Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T13:49:10.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Garment homework in Argentina: Drawing together the threads of informal and precarious work

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Rosaria Burchielli ,
Annie Delaney  and
Nora Goren
Rosaria Burchielli*
Affiliation:
La Trobe University, Australia
Annie Delaney
Affiliation:
Victoria University, Australia
Nora Goren
Affiliation:
Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche, Argentina
*
Rosaria Burchielli, Department of Management, Faculty of Business, Economics and Law, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC 3086, Australia. Email: r.burchielli@latrobe.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores and applies Kalleberg’s concept and dimensions of precarious work in relation to garment homework in Argentina. Although precarious work exists across formal and informal employment, its nature and dimensions are most commonly researched in relation to formal work in developed economies where the loss of standard conditions can be documented. Similarly, homework is most usually discussed as a category of informal work, in the context of developing countries, within which precariousness is one among numerous aspects of adverse job quality. Applying the concept of precariousness enables homework to be assessed systematically against specific labour standards, yielding a more powerful analysis than reference to a general deficit. This may increase our understanding of homework especially with regard to addressing labour standards.

Keywords

Argentinagarment homeworkinformal workprecarious work
Type
Symposium Articles
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 25 , Issue 1: Symposium - Work, Workplaces and Industrial Relations , March 2014 , pp. 63 - 80
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bair, J (2010) On difference and capital: gender and the globalization of production. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 36(1): 203–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrientos, S (2012) Corporate purchasing practices in global production networks: a socially contested terrain. Geoforum 44(1): 44–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bastia, T (2007) From mining to garment workshops: Bolivian migrants in Buenos Aires. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 33(4): 655–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boris, E, Daniels, C (eds) (1989) Homework: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Paid Labor at Home. Urbana, IL and Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Burchielli, R, Buttigieg, D, Delaney, A (2008) Organizing homeworkers: the use of mapping as an organizing tool. Work, Employment and Society 22(1): 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carre, F, Ferber, M, Golden, L, et al . (eds) (2000) Nonstandard Work: The Nature and Challenges of Changing Employment Arrangements. Urbana, IL: Industrial Relations Research Association.Google Scholar
Delaney, A, Montesano, M, Burchielli, R (2013) Regulatory challenges in the Australian garment industry: human rights in a post Ruggie environment. Labour & Industry 23(1): 69–88.Google Scholar
Fudge, J, Owens, R (eds) (2006) Precarious Work, Women, and the New Economy: The Challenge to Legal Norms. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Gardetti, MA, Torres, AL (2012) Introduction. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 45(Spring): 5–15.Google Scholar
Hewison, K, Kalleberg, AL (2012) Precarious work and flexibilization in South and Southeast Asia. American Behavioral Scientist 57(4): 395–402.Google Scholar
Hill, E (2005) Organising ‘non-standard’ women workers for economic and social security in India and Australia. In: Reworking work: Proceedings of the 19th conference of the Association of Industrial Relations Academics of Australia and New Zealand (AIRAANZ), Sydney, NSW, Australia, 9–11 February.Google Scholar
International Labour Organization (ILO) (1996) Convention on Homework No 177. Geneva: International Labour Organization.Google Scholar
International Labour Organization (ILO) (2002) Women and men in the informal economy: a statistical picture. In: International Labour Conference 90th Session, International Labour Organization, Geneva, June.Google Scholar
Jütting, J, De Laiglesia, JR (eds) (2009) Is Informal Normal? Towards More and Better Jobs in Developing Countries. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalleberg, AL (2009) Precarious work, insecure workers: employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review 74(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Kalleberg, AL, Hewison, K (2013) Precarious work and the challenge for Asia. American Behavioral Scientist 57(3): 271–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La Alameda (2013) La Alameda: asamblea popular. Available at: http://laalameda.wordpress.com/ and http://nochains.org/ (accessed 24 October 2013).Google Scholar
Lieutier, A (2009) Esclavos: los trabajadores costureros de la cuidad de Buenos Aires []. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Alameda Centre.Google Scholar
Miles, MB, Huberman, AM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Ministry of Industry (2013) Ministerio de Industria Argentina. Available at: http://www.industria.gob.ar/ (accessed 24 October 2013).Google Scholar
Olmedo, C, Murray, MJ (2002) The formalization of informal/precarious labor in contemporary Argentina. International Sociology 17(3): 421–443.Google Scholar
Pascucci, S (2011) Progress and limits of the political and union action in the clothing industry. A characterization of SOIVA and UTC-Alameda. University of Buenos Aires Working Papers Instituto de Investigaciones Gino Germani Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Buenos Aires, Argentina, March.Google Scholar
Prugl, E, Tinker, I (1997) Microentrepreneurs and homeworkers: convergent categories. World Development 25(9): 1471–1482.Google Scholar
Quinlan, M (2012) The pre-invention of precarious employment: the changing world of work in context. Economic and Labour Relations Review 23(4): 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, L (2009) Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Standing, G (2011) Labour market policies, poverty and insecurity. International Journal of Social Welfare 20(3): 260–269.Google Scholar
Tate, J, Brill, L (2003) Policy Issues and Strategies for Homebased Workers: Emerging Themes from the Mapping Programme. Leeds: Homeworkers Worldwide.Google Scholar
Thornton, M (1991) The Public/private dichotomy: gendered and discriminatory. Journal of Law and Society 18(4): 448–463.Google Scholar
Trebilcock, A (2006) Using development approaches to address the challenge of the informal economy for labour law. In: Davidov, G, Langille, B (eds) Boundaries and Frontiers of Labour Law: Goals and Means in the Regulation of Work. Oxford and Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, pp. 63–86.Google Scholar
Vosko, L (2010) Managing the Margins: Gender, Citizenship, and the International Regulation of Precarious Employment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Whitson, R (2007) Beyond the crisis: economic globalization and informal work in Argentina. Journal of Latin American Geography 6(2): 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar