The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-019-0150-y

ARTICLE

Demand for Domestic Workers in India: Its Characteristics

and Correlates

Shraddha Jain1 · Udaya S. Mishra1

Published online: 17 January 2019

© Indian Society of Labour Economics 2019

Abstract
This paper is an attempt towards analysing the demand for domestic workers spe-
cifically in urban India, wherein we intend to verify a range of hypotheses pertain-
ing to demand for domestic workers in urban households. The analysis exploits the
information obtained in Unemployment and Employment Survey and Consump-
tion Expenditure Survey provided by the National Sample Survey Organisation, to
assess the significance of domestic work and to characterise the demand for domes-
tic workers across Indian states. We supplement the discussion with insights from
a micro-level enquiry. While it may be otherwise understood that rising economic
affluence is the driving force behind this phenomenon, a critical analysis at the
household level indicates the complex dynamic of economic affluence and rising
dependency determines engagement of domestic workers in urban Indian house-
holds. A micro-level study conducted in the National Capital Region throws further
light on the nature of demand for domestic workers in urban areas. A survey among
employers reveals that employment of domestic workers has been customary for a
class of population. However, other household characteristics like women’s employ-
ment and life cycle of a household also shape the demand for a domestic worker.
Nature of employment, broadly categorised as live-out/day work or live-in work, is
also observed to be influenced by economic class and household specific needs.

Keywords  Domestic workers · Women’s employment · Economic class ·

Dependency

* Shraddha Jain
shraddhajain91@gmail.com; shraddha16phd@cds.ac.in
1
Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India

ISLE 13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 660 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

1 Introduction

Domestic work in India is not recognised as labour in the full sense of the term as
it lacks cover under the labour laws in the same way as other forms of wage labour,
despite a thriving market for domestic service in India.1 The share of domestic ser-
vice in total service sector employment of women increased from 12% in 1999–2000
to 27% in 2004–2005 (Neetha 2008). The number of women employed in the broad
category of domestic work shows more than fourfold increase over the 10-year
period from 1999–2000 to 2009–2010 (Neetha 2013).2 An upsurge has been identi-
fied in ‘part-time’ work especially in urban middle class households. The number of
domestic workers in urban areas increased by 68% during the decade between 1999
and 2009 in India, according to a news report, there are 2.52 million domestic work-
ers as per NSSO (2009–2010), seven million as per NGO sources and 4.2 million
as per ILO (DNA 2013). It is also important to note that two-thirds of this domestic
workforce lives in urban areas. The uncertainties that mark estimates of domestic
work have been highlighted. ‘No society can survive without the massive contribu-
tion that domestic work makes to the national income. Yet it remains largely invis-
ible and undervalued, a reflection of the low value India places on social reproduc-
tion’ (Ghosh 2014).
In India, paid domestic work was a cultural practice and part of the reproduc-
tion of class difference within a society marked by inequality. However, employing
domestics is no longer a symbol of wealth and aristocracy and neither associated
with middle class women’s labour force participation. But there can be few instances
where domestic workers depict status of employers. Economic growth, modernisa-
tion and change in lifestyle have contributed to an increase in the demand for domes-
tic workers, particularly for ‘part-time’ workers. Ageing and lack of state provision-
ing of care too have contributed to their growing demand (Neetha 2004, 2009; Ray
and Qayum 2009; Vasanthi 2011).
Migration and domestic work in cities is closely related, owing to the ease with
which migrants can enter this occupation, and gendered nature of this occupation.
Migration has considerably increased supply of domestic workers in cities like Delhi
and Kolkata. Movement of female domestics to cities represents a classic case of
migration and employment facilitated through social networks. New city-based
employment opportunities have been identified as pull factors leading to migra-
tion to the cities. These combined with push factors from rural areas characterised
by agricultural unrest, etc. have induced the rise in demand for domestic work in
urban space. The success stories of kinsmen also attract migration (Karlekar 1995;
Raghuram 1999; Neetha 2004, 2009; Wadhawan 2013).

1
  Regulation has been brought in piece meal at different levels. Some states have prescribed minimum
wages for domestic work (see Neetha 2013). After much struggle, domestic workers are brought under
the law against sexual harassment at the workplace. Though domestic workers have Rashtriya Swasthya
Bima Yojana and Unorganised Workers Social Security Act, 2008, the coverage is negligible.
2
  Domestic workers are included in the employment category of domestic personnel which comprise
of a range of activities representing domestic work. The used sub-categories are as follows: housemaid/
servant, cook and governess/babysitter.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 661

This paper is an attempt towards analysing the demand for domestic workers spe-
cifically in urban India, wherein we intend to verify a range of hypotheses pertain-
ing to demand for domestic workers in urban households. The analysis exploits the
information obtained in Unemployment and Employment Survey (National Sample
Survey Organisation, NSSO), hereafter to assess the significance of domestic work
across Indian states. The characteristic aspect of the demand for domestic work in
urban India is elaborated based on the reporting made in household consumption
expenditure surveys provided by the NSSO. We supplement the discussion with
insights from a micro-level enquiry. Based on the narratives of the employers, we
offer an understanding on the demand for domestic workers in the National Capital
Region.

2 Data and Methods

For our analysis, we use National Sample Survey Employment and Unemployment
Survey data for the years 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round). We
also used NSS household consumption expenditure survey for 2004–2005 (61st
round) and 2011–2012 (68th round).

2.1 Data for Analysing Significance of Domestic Work in India

Here, we adopt National Industrial Classification (NIC) 20083 in defining domestic

workers as included in the employment category of domestic personnel, which com-
prise a range of activities representing domestic work. The sub-categories are as fol-
lows: housemaid/servant, cook, gardener, gatekeeper/chowkidar/watchman, govern-
ess/babysitter, tutor, driver and ‘others’. This information has been used to analyse
the growth and social and demographic characteristics of domestic workers in India
(Neetha 2009, 2013). ‘Housemaid/servant’ and ‘others’ are categories that do not
specify tasks. ‘Cook’ and ‘babysitter’ are categorised separately. One may assume
that housemaids/servants are those either doing only cleaning tasks or combining
many tasks (Neetha 2009). For our analysis, the categories of ‘housemaid/servant’,
‘cook’ and ‘governess/babysitter’ are relevant. On close examination of the data for
urban areas, we found very small number of observations in the categories of ‘cook’
and ‘governess/babysitter’. There were states that do not report workers in these cat-
egories. Hence, our analysis is based on the category of housemaid/servant which
we will refer to as ‘domestic worker’ hereafter.4

3
  We use usual principal and subsidiary status (ps + ss).
4
 National Occupational Classification of Workers (NCO)—2004 also categories domestic workers
under various heads. Due to availability of information at the broader level including both domestic and
institutional workers, we were unable to use NCO classification for analysing extent of employment in
paid domestic work in India. For other discussions on ambiguities in NCO classification, see Neetha
(2004).

ISLE 13
 662 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

NSS also provides every household’s principal industry and occupation which is
determined by listing all the occupations pertaining to economic activities pursued
by the members of the household excluding those employed by the household and
paying guests (who in view of their staying and taking food in the household were
considered as its normal members) during the 1-year period preceding the date of
survey, no matter whether such occupations were pursued by the members in their
principal or subsidiary (on the basis of earnings) capacity. Out of all the occupa-
tions listed, the one which fetched the maximum earnings to the household dur-
ing the last 365 days preceding the date of survey was considered as the principal
household occupation. If one or more members of the household pursued the house-
hold occupation in different industries, corresponding to the principal occupation,
which fetched the maximum earnings, was considered as the principal industry of
the household (NSS employment unemployment report, 2011–2012). This informa-
tion is used to analyse the extent to which urban households are dependent on paid
domestic work for their living.

2.2 Data for Analysing Demand for Domestic Workers in India

Demand for paid domestic work has been analysed based on the NSS Household
Consumption Expenditure survey for 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012
(68th round). The survey provides information on monthly expenditure incurred
by a household on ‘domestic servant/cook’, a category we refer to as ‘domestic
worker’. In this paper, we analyse NSS data only for urban India. Urban house-
holds are divided into monthly per capita expenditure (MPCE) quintiles, and we
analyse the proportion of households reporting expenditure on ‘domestic worker’
in each of these quintiles. This analysis estimates demand for paid domestic work
across MPCE quintiles. We also analyse the proportion of urban households which
were spending 10% or more of their total MPCE on ‘domestic worker’. Further, we
explore the possible potential of ageing and child care responsibilities in inducing
the employment of domestic workers by verifying the linkages between demand for
domestic workers and a household’s age composition.
Demand for paid domestic work may also depend on characteristic attributes of
female members within a household in urban areas. Work status of women is likely
to influence the demand for domestic workers; however, in the absence of informa-
tion on work status of female members within a household, we make use of avail-
able information on female members in the households. We categorise households
according to age and education levels of their female members. We distribute the
households according to the presence/absence of women in working age group
(between 25 and 45  years) along with educational level beyond graduation and
above.
We compute characteristic odd for reporting expenditure on ‘domestic worker’
across each category defined according to three household characteristics: MPCE
quintiles, household’s age composition and demographic characteristics of female
members of the household. The characteristic odd explains the likelihood of occur-
rence of an event for a category vis-à-vis the overall likelihood of that event. Most

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 663

Table 1  Occupations with single largest proportions of women in urban areas. Source NSS employment–
unemployment survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)
Year Occupations with the single largest proportions of urban Proportion of women
women workers workers in urban areas
(%)

2004–2005 Growing of food grain crops (cereals and pulses) 9.54

housemaid/servant 7.41
2011–2012 housemaid/servant 6.93
Custom tailoring 6.22

often differences in outcomes are presented across characteristic categories; how-

ever, these differences may not be plainly comparable as they may be influenced
by the level of the occurrence of the phenomenon. To overcome this problem, a
unit free approach of reading characteristic differences may be appropriate. Such
an approach involves measuring characteristic odds. In simple terms, characteristic
odds are computed as a ratio of the odd of the phenomenon with a certain char-
acteristic and the odd of the phenomenon irrespective of any characteristics. The
advantage of using such a measure is that the characteristic differences get placed
in a range that becomes comparable across time and space without being influenced
or biased by varying level of the phenomenon. Moreover, this measure captures the
departure from homogeneity (Chakraborty 2001). In this paper, we define character-
istic odd in the following manner.
Oai = (pi∕1 − pi)∕(po∕1 − po),
where Oai = characteristic odd of employing a domestic worker among ith group,
pi = proportion of households in the ith group that have reported an expenditure on a
domestic worker. po = proportion of households in the ith group that have reported
an expenditure on a domestic worker.
This concept can be further understood through an example. Suppose the char-
acteristic odd for reporting expenditure or employing a domestic worker is 4.00
for households in 5th MPCE quintile, while it is 0.33 for 3rd quintile. This means
that households in 5th MPCE quintile are 4 times more likely to employ a domes-
tic worker as against households in the 3rd quintile being 0.33 times less likely to
employ a domestic worker. Joint and conditional odds are also analysed to comment
on differential likelihood of employing a domestic worker across economic status of
households.

3 Significance of Domestic Work

In 2011–2012, domestic work became the single largest occupational category for
women in urban areas (Table 1). A noteworthy phenomenon is that in 2004–2005,
growing of crops was the occupation involving the largest proportion of women

ISLE 13
 664 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

2004-05 2011-12
18
16
16 16
14 15
14
12 13
13
10 12
8 10
6 8 8
4 5.5
2 4

0
CHATTISGARH DELHI KARNATAKA MAHARASTRA TAMIL NADU ALL INDIA

Fig. 1  Number of households with domestic work as a major source of income per 1000 households in
urban areas. Source NSS employment–unemployment survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012
(68th round)

workers in urban areas. But over a period of time domestic work has become the
single largest occupation.

3.1 Households with Paid Domestic Service as the Major Source of Income

We examine the proportion of households in urban areas, designated in the occupa-

tional category of ‘domestic work’. We analyse the selected states that have higher
number of households reporting domestic work as the major source of income in
urban areas than the national average. Among all the states, only those states that
have a higher share of households reporting domestic work as the major source
of income than the national average are depicted here. National capital territory
of Delhi has also been considered for the analysis given that many scholars have
documented the presence of domestic workers (especially migrant workers) in the
region. From Fig. 1, we see a rise in the proportion of urban households dependent
on domestic work in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu as against Delhi and Maharashtra
where there is a marginal decline in the proportion of urban households reporting
domestic work as their major source of income. States with higher number of house-
holds depending on domestic work as the major source of income per 1000 house-
holds in urban areas than the national average are experiencing varying degree of
urbanisation. Urbanisation rates vary from 23% in Chhattisgarh to 97.5% in Delhi.5
However, except Chhattisgarh, all other states have a greater degree of urbanisation
compared with the urbanisation at the national level.
Interestingly, in 2004–2005, West Bengal, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Odisha were
also among the states that had proportion of urban households dependent on domestic
work greater than the national average. The analysis suggests that in relatively more
urbanised states, domestic work may be a remunerative livelihood option for many

5
  Based on Primary Census Abstract 2011.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 665

2004-05 2011-12
35
30 32 31 32
25 29 28 29
25
20
22 21 21
15 19 18 18
18
16
10 12.5
10.5 10.3
5
0

Fig. 2  Number of persons in the category of domestic workers per 1000 persons in urban areas. Source
NSS employment–unemployment survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)

households. Such an option serves as a catalyst to attract migrant workers to the cities.
Another possible reason could be that the major urban centres of economic growth are
situated in Delhi, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra, the states with relatively
greater share of urban households reporting domestic work as their major source of
income.
Additionally, we analyse the proportion of persons in the category of domestic work-
ers in urban areas. We depict the selected states that have a higher number of persons
in the category of ‘domestic worker’ per 1000 persons in urban areas than the national
average. Figure 2 shows an increase in the same proportion for Assam, Karnataka and
Tamil Nadu. At the same time, in other states there is a decline in the proportion of
persons dependent on domestic work. The states with higher proportion of persons in
the category of domestic worker in urban areas are conditioned by the levels of urban-
isation. The urbanisation rates vary from 14% in Assam to 97.5% in Delhi. But the
urbanisation rate in Assam has also increased between 2001 and 2011. Interestingly,
in 2004–2005, Chhattisgarh and Odisha were also among the states that had a higher
number of persons in the category of domestic worker per 1000 persons in urban areas
than the national average.
It is noteworthy that despite a relatively small sample in the NSS, Delhi is among
the states that have a higher proportion of persons as well as households dependent on
domestic work than the national average. Delhi emerges as a region where domestic
work may be a viable and remunerative livelihood option.

ISLE 13
 666 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

2004-05 2011-12
25.00 23.14
23.68
20.00

14.36
15.00 12.98 12.66
13.01
10.57 10.20
9.58 9.58 9.17
10.00

4.60
5.00

0.00
WEST BENGAL DELHI MAHARASTRA HARYANA KARNATAKA ALL INDIA

Fig. 3  Proportion of urban households reporting expenditure on domestic worker. Source NSS consump-
tion expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)

4 An analysis of Demand for Domestic Worker Across Indian States

4.1 Employment of Domestic Workers Across the Selected States

The selected states have been analysed in terms of the proportion of urban house-
holds reporting expenditure on domestic worker. Figure  3 depicts the states with
percentage of households reporting expenditure on domestic worker higher than the
national average in 2011–2012, West Bengal ranked at the top followed by Delhi.
Strikingly, Delhi and Haryana show an increase in the proportion of households
demanding domestic worker, while other states have shown a decline in the same.
This suggests that it is likely that there has been an increase in demand for domestic
help in NCR.6 In 2004–2005, Chhattisgarh and Gujarat were also among the states
which had a higher proportion of households reporting expenditure on domestic
worker compared with the national average.

4.2 Characterising the Households with Demand for Paid Domestic Workers

This section analyses household demand for domestic workers in urban areas in
terms of three household characteristics: MPCE quintiles, age composition and
demographic characteristics of female members.

4.2.1 Demand for Domestic Workers Across MPCE Quintiles

The following tables reveal the greater likelihood of engaging domestic workers
among economically well-off households as against those less well-off households.

6
  NCT of Delhi, Gurgaon (sub-region of Haryana) and Noida (sub-region of Uttar Pradesh) are covered
in our micro-level study.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 667

Table 2  Characteristic odd for reporting expenditure on domestic workers according to MPCE quintiles.
Source own calculation based on NSS consumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and
2011–2012 (68th round)
2004–2005 2011–2012
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5

All India 0.01 0.08 0.22 1.02 5.19 0.02 0.1 0.39 1.08 4.47
Delhi 0 0 0 0.26 8.5 0 0.01 0.07 0.86 8.22
Haryana 0 0 0 0.95 4.83 0 0.05 0.15 1.27 4.86
West Bengal 0.02 0.09 0.36 1.68 7.76 0.03 0.19 0.61 1.64 5.16
Maharashtra 0.04 0.1 0.27 1.08 5.51 0.02 0.07 0.33 1.54 4.52
Karnataka 0.02 0.15 0.35 0.81 5.82 0.02 0.11 0.3 1 4.86
Kerala 0.01 0.01 0.13 1.07 5.06 0 0.05 0.33 1 4.44

Table 3  Distribution of (urban) households according to household age composition. Source NSS con-
sumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)
Code 2004–2005 2011–2012

Household age composition (All India)

 Households with children and elderly C1 13.57 12.64
 Households with children but no elderly C2 45.9 41.91
 Households without children but with elderly C3 10.58 11.78
 Households without children and elderly C4 29.96 33.67
 Total 100 100
Household age composition (Kerala)
 Households with children and elderly C1 21.24 20.52
 Households with children but no elderly C2 29.17 28.77
 Households without children but with elderly C3 17.78 20.89
 Households without children and elderly C4 31.8 29.82
 Total 100 100

This pattern of employment of domestic worker across consumption quintiles is ver-

ified for possible association between the two.7 The test results confirm that house-
holds higher in the consumption hierarchy have a positive bearing on the demand for
a domestic worker. We observe that in 2011–2012, at all India level, households in
the richest quintile are four times more likely to demand a domestic worker than a
typical household (Table 2). Households in first three quintiles are much less likely
to demand a domestic worker. A similar exposition of the demand for domestic
workers across consumption quintiles is made for selected states that depict a wide
variation. It is noteworthy that in Delhi, households in the fifth quintile of MPCE
were eight times more likely to have demand for domestic worker than households in

7
  Pearson’s Chi-square test was used.

ISLE 13
 668 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

Table 4  Characteristic odd 2004–2005 2011–2012

for reporting expenditure on
‘domestic worker’ according C1 C2 C3 C4 C1 C2 C3 C4
to household age composition.
Source NSS consumption All India 1.29 0.65 2.44 0.98 1.11 0.49 4.79 0.88
expenditure survey 2004–2005 Delhi 1.11 0.49 4.79 0.88 1.8 0.62 4.52 0.62
(61st round) and 2011–2012
(68th round) Haryana 1.42 0.55 5.62 0.49 1.43 0.97 2.26 0.54
West Bengal 1.45 0.62 2.15 0.9 1.61 0.58 2.58 0.69
Maharashtra 1.36 0.71 2.55 0.82 0.94 0.84 2.45 0.79
Karnataka 1.38 0.73 2.21 0.87 2.16 0.91 2.15 0.36
Kerala 0.99 0.84 1.87 0.71 0.85 0.88 1.86 0.66

general. This likelihood of employing a domestic worker by households in response

to consumption hierarchy has intensified over time.

4.2.2 Age Composition of Households and Demand for Domestic Work

Household demand for domestic worker may arise owing to the level of dependency
within the household indicated by the presence of elderly people and young chil-
dren. We therefore categorise the households according to the presence of children
(14 years of age and below) and elderly (60 years of and above) in the household.
This categorisation is intended to capture the potential levels of dependency within
the household. Table 3 illustrates that the two prominent categories are households
with children but without elderly and households with elderly but without children.
All the selected states except Kerala have the distribution of households across all
the four categories similar to the distribution at the national level. Contrary to the
frequency distribution of households across the categories, Table  4 depicts that in
2011–2012, at the all India level, a household with elderly and without children was
at least twice more likely to hire a domestic help than a usual household. The fol-
lowing graphs also distinguish this likelihood to be more prominent in Delhi. We
also observe that households with both children and elderly do have greater like-
lihood of employing a domestic worker than households in general. This pattern
of employment of a domestic worker against the prevailing levels of dependency
within the household was verified for association between the two.8 We found that
the presence/absence of elderly people and young children within the household sig-
nificantly influence the demand for domestic workers.

4.2.3 Demographic Characteristic of Female Members of a Household and Demand

for Domestic Work

In the absence of information regarding female employment, we have considered the

presence of educated adult female of working ages to represent likelihood of their

8
  Pearson’s Chi-square test was used.

13 ISLE
 Table 5  Classification of urban households according to female members’ age and education
Households with females in Households with females in work- Households with no females in Households without females in
working age and elderly women ing age but no elderly women working age but with elderly women working age and but no elderly
women

Households with F1 F2 F3 F4
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

graduate and above

educated women
Households with no F5 F6 F7 F8
women with graduate
and above education

ISLE
669

13
 670 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

Table 6  Distribution of households across categories of female members’ characteristics: All India, Ker-
ala and Delhi. Source own calculation based on NSS consumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st
round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)
2004–2005 2011–2012 2004–2005 2011–2012 2004–2005 2011–2012
All India Percentage Percentage Kerala Percentage Percentage Delhi Percentage Percentage

F1 4.92 6.58 F1 7.37 8.98 F1 8.5 8.69

F2 6.31 8.09 F2 6.03 6.24 F2 8.21 8.35
F3 3.27 3.93 F3 6.03 6.84 F3 5.46 7.6
F4 0.47 0.53 F4 0.49 0.25 F4 0.44 0.33
F5 12.12 11.57 F5 21.56 17.16 F5 7.41 8.5
F6 41.69 37.86 F6 30.19 26.37 F6 39.04 34.92
F7 15.34 14.87 F7 20.33 23.92 F7 10.84 8.84
F8 15.89 16.58 F8 7.99 10.26 F8 20.1 22.76
Total 100 100 Total 100 100 Total 100 100

participation in paid work outside home. This aspect was considered to categorise
the households according to female members’ education and the presence of women
in the working age group and in the older age group.9 The categorisation is as fol-
lows (Table 5).
From Table  6, we observe that in 2011–2012, 38% households in India have
women in working age group only with graduation and above levels of education.
Moreover, it is pertinent to note that among the selected states, Kerala and Delhi
depict slightly different pattern in this regard vis-à-vis the distribution at the national
level. Twenty-three per cent of households in Delhi did not have women in the work-
ing age group or in the older age group who had graduation and above levels of
education, whereas 16% of urban households fall under the same category. We also
observe that in Kerala, 24% of the households had no woman with education level
of gradation and above and only had elderly women; however, at all India level only
15% households had such household characteristics. Contrary to the distribution of
households according to female members’ education and the presence of women in
the working age group and in the older age group, Table 7 shows that at all India
level, households comprising women educated up to graduation (and above) and
elderly women have a greatest likelihood (over five times) of employing a domes-
tic worker than in general. The subsequent graphs highlight some varying patterns
across the selected states. In West Bengal, households with women educated up to
graduation (and above) and elderly women households were even more likely (nine
times) to report an employment of a domestic worker, while in Haryana similar
households were only three times likely to employ a domestic worker than in gen-
eral. It is also noticeable that in 2011–2012 at all India, households with women in
the working age group, in elderly age group and those educated up to graduation
and above were four times more likely to report an expenditure on domestic worker,

9
  Working age is taken to be 25 ≤ age ≤ 45; elderly age is taken as 45 and above.

13 ISLE
 Table 7  Characteristic odd for households reporting expenditure on ‘domestic worker’ according to female members’ age and education. Source own calculation based on
NSS consumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)
2004–2005 2011–2012
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8

All India 4.7 4.13 8.24 1.37 0.64 0.43 1.06 0.26 4.18 3.68 5.31 1.11 0.51 0.32 1.04 0.27
Delhi 3.24 4.72 6.89 1.78 0.08 0.11 1.27 0.33 4.82 3.4 6.6 0 0.22 0.15 1.02 0.28
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

Haryana 4.74 2.07 17.59 0 0.66 0.23 0.99 0.1 2.49 4.32 3.13 0 0.17 0.09 0.81 0.18
West Bengal 6.63 4.23 10.48 1.98 0.78 0.47 1.38 0.21 6.29 3.79 9.23 5.68 0.86 0.37 1.04 0.27
Maharashtra 6.86 4.89 7.99 0 0.52 0.46 0.99 0.19 3.68 5.06 6.37 0.22 0.35 0.34 1.13 0.3
Karnataka 3.77 4.27 6.11 0.76 0.9 0.62 1.22 0.27 5.54 5.82 3.82 0 0.51 0.17 0.72 0.16
Kerala 2.32 1.8 5.71 0 0.28 0.53 1.18 0.37 1.98 3.14 5.85 0 0.18 0.31 0.85 0.33

ISLE
671

13
 672 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

Table 8  Joint characteristic odd for households reporting expenditure on ‘domestic worker’: India, 2011–
2012. Source own calculation based on NSS consumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round)
and 2011–2012 (68th round)
Both children Only elderly Only children None Overall odds
and elderly for quintiles

Q5 13.06 10.79 5.31 2.25 4.47

Q4 3.09 2.24 1.02 0.59 1.08
Q3 1.14 0.91 0.27 0.12 0.39
Q2 0.25 0.19 0.06 0.05 0.10
Q1 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.02
Overall odds for 1.46 2.40 0.69 0.80 9.17
dependency

Table 9  Characteristic odd for households reporting expenditure on ‘domestic worker’ within MPCE
quintiles conditioned by household dependency: India, 2011–2012. Source own calculation based on
NSS consumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)
Both children Only elderly Only children None Overall odds
and elderly for quintiles

Q5 2.92 2.41 1.19 0.50 4.47

Q4 2.87 2.09 0.95 0.55 1.08
Q3 2.95 2.36 0.71 0.31 0.39
Q2 2.43 1.86 0.62 0.50 0.10
Q1 1.89 3.19 0.59 0.18 0.02
Overall odds for 1.46 2.40 0.69 0.80 9.17
dependency

while in West Bengal these households were over five times more likely to demand
a domestic worker. It is noteworthy that households with female only in working age
group and those educated up to graduation and above also depict higher likelihood
to report an expenditure on domestic work. Moreover, we observe that in Haryana
such household had the greatest likelihood to employ a domestic worker. We tested
this pattern of employment of domestic worker across demographic characteristics
of female household members.10 It was found that female members’ age and educa-
tional status have a significant bearing on household’s demand for domestic worker.

4.2.4 Joints and Conditional Odds for Employing a Domestic Worker

Likelihood of employing domestic worker in a household is examined from

twin perspective of need (indicated by extent of dependency) and affordability

10
  Pearson’s Chi-square test was used.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 673

Table 10  Characteristic odd for households reporting expenditure on ‘domestic worker’ within depend-
ency categories conditioned by MPCE quintiles (economic status): India, 2011–2012. Source own calcu-
lation based NSS consumption expenditure survey 2004–2005 (61st round) and 2011–2012 (68th round)
Both children Only elderly Only children None Overall odds
and elderly for quintiles

Q5 8.92 4.50 7.70 2.81 4.47

Q4 2.11 0.94 1.48 0.74 1.08
Q3 0.78 0.38 0.40 0.15 0.39
Q2 0.17 0.08 0.09 0.06 0.10
Q1 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02
Overall odds for 1.46 2.40 0.69 0.80 9.17
dependency

(economic capacity). This phenomenon when examined along both the aspects
reveals an interesting pattern where affordability dominates but is conditioned
by dependency need within the household. For instance, the most affluent with
greater need (presence of both children and elderly) are more likely (13 times)
to employ a domestic worker but this likelihood does reduce with intensity of
need for care (Table 8). Similarly, along the economic hierarchy the likelihood
comes down but the need conditionality remains. With reduced need, the likeli-
hood of employing domestic worker declines. In fact, affordability factor creates
divide in likelihood of employing domestic worker where in the gap between the
odd ratio for the lowest quintile and highest quintile is 5.45 and up to the third
quintile, i.e. 60% of the households are less likely to employ domestic workers
as against the overall trend. Similar to this, the dependency attribute as concep-
tualised here does reflect a gap of 2.60 between the most needy households (i.e.
with elderly in household) and those in the absence both children and elderly.
Following the analysis of joint likelihood of recruiting domestic worker,
we examine the conditional odds to reflect upon the differential likelihood of
employing domestic workers across economic status of the households. Table 9
reveals that among the households belonging to the top hierarchy in economic
status the dependency feature differentiates the employment of domestic work-
ers and in the absence of dependency there is the least likelihood of having the
same. Further, despite coming down the ladder in economic status, the likeli-
hood of having domestic workers remains strongly conditioned by the depend-
ency needs.
A similar analysis can also be made across dependency categories to under-
stand the potential role of economic affluence in determining employment of a
domestic worker in a household (Table  10). Undoubtedly, analysis in Tables  9
and 10 supports the inference that while economic status of the household has a
positive bearing on the employment of domestic worker, the dependency needs
intensify such demand.

ISLE 13
 674 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

Table 11  Distribution of surveyed workers across work arrangements (nature of employment). Source

field survey
Nature of employment/work arrangement Freq. Percentage of total
workers (out of
167)

Live-out/day workers
 Part time in single house 12 (10.62) 7.19
 Part time in multiple houses 90 (79.65) 53.89
 Full-time live-out 11 (9.73) 6.59
 Total 113 (100) 67.67
Live-in workers
 Full-time live-in residing with employer 36 (66.67) 21.56
 Government servant quarters 12 (22.22) 7.19
 Private quarters 6 (11.11) 3.59
 Total 54 (100) 32.33
 All 167 100

45
39.7
40
35
30
Percentage

25 21.59
20 16.38
15
10.17
10 7.44
4.71
5
0
Multi storey Single storey Relatively Big Small Big
ind. House house small house apartment apartment government
houses

Fig. 4  Distribution of jobs by type of workplace. Source field survey

5 Demand for Domestic Workers: A Micro‑Level Study in the National

Capital Region

Primary Survey was conducted to investigate employment relations for female

domestic workers in the National Capital Region.11 The Survey comprised 167

11
  The study was conducted for the first author’s MPhil dissertation.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 675

domestic workers. In addition, 43 employers were interviewed to obtain their views

on employment of domestic help. Domestic workers employed by the interviewed
employers were not part of the surveyed workers. The surveyed workers provided
information about their work arrangements, tasks and wages, workplace and employ-
ers.12 The study highlighted diversity in demand for domestic workers. Workers had
varied work arrangements. Such details regarding domestic work are unavailable in
secondary data. The workers were categorised as day workers and live-in workers.
Day workers could be further categorised as part-time workers (either in a single
house or in multiple houses) and full-time day workers. Live-in workers were further
categorised as those living alone with the employers and those living in servant’s
quarters attached to government-provided accommodation and private independent
houses (Table 11). Several workers were engaged in multiple jobs; hence, from 167
workers, information was collected about 424 jobs.
Domestic workers were employed in diverse workplaces including independent
houses and apartments of varying sizes. About two-fifths of the jobs were carried
out in relatively small apartments, while a little over one-fifth of the jobs were car-
ried on single-storey independent houses. Nearly 30% of the jobs were executed in
relatively larger houses and apartments (Fig. 4). Moreover, demand for a domestic
worker was no different between households with a working woman and those with-
out a working woman.13 Further, about 60% of the jobs that were carried out in the
households with working women did not have non-working adult.

5.1 Employers’ Needs for and Preferences Regarding Domestic Workers

We found that varied nature of demand exists in National Capital Region (NCR).14
These distinctions are made on the basis of household characteristics, their reasons
for employing domestic worker/s, women’s work status and their preference for a
particular work arrangement. This section provides an empirical evidence for vari-
ous propositions made in the literature regarding demand for domestic work. For
instance, Kaur (2006) has discussed the strategies adopted by various kinds of
households to meet their needs. It was highlighted that working women, non-work-
ing women and middle class households with grown up children adopt different
strategies. A section of respondents in the present study employed domestic workers
because female members were working while some employed domestic help as they
were used to a domestic help.15 Few working women added that even if they were

12
  This paper presents information on type of workplace and work arrangements only. Then, we proceed
to analyse the demand as narrated by the employers themselves.
13
  Out of 424 jobs, such information could be collected only 362 jobs.
14
  About two-fifths of the employers interviewed were above 50 years of age, 37% were between 31 and
40 years, 14% were between 41 and 50 years and only three employers were 30 years or less.
15
 Earlier works done in Kolkata and Delhi have also highlighted the indispensability of the domes-
tic worker. Qayum and Ray (2016) point out the struggles faced by the households in Kolkata while
adjusting to the ‘modern’ world. There were shifts from male domestic worker to female domestic
worker, from live-in workers to part time workers and the employers required spatial management in
the restricted spaces of the flats. Yet servants were essential for managing the household and child care,
especially for working. For those aspiring for middle class status, hiring a domestic worker even for an

ISLE 13
 676 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

not working they would have hired a domestic worker, at least for certain tasks like
cleaning. A section of respondents started employing workers later in their lives.
Some of the employers employing full-time live-in workers preferred hiring through
personal and social networks, while others preferred hiring through private agencies
as it reduces their task for looking for workers. Following is a detailed categorisation
of demand for domestic worker in the NCR.
(1) Households with employed women and employing full-time worker/s In most
cases, working women employed full-time workers for child care. But some employ-
ers prefer multiple workers and divide the work load between full-time workers and
the part-time workers. A working woman in her thirties has a 1-year-old daughter.
Either her mother or mother-in-law is always there to help her. But she has employed
three workers—a part-time cook, a cleaner and a full-time day worker to take care
of the child and to do odd jobs. She said that it was difficult for her to employ a
full-time live-in worker because of lack of space in the house. From this case, we
observe that the working woman’s requirement for a full-time help does not neces-
sarily arise from the absence household members to provide care, though they may
be older members.
Moreover, a civil servants narrative explained that employers could change the
work arrangement owing to the perks attached to their jobs. Earlier she used to hire
young girls from her home town but as her son grew up, she started employing part-
time workers. Recently, she felt that she needed someone to take care of the chil-
dren. Hence, she shifted to a house with a servant’s quarter. Now, she had a full-time
worker living in the quarters and a part-time worker for cleaning purposes.
For some respondents, the full-time workers who have been working for years
have become ‘house managers’ or ‘house keepers’. The employers need not worry
about everyday household management.
(2) Households with employed women and part-time workers Many working
women could manage with part-time workers. Either they did not feel the need for
a full-time worker or they did not find the arrangement suitable. Discomforts arose
due to space constraints, financial constraints and unsatisfactory experiences while
hiring through private recruiting agencies. In some cases, employer’s preference
for an arrangement changes over time. Most of them have hired multiple part-time
workers. An employer informed us that when her child was born and she was busy
with research for her PhD, she had employed a full-time worker but now she has two
part-time workers. This manifests the domestic work arrangements being responsive
to the specific needs and preferences.
(3) Households with non-working adult women This category of households too
prefers domestic workers (both full time as well as part time) but their choice and
preference are guided by an entirely different set of norms which have more to do

Footnote 15 (continued)
hour or two a day allowed a sense of achieving such status. Similar essentiality of domestic worker was
observed in the study carried out by Jagori (2010) in Delhi. The employers interviewed in that report
added that it was possible to hire domestic workers as they were available at affordable rates.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 677

with status and peer influence. Some of them recruit domestic worker owing to their
age.
(a) Households employing full-time workers as it were customary Among house-
holds with non-working women, the reason offered is less need based rather than
as part of practice. Few felt the need for full-time workers to manage household
chores throughout the day, and the household always had domestic workers. Some
of them employed male domestic workers because they can perform heavy tasks as
well. These male workers have been working with them for many years. The reasons
for opting for a male worker varied. Reasons mentioned were that employers had to
shoulder greater responsibilities when they hired female workers and to circumvent
the taboo on cooking during menstruation. But those who have daughters prefer a
female worker to take care of them. Few others, however, preferred hiring a male
full-time worker as female workers tend to get involved with other male workers
around like drivers, etc.
Another employer in the same age group had a full-time worker for around
20 years, but after her daughters got married she is managing with part-time work-
ers. She said that full-time worker was necessary when the children were studying,
they required tea/coffee at regular interval. ‘Servant ke beggar guzarana hi hotatha
(could not manage without a servant)’. Now, she cooks and washes clothes using
electrical devices.
Several employers acknowledged the contribution made by the domestic work-
ers which allowed them manage large houses and elaborate tasks. They could also
socialise and spend quality time with children and family. These examples highlight
that demand for domestic worker may arise from persons’ time and energy being
spent in conspicuous consumption. Moreover, the apparatus of living becomes so
elaborate that the household cannot be managed without help (Veblen 1899).
(b) Households with non-working women and part-time workers Households in
this category said they always had workers at least for cleaning and washing uten-
sils. Several employers added that they prefer to cook themselves according to the
family’s tastes and preferences. Another employer of 36 years of age lives with her
husband and son. She has employed two workers, one for cleaning and another for
washing utensils and assisting in food preparation. She said that in India, it has been
a trend/tradition to hire workers for cleaning and washing utensils. They ease the
household chores of employers.
(c) Households that employed workers due to life cycle changes There were few
households where domestic work was earlier done by household members them-
selves but later they employed workers either due to old age or due to younger
female members joining the work force. The demand for domestic workers is con-
ditioned by the dependence manifested over the life cycle of members of the house-
holds. Other woman employer of 35 years of age lives in her family of seven mem-
bers. They have a single part-time worker for cleaning and washing utensils. The
family started to employ workers since last 5–6 years, because her mother started to
grow old, her sister got married and she started working. Previously, all tasks were
being done on their own. In the worker’s absence, they manage themselves. They
have never appointed any full-time worker. Another employer in her mid-fifties
started having a domestic help since 2–3 years when she started feeling pain in her

ISLE 13
 678 The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679

knees and her children started working and pursuing higher education. She needed a
worker only for cleaning as utensils can be washed while standing. But the workers
in her colony do not agree to do only one task.

6 Conclusion

In the context of rising demand for domestic work in a fast urbanising India, this
exercise brings to light certain aspects of this rising demand by analysing chang-
ing dynamics of household structure and composition as well as rising affluence.
While it may be otherwise understood that rising economic affluence is the driving
force behind this phenomenon, a critical analysis at the household level indicates the
complex dynamic of economic affluence and rising dependency determines engage-
ment of domestic workers in urban Indian households. A micro-enquiry unfolds
rich details regarding varying ranges of domestic work as well employment rela-
tions and conditions in such engagement. While economic affluence is undoubt-
edly the differentiating attribute between households engaging domestic worker
and others, the dependency need of the household remains the trigger intensifying
such differentiation. Further, there is indicative evidence to the effect that educated
women engaged in paid work within the household when coupled with the care need
within the household increase the likelihood of engaging domestic worker by Indian
households.
The analysis of demand for domestic worker across categories of households in
terms of age composition and demographic characteristics of female members sug-
gests that this demand may be arising out of replacing role of women within the
household on the one hand and the compulsion owing to the presence/absence of
children and elderly within the household on the other. Joint and conditional odds
further highlight that affordability has a strong influence on the employment of
domestic worker but the role of dependency characteristics cannot be ignored. The
scholarly work on this topic observes that the large supply of such workers to cit-
ies makes them affordable to sections of households that may otherwise not have
employed domestics.
A micro-level study conducted in the NCR throws further light on the nature of
demand for domestic workers in urban areas. A survey among employers reveals
that employment of domestic workers has been customary for a class of population.
However, other household characteristics like women’s employment and life cycle
of a household also shape the demand for a domestic worker. Nature of employ-
ment, broadly categorised as live-out/day work or live-in work, is also observed to
be influenced by economic class and household specific needs.
Finally, demand for domestic work in the evolving familial transition in Indian
urban space may rise not merely owing to affordability but also due to care work/
dependency which was otherwise unpaid work of women in the household.

Acknowledgements This paper has benefitted immensely from the inputs offered by Prof. Praveena
Kodoth, and the suggestions and comments as regards analysis received from Dr. Upasak Das are highly
appreciated.

13 ISLE
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics (2018) 61:659–679 679

References
Chakraborty, A. (2001). The Concept and Measurement of Group Inequality. Centre for Development
Studies, Working paper No. 315, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.
DNA. (2013). Domestic Help Workforce in India Exists Without Government or Societal Support.
Retrieved from https​://www.dnain​dia.com/india​/repor​t-domes​tic-help-workf​orce-in-india​-exist​
s-witho​ut-gover​nment​-orsoc​ietal​-suppo​rt-19406​46. Accessed 8 Jan 2019.
Ghosh, J. (2014). Lecture on The Invisible Workers: Rights, Justice and Dignity for Domestic Workers.
Retrieved from http://in.one.un.org/page/the-invis​ible-worke​rs-right​s-justi​ce-and-digni​ty-for-domes​
tic-worke​rs. Accessed 8 Jan 2019.
Jagori. 2010. A Report on Domestic Workers: Conditions, Rights and Responsibilities a Study of Part-
Time Domestic Workers in Delhi. New Delhi: Jagori.
Karlekar, M. 1995. Gender Dimensions in Labour Migration. In Women and Seasonal Labour Migration,
ed. L.S. Sandbergen. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Kaur, R. 2006. Migrating for Work: Rewriting Gender Relations. In Poverty, Gender and Migration, ed.
S. Arya and A. Roy. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Neetha, N. 2004. Making of Female Breadwinners: Migration and Social Networking of Women Domes-
tics in Delhi. Economic and Political Weekly 37(17): 1681–1688.
Neetha, N. 2008. Regulating Domestic Work. Economic and Political Weekly 43(37): 26–28.
Neetha, N. 2009. Contours of Domestic Service: Characteristics, Work Relations and Regulations. Indian
Journal of Labour Economics 52(3): 489–506.
Neetha, N. 2013. Paid Domestic Work Making Sense of the Jigsaw Puzzle. Economic and Political
Weekly 48(43): 35–38.
Qayum, S., and Raka Ray. 2016. The Middle Classes at Home. In Elite and Everyman: The Cultural Poli-
tics of the Indian Middle Classes, ed. A. Baviskar and R. Ray. New Delhi: Routledge.
Raghuram, P. 1999. Interlinking Trajectories: Migration and Domestic Work in India. In Gender, Migra-
tion and Domestic Service, ed. Janet Henshall Momsen. London: Routledge International Studies of
Women and Place.
Ray, Raka, and S. Qayum. 2009. Cultures of Servitude: Modernity, Domesticity, and Class in India. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Vasanthi, N. 2011. Addressing Paid Domestic Work: A Public Policy Concern. Economic and Political
Weekly 46(43): 85–93.
Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class: An economic study in the evolution of institutions.
Macmillan.
Wadhawan, N. 2013. Living in Domesticity Women and Migration for Domestic Work from Jharkhand.
Economic and Political Weekly 48(43): 47–54.

Publisher’s Note  Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

ISLE 13