Main characteristics of coverage to domestic work

There are significant differences in the configuration of social security schemes for domestic workers, mainly in terms of programme design and implementation. The main components that differ are associated with: the type of scheme (general or special) designed to cover workers; the enrolment system – whether it is mandatory or voluntary; the number of contingencies or branches of social security covered; financing; availability of coverage provisions for migrant domestic workers; and the effective coverage of the schemes. These and other key issues are discussed below.

The design of social security schemes demonstrates a clear trend toward inclusion of domestic workers in general schemes, thus legally guaranteeing the same coverage conditions other workers enjoy, or with some minor variations (Figure 1). This is positive in that it represents a means to comply with Article No. 14 of Domestic Workers Convention No. 189, which underscored the need to guarantee that domestic workers enjoy conditions no less favourable, in terms of social security coverage, than those applicable to other workers.

Regarding international experience, countries that have specific social protection schemes or programmes for the domestic work sector include Algeria, Egypt, El Salvador, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong (China), Mexico, Paraguay, Tunisia and the United States. Recently, some countries have eliminated special schemes for domestic workers and have transferred their coverage to the general system. Spain is one such country, where the government eliminated the Special Scheme for Household Employees in 2011 and created the Special System within the General Social Security Scheme to include domestic workers, granting them practically all of the benefits offered in the General Scheme.

Figure 1. Number of countries with legal coverage of the domestic work sector, by region and type of scheme (general versus special) 

Source: Department of Social Protection ILO, database domestic workers.

With respect to type of enrolment, only a small number of countries have voluntary social security coverage for domestic workers. It is noteworthy that in recent years, many countries have reformed legislation to make coverage mandatory. El Salvador, Fiji, Guatemala, Honduras, Iceland, Malaysia, Mexico and South Korea still have voluntary coverage.

International experience has shown that voluntary coverage is ineffective while mandatory social security registration is highly useful and effective for a group such as domestic workers, which are usually considered a difficult-to-cover group. The process to register domestic workers in social security schemes can be complex in light of the atypical nature of the occupation. Some aspects that justify this are that: the work is performed in a private home, which makes it difficult to carry out labour inspections (see Box 2); workers are sometimes employed by more than one employer; labour relations are not usually established through an employment contract; employers often do not know what their responsibilities are or how to comply with the law; the group has irregular wage income given the sector’s high unemployment and job turnover rates; the number of hours worked varies considerably; payment is often in-kind (food, transportation, housing); workers sometimes reside at their workplace (live-in); and, in some cases domestic workers may be in an irregular status in the country, among other reasons. At any rate, voluntary registration clearly hinders institutional efforts to extend social security to this group.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of countries with mandatory and voluntary systems, as well as those that do not offer coverage and where information is insufficient. The regions with the largest number of countries without coverage – and which are less likely to ratify international conventions – are Africa, Asia and the Middle East. In this last region, no country grants social security coverage to domestic workers. This trend is similar to that reported in other studies on labour laws, where the countries of the Middle East, Asia and the Pacific and Eastern Europe are among those with the most limited legal coverage.

Figure 2. Countries with some provision for social security coverage of domestic workers, by type of programme (mandatory versus voluntary) 

Fuente: Departamento de Protección Social de la OIT, Base de datos de trabajo doméstico.

Figure 2 also includes some countries that are implementing measures to strengthen legislation or to create new instruments to extend coverage. These include India, Kenya, Lebanon, Mozambique, Pakistan, Thailand and Yemen. In India, for example, the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act was enacted in 2008. This is a special scheme for informal economy workers, which includes domestic workers. It has only recently been implemented and coverage of domestic workers is partial and limited to certain states of the country.

While many countries offer social security protection to domestic workers, this does not imply that they cover the same vertical dimension in terms of coverage. In other words, not all countries have provided for the same categories of social security branches established in Convention No. 102. At least 17 countries – located mainly in Western Europe and North America – provide the nine branches set forth in the Convention.

Figure 2 shows the number of countries of countries within each region whose laws mandate social security coverage of domestic workers for the different branches established in Convention No. 102. These indices do not measure effective coverage rates given that the information systems available in most of the countries still do not contain data for that aspect. Based on existing information, it is possible to conclude that gaps exist in the scope of legal coverage, and, consequently, in effective coverage. Coverage gaps are much more pronounced in developing countries. Crucially, while a country may guarantee coverage in its legislation, this coverage is not always adequate in terms of the populations included, qualifying conditions and levels of benefits. To the contrary: international experience reveals significant gaps in terms of the scope of national laws and their enforcement, even in countries where legal coverage exists. Furthermore, not all countries listed (see “Legal coverage”) are considered in the results of Figure 3 given the limited information available. Nonetheless, the data presented offer a clear vision with respect to the main social security benefits included in legal coverage in each region, as well as existing gaps and challenges.

Figure 3. Number of countries with legal social security coverage for domestic workers, by contingencies covered and region  

Fuente: Departamento de Protección Social de la OIT, Base de datos de trabajo doméstico.

European countries have established coverage in most branches of social security, except employment injury benefits, which are not covered in Ireland, or unemployment benefits, which are excluded in Spain (Ministry of Employment and Social Security, 2015). In developing regions, the main contingencies covered are medical care (contributory and non-contributory), disability, old age and survivors’ pensions – the majority covered by social insurance programmes – and employment injury benefits. By contrast, family benefits and unemployment protection are the branches with the largest gaps in legal coverage. In the case of unemployment benefits, most are contributory programmes and are granted mainly in high-income countries. Nevertheless, there are some noteworthy programmes in developing countries such as South Africa, where domestic workers were incorporated in the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) in 2003.

It is important to mention that in most of the countries studied, the contingencies covered by social security for the domestic work sector are the same as those provided to other employees. In cases where fewer contingencies are covered, employment injury and unemployment benefits are generally excluded. Likewise, the amount of benefits within a given contingency may vary for domestic workers, either because they grant a larger amount or because they vary in terms of the maximum benefit amount. Maternity benefits are frequently differentiated and lower for domestic workers.