authorities, national
governments, international institutions, employer bodies.
The functions of unions would have to adapt to the
constantly changing needs of the membership. For many informal
workers, employment is transient: today’s street vendor may become
tomorrow’s home-based worker or transport operator. Successful
organizations are likely to be those with a broad base and flexible
response to changing employment conditions: a ‘union for life’
where membership is retained through changes in occupations and
working environments, and where they provide for a wide range of
functions. These may include mutual social protection, cooperative
and livelihood development, self-help welfare provision, access to
financial and legal services, skills training and so on.
Collective bargaining will inevitably change as well.
Bargaining counterparts and the negotiating agenda will have to
reflect the priority needs and demands of both formal and informal
workers. New forums, new bargaining approaches, new pressure
tactics and new methods to resolve disputes will be needed, and are
already in the making through informal workers’ organizations.
Finally, effective organization of informal workers may
provide the opportunity to change the relationship between unions
and governments, having the potential to reverse the loss of power
and influence felt by unions in many countries over the past few
decades. It is important that the international trade union movement
seize this opportunity.
Endnotes
1. Director, Organization and Representation Programme of Women
in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing, Email: chris.
bonner@wiego.org.
150
2. Membership-based organization consultant, Organization and
Representation Programme of Women in Informal Employment:
Globalizing and Organizing, Email: dave.spooner@wiego.org
Bibliography
Bonner, Christine. 2010. “Domestic Workers Around the World:
Organizing for Empowerment”. Paper presented at conference,
Exploited, Undervalued – and Essential: The Plight of Domestic
Workers, Social Law Project, Cape Town, 7-8 May, 2010.
Retrieved 14 March 2011. http://www.dwrp.org.za/images/stories/
DWRP_Research/chris_bonner.pdf
Chen, Martha, R. Jhabvala, R. Kanbur & C. Richards (eds.). 2007.
Membership-Based Organizations of the Poor. Routledge Studies
in Development Economics. New York. Routledge.
Dias, S. and F. Alvez. 2008. Integration of the Informal Recycling Sector
in Solid Waste Management in Brazil. Echborn, Germany: Federal
Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. Retrieved,
4 April 2011. http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/gtz2008-informalrecycling-
brazil.pdf
European Trades Union Confederation. 2011. Resolution on
Recommendations for improving gender balance in trade unions
Adopted at the Executive Committee on 9 March 2011. Retrieved
5 February 2012. http://www.etuc.org/IMG/pdf/EC191_Gender_
Equality_Resolution_FINAL_EN.pdf
European Trades Union Confederation. 2005. “Out of the Shadows:
Organizing and Protecting Domestic Workers in Europe: The
Role of Trade Unions.” Report of a conference organized by the
European Trades Union Confederation, International Restructuring
Education Network Europe and Platform for International
Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants, Brussels, 14-15 April.
Retrieved 5 April 2011. http://www.etuc.org/IMG/pdf/Rapport_
dosmestic_workers.pdf
Gallin, D. and P. Horn. 2005. “Organizing Informal Women Workers”.
Mimeograph. Retrieved 19 March 2011 http://www.globallabour.
info/en/2007/11/organizing_informal_women_work_1.html.
Human Rights Watch. 2006. Swept Under the Rug: Abuses against
Domestic Workers Around the World. Retrieved, 14 April 2011.
http://www.hrw.org/legacy/campaigns/women/2006/domestic_
workers/index.htm
Horn, Pat. 2008. “Respective Roles for and Links between Unions,
Cooperatives, and other forms of organizing informal workers”.
Mimeograph. Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and
Organizing ,Cambridge, USA
Inclusive Cities. (n.d.) Waste Pickers and Climate Change. Retrieved
151February 5, 2012. http://www.inclusivecities.org/climatechange.
html
International Domestic Workers’ Network. 2009. Report of Africa
Regional Workshop. Building Organisation and the Campaign for
an ILO Convention on Domestic Work. 27th-28th November 2009,
Nairobi, Kenya. Mimeograph.
International Labour Organization. 2010. “Decent Work for Domestic
Workers”. Report IV (1), International Labour Conference, 99th
Session, Geneva. Retrieved 31 March 2011, http://www.ilo.
org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—ed_norm/—relconf/documents/
meetingdocument/wcms_104700.pdf
—–. 2005. “Evaluation: SYNDICOOP-Poverty Reduction among
Unprotected Informal Economy Workers through Union-
Cooperative Joint Action.” Geneva. International Labour
Organization. Retrieved 4 April 2011. http://www.ica.coop/
outofpoverty/documents/Syndicoop_eval.pdf
—–. 2002a. Women and Men in the Informal Economy: A Statistical
Picture. Geneva. International Labour Organization Employment
Sector.
—–. 2002b. “Resolution Concerning Decent Work and the Informal
Economy”, Geneva. International Labour Organization. Retrieved
19 March 2011. www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/ilc/
ilc90/pdf/pr-25res.pdf).
—–. 2000. The role of trade unions in promoting gender equality. Report
of the ILO-ICFTU survey; International Labour Organisation,
November 2000. Retrieved February 5, 2012 http://actrav.itcilo.org/
library/english/06_Gender/resource_kit_for_tu/fin_rep.pdf
International Trade Union Confederation . 2011. “General Council
Resolution on Tackling Precarious and Informal Work”, Brussels,
2-4 February 2011. Retrieved June 2011. http://www.ituc-csi.org/
IMG/pdf/8GC_E_16_b_-_FINAL_Resolution_on_Precarious_and_
Informal_Work-2.pdf
—–. 2010a. “Decent Work, decent life for domestic workers.” ITUC
Action Guide. Retrieved, 3 April 2011. http://www.ituccsi.org/
IMG/pdf/ITUC_dwd_AnglaisWEB.pdf
—–. 2010 b. “Resolution on Organizing”. 2nd World Congress,
Vancouver, 21 – 25 June 2010. Retrieved January 2011. http://
www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/2CO_06_Organizing_03-10-2.pdf
—–. 2010 c. “Spotlight interview with Priscilla González (DWU –
USA)”. Retrieved 4 April 2011.
http://www.ituc-csi.org/spotlight-interview-with-priscilla.html
—–. 2009. Decent Work for Decent Life for Women,
Discussion Guide. 1st World Women’s Conference,
19-21 October 2009. Retrieved February 5, 2012.
152
http://www.ituccsi.org/IMG/pdf/DECENT_WORK_DECENT_
LIFE_FOR_WOMEN.pdf
—–. 2006. “Constitution”. Retrieved 5 January 2011. http://www.ituc-csi.
org/IMG/pdf/Const-ENG-W.pdf.
International Transport Workers’ Federation . 2010. “Strong Unions –
Sustainable Transport. 2010”, 42nd Congress, Mexico City, 5-12
August 2010. Retrieved 4 Jan 2011. http://www.itfcongress2010.
org/files/extranet/-2/24484/Congress%20Theme%20Document%20
42nd%20C-8%20-1.pdf
International Restructuring Education Network Europe and International
Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco
and Allied Workers’ Association. 2008. “Respect and Rights.
Protection for Domestic Workers”. Report of the international
conference held in Amsterdam, 8-10 November 2006. Geneva.
Retrieved, 31 March 2011 http://domesticworkerrights.org/sites/
en.domesticworkerrights.org/files/RESPECT&RIGHTS
Kuria, D. and Muasya, R. 2010. “Mapping of Wastepicker organisations
and organisations supporting wastepickers in Kenya”. WIEGO.
Mimeograph. Retrieved, 4 April 2011. http://www.inclusivecities.
org/pdfs/Kenya%20Mapping_web.pdf
Lindell, Ilda (ed.). 2010. Africa’s Informal Workers: Collective agency,
alliances and transnational organizing in urban Africa. London, UK.
Zed Books
Mitullah, Winnie. 2010. “Informal workers in Kenya and transnational
organizing: networking and leveraging resources” in Lindell, Ilda
(ed.). 2010. Africa’s Informal Workers: Collective agency, alliances
and transnational organizing in urban Africa. London, UK. Zed
Books, pp 184-201.
Mercado, A. C. and A. Poo. 2009. “Domestic Workers Organizing in
the United States, Case Study”, written for AWID, Mimeograph.
Retrieved 4 April 2011. http://www.comminit.com/en/
node/284096/348
Samson, Melanie. 2009. Refusing to be Cast Aside: Waste Pickers
Organizing Around the World. Cambridge, USA. WIEGO.
StreetNet International. (n.d.) History. Retrieved 5 February 2012
http://streetnet.org.za/show.php?id=19
Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing. 2008.
“Waste pickers without Frontiers”. First International and Third
Latin American Conference of Waste-pickers, Bogota, Colombia,
1- 4 March 2008. Retrieved 25 May 2011. http://www.wiego.org/
reports/WastePickers-2008.pdf