Fathimah Fildzah Izzati – The passing of the Domestic Workers Protection Bill (PPRT Law) on 21 April 2026 is a major victory that should be celebrated. After more than two decades, the struggle of domestic workers has at last paid off – they are finally recognised as workers.
This is crucial, particularly in the Indonesian context, where domestic workers (PRT) are often seen simply as 'babu/maids' whose work is undervalued, unappreciated and considered trivial.
In fact, they carry out crucial 'social reproductive labour'. This refers to all the activities and processes required to maintain daily life and prepare individuals to take part in economic production. It includes household chores and childcare.
Without social reproductive labour, the workforce cannot exist. Without it, there would be no factory workers, no office workers, and so on. In other words, there would be no society.
In Indonesia, many domestic workers are employed to live in their employers' homes, and subjected to indefinite labour. They are often seen part of the employer's family, so that they seem to be 'owned' without a clear employment contract. Many also experience violence or even abuse by their employers.
Now, the passing of the PPRT Law means domestic workers at last have regulations that protect them. Employers/families who delegate social reproductive labour to domestic workers must respect their rights as workers by paying a decent wage, providing paid leave, and ensuring access to social security, named Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Sosial Kesehatan (BPJS Kesehatan) and Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Sosial Ketenagakerjaan (BPJS Ketenagakerjaan).
This victory suggests that advancing two other important issues related to social reproductive labour is also becoming increasingly possible.
Protecting working-class housewives
First, it is time to urge the government to provide affordable daycare with standardised facilities and trained, trusted care workers in every workplace (as mandated by the 2024 Maternal and Child Welfare Law), and neighbourhood.
The goal is for working-class families with children to be able to delegate childcare to third parties other than women in their families such as their mothers, mothers-in-law, sisters, and so on. This would free up what has been described by Ay?e Arslan as 'women's reserve army of reproductive labour.'
As of now, externalising social reproductive labour, especially childcare, is largely possible only for upper-middle-class families. Low-income working-class women are often unable to do this, because their own family's basic needs frequently remain unmet. With the enactment of the PPRT Law, it will become even more difficult for working-class families to externalise social reproductive labour to domestic workers. Therefore, access to affordable and safe daycare is critical to fill the widening gap that will be created.
Second, it is time to fight for wages for working-class housewives whose social reproductive labour is systematically undervalued and unrecognised.
In Indonesia's capitalist-patriarchal society, social reproductive labour is largely reliant on women. The asymmetrical gendered labour system places the burden of this work disproportionately on them, while also to assigning blame to them. Those who work outside the home are criticised for neglecting their children and their families, while those who choose to remain at home and care for their children and their families are accused of wasting their potential.
At the same time, many women have no choice but to become housewives with no income. Their roles and contributions are usually ignored, but, In reality, the contribution their unpaid work makes is extensive. As an illustration, in China, such unpaid labour is estimated to account for approximately 25 to 32 per cent of its official GDP.
As a result, working-class and lower-middle-class housewives are often marginalised in policy-making concerning social reproductive labour. Mainstream economics excludes unpaid household labour, like domestic work, from national accounts, leading economists and policymakers to largely overlook it. The unpaid labour performed by these housewives is often rendered invisible and considered insignificant. Yet, as noted earlier, capitalist society could not survive without it.
State-provided wages for housework?
The idea of the government paying wages for working-class housewives is not new. It dates back to to the Wages for Housework (WfH) movement that emerged in the 1970s in the United States and Europe – pioneered by the International Feminist Collective led by Silvia Federici, Selma James, and Mariarosa Dalla Costa
It is critical for two reasons. First, it would help make their previously invisible labour recognised as work. We have heard enough phrases like, 'I don't work, I'm just a housewife', when what a housewife does is, of course, work. Household chores and childcare are a key part of social reproductive labour. Recognising this work is crucial given the persistent gendered asymmetrical labour in social reproduction, particularly at the household level.
Second, these wages would support working-class housewives in carrying out social reproductive labour. Instead of providing Makan Bergizi Gratis/free nutritious food through an undemocratic, top-down process filled with militarism and corrupt projects, would it not be better to provide free nutritious food through a democratic, bottom-up process that responds to grassroots needs?
The objective of a balanced division of labour within the household between women and men may be the ideal, but, for now, the role of the housewife remains unavoidable in Indonesia's patriarchal society.
Pushing for state-provided wages for working-class housewives is one way to try to make this reality fairer.