A well written story. I'd be interested in hearing from any Filipino commentators how common this practice still is/is perceived to be in the Philippines today. It's ranked 33/167 by Global Slavery Index[0] as compared to the US at #52.
What I can tell you is that this kind slavery-level practice is virtually non-existent. Maids/Housekeepers/"Kasambahay"s/"Katulong"s are expected to be paid. The practice of employing kasambahays is still common among the middle class and is expected of rich families. In lower classes families that are more well off sometimes takes in relatives, of course paying them something for them to save up or paying for their tuition if they're studying. Houseworkers are mostly needed to take care of little children as it is now more common for families to have both parents working.
Here in the Philippines a LOT of television dramas are with protagonists coming from lower classes, often with plots where they are being employed as houseworkers (and you kind of get where this is going :). And television viewership is almost universal here, even in remote villages. I think this really helps a lot for people who identify with these drama characters.
We have now laws setting salary, benefits and treatment standards for houseworkers. This is the landmark law that was signed into law in 2013: https://www.dole.gov.ph/files/Q%20&%20A%20on%20Batas%20Kasam...
I think it would be helpful to distinguish between a true remunerated employer-employee relationship like what you appear to describe above, and unpaid slavery like what is described in the article. The former is a valued part of the economy in many developing country (if you're wealthy and employ no household staff in some such countries you're considered stingy). The latter is slavery, nothing less nothing more, as the author of the piece was able to recognize at a fairly early age.
"Room and board" is valid compensation in some jobs. There are valid jobs to this day where having a place to stay is a large part of the compensation you will receive.
It is not as black and white as you seem to think.
To put some clearer relief around the point: the author's parents had no means of keeping Lola in their home by force. They had no right to shoot or maim her if she attempted to leave, and would have been convicted of murder if they did. But where would she go and what would she do, illiterate, with no education or practical experience with worldly matters, no skills, and uncertain legal status?
Few human beings will cope with that level of uncertainty, and to imagine that they ought to is, I would say, a conceit of someone who is unable to properly situate themselves in that person's shoes as a mental exercise. The familiar, with all of its unpleasantness, can be a welcome refuge from the fear and uncertainty of the outside world, especially if the familiar is all you know, you have few bases for comparison, and weren't brought up socially to embrace fear or uncertainty to any degree.
That's the thing, though. It's very difficult to distinguish. I know my parents and some family friends who treat their helpers like extended family. But at the same time, it's not uncommon to find others who do it worse. Still, there are those in between.
Like the author, I was raised with a helper around the house. As long as I remember, even when I was a kid, they were there. Unlike the author, though, my parents take care of them, (they're paid, they get vacations, even help when the situation with their families in the province is tight, etc.) but looking back, I can't help but think if having a helper at all (no matter how well treated) is part of the problem.
There's some effect to society that feels like a barrier. The mentality of "I'm just a helper" is real and even when you invite a friend's driver or helper to eat lunch with the group, they'll lie ("I ate already."). What's difficult too, is you don't know if "I ate already" means they weren't given allowance, they're saving to send some to their family, or just prefer to eat with others i.e. go make friends with the other helpers.
My childhood helper sometimes tells stories of some realities of other helpers that he befriended, and the variance is huge, but it's not a binary good/bad thing. It's more like a range of possibilities.
A lot needs to be done in terms of triangulating proper compensation and upping respect for some families, but I think people also need to maybe visit the Philippines.
That's not to say I didn't find it weird, I totally did. They were privy to such intimate aspects of our lives, but sitting in the car next to them was weird, and they wouldn't really be "allowed" to eat with us (although my mother, around Alex's age, was fine with them eating with us). It was unsettling to me even as a young kid. It was like they were these pariahs and I didn't exactly know why and couldn't really ask why, but they were so present in the day to day that they would know when I cried over something stupid or if I had a period stain I had trouble washing out.
But, I think it's also good to have some frame of reference. Again, proper compensation and respect are essential. But also realise that it's a country trying to grow it's middle class and that there's no way to go from point A to point B in the major metropolitan area without seeing children digging through trash, shanty-towns that may or may not wear the next rainy flood, etc. In these situations, proper compensation for a live-in helper to a middle class family maybe (I wouldn't know) is the stability of room and board and food, even if that means sleeping on a futon with the other live-in workers (who do different roles) in a tiny spare room.
My philosophy tends to be that if you can reasonably afford to give them better standards, then do so. So if you're a foreigner, give them that extra $20 because they will certainly appreciate the exchange rate. If you're well-to-do and regularly have live-in help, having proper "maids quarters" and cots can't be too much of an ask over time.
it's ranking by prevalence, so countries like North Korea (rank #1) worse than countries like the U.S. (#52) and Australia (also #52).
I couldn't find a country that was ranked #167 out of #167, though. I think #52 is as high as it goes.
Site seems pretty good overall but is missing a hard facts and figures section to go alongside the nice graphical interface. They appear to offer a pdf report but they wanted me to request access to get it.
So they didn't count prisoner labour?
What is 'force' though? "Do this or I hit you with a stick"? "Do this and you go back to your cage"? "Do this or there will be nothing positive in your life"?
The prison gets cheap labour. Slavery is just a border on a map of human exploitation, I think some distinctions need far more qualification to be relevant.
> The Index presents a ranking of 167 countries based on the proportion of the population that is estimated to be in modern slavery. [0]
North Korea, with 4.37% in slavery, is ranked 1.
India, with 1.4% in slavery, is ranked 4.
Philippines, with 0.4% in slavery, is ranked 33.
China, with 0.25% in slavery, is ranked 40.
USA, with .02% in slavery, is ranked 52.
[0] https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/findings/
EDIT: number -> ranking
GP's claim makes it seem like they interpreted as I did.
> ...countries like North Korea (rank #1) are closer to 0...
NK is not close to 0 in relative or absolute slave counts, and I don't see the utility in pointing out that 1 is closer to 0 than 52.
Maybe it has to do with prostitution being legal here. You'd expect licensed and regulated prostitution to reduce slavery in prostitution, but apparently it's still a serious problem. Still, 17,500 people in slavery? That's a lot. I'd like to know where they got that figure.
Although they probably do get paid something and have freedom, the situations are very similar. Dropped into a location without the ability to speak the language or financial resources to escape.
[0] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EHNSDKK/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...
Partly for this reason. The addition of ethnic differences to economic inequality is a volatile mixture.
[0] https://www.amazon.com/World-Fire-Exporting-Democracy-Instab...
Not only are they paid well, there are government restrictions on who can hire a foreign live-in caregiver.
Usually there has to be a compelling reason like the person is handicapped or extremely elderly.
The reason it's so heavily regulated is because they are taking away jobs from native caregivers.
That book was published in 2006 and if that's what you got from it, then it's extremely outdated.