A

standard question fielded by high achieving females is, “What is the secret of your success in managing your career and family?” The demure answer: “My husband’s blessing”, no further questions asked. She is automatically the wise and kind benefactor of her household with a multitude of servants. Her servants’ children may even look forward to work in the same household, where servants are part of the family.

Because they are part of the family, no one pries. That some do get abused is unfortunate. That Human Rights Watch highlights working conditions of Indonesian maids who do not have defined work hours, let alone holidays, is just an example of foreigners totally ignorant of the local situation.

The maids are grateful for a job, meals and free shelter in a nice home, and do not have to fetch water, tend to goats and work the fields back home in the dirt and heat, and be married off to another old goat.

It is this mindset that is clearly behind the on-and-off decision to deliberate the bill on domestic workers in parliament; women legislators are reportedly among those citing the cultural factor of a
generation of maids following in their mother’s or grandmother’s footsteps in the same household, with all her needs guaranteed, from free education to marriage. Even if a non-Javanese employer is not familiar with the ngenger custom, the argument suits all benevolent employers.

Members of the national women’s rights body said recently they are “frustrated” with the lack of progress on the bill. The aggressive stance by activists and a bit of sensationalist reporting has been unproductive, they say, with employers scared by headlines blaring “Maid law could criminalize employers”.

However urgent they think it is, the commissioners looking for a “strategic”, non-confrontational, unoffensive way to make people understand that maids need legal protection, not just from being physically abused, but also about an agreement of work hours and days off, just like anyone else.

Wages could still be a subject of negotiation, activists say — given that the taxi driver or office boy would be all up in arms if everyone had to be paid the minimum wage.

You see, no one wants to be robbed of Indonesia’s “blessing” compared to life in advanced countries — the blessing of cheap, meek, ever-abundant labor.

Now the “non-offensive” way would clearly be to talk to us as certainly kind employers exasperated with the maids’ daily antiques. One expert even proposed a kind of tax relief for households willing to be checked for working standards, assuming the bill is passed into law.

I could tell my mother that the law would state a clear amount of days off so the maid would not leave every six months or so, saying she dreamed her tooth fell out, meaning grandpa may be critically ill. Or that contracts would be introduced so we would not be wasting time, money and energy on intensive coaching in how to use the washing machine, how not to ruin the teflon pans or the pressure cooker ... only to have the maid mumbling that “Ibu” is making her too nervous and that maybe the chemistry is not there (tidak cocok) ... and there goes another one ... .

The seemingly mundane household management affair goes deep into our daily rythms and peace of mind at home and at work — which is why many would like to see the bill dropped from the national radar forever. We’re prepared to change radically when we go overseas — we’ll worry about cooking and disposing of garbage when we have to. That Indonesia has signed its commitment to all the politically correct things like erasing poverty through “decent, dignified work” cannot be our problem, let the government worry.

Deliberating the bill stands to bring our real, hidden clashes into the open; not the ethnic or religious kind but the “who’s supposed to do the chores?” kind. An agreed wage level, a limit on work hours and — God forbid, days off! — would immediately mean paying more for delivery food, or actually doing the laundry. Spouses’ relations would be strained on the weekends, for Madam might suddenly ask “Bapak” to wash some dishes, a historical development as radical as the notion of Soeharto stepping down, if not more.

Therefore at this juncture of one of the world’s largest, vibrant “democracies”, the national women’s rights body sees that it will try its best to be strategic, nice and unoffensive no matter how radical the issue at hand.

For it is radical to end a people’s sense of privilege that some poor village woman does our chores
with cheap pay, a pay we are absolutely entitled to determine; a privilege inherited from the feudal days of old.

It is radical to perceive that a maid is a worker with entitlements, no matter how “unskilled” you think she is. It’s only ok for the babysitter and driver to get extra pay on their day off.

It is radical to expect the man of the house to even think about domestic management; being the goodhearted gentleman that he is, he will of course chip in and even take care of the kids better when he is inclined to do so. So passing the bill would heap all domestic worries on the woman, whether housewife or CEO.

In such a situation, advocates of maid protection certainly need all the help they can get, such as from those talented with making catchy, delightful T-shirts. “Wanted: Sexy cooks for hubbies”? Maybe. “Your maid has rights”? Hmmm. ... Good luck!