Since advocates for trafficked domestic workers must work closely with law enforcement, there are groups whose purpose is to bridge the gap between domestic workers and the legal establishment. The Freedom Network, a national conglomeration of organizations, advocates, scholars, and attorneys, has long been an organizing force to aid trafficking victims. Ivy Suriyopas of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, who co-chairs the Freedom Network, says, “We crowd-source our knowledge and make vital connections; we rapidly respond to problems that we see,” adding, “Domestic workers always walk through our doors. They work in homes, isolated; they are often the only employee in the entire household. They often have limited education or English; maybe they are vulnerable because of their immigration status. All of those factors can leave workers vulnerable, and in the wrong employer’s household, it could lead to a trafficking situation.”
In the context of legal services, a trafficking victim usually requires multiple types of advocacy—in particular, an immigration lawyer familiar with the T or U visa process. (A U visa enables victims of trafficking to remain in the United States legally while they pursue claims against their abusive employers, while a T visa permits human trafficking victims to remain in the country if they agree to testify against their employers.) In addition, the victim may pursue a civil case, which is the piece of the puzzle that Rocio Avila handles. “If they get deported, they can’t pursue the criminal or civil matter,” she says. “The federal trafficking statute is to ensure that the victim cooperates with law enforcement to be able to bring the perpetrator to justice.”
To seek help, a worker first must escape his or her abusive employer with the assistance of an acquaintance or through connecting with a community organizer from an organization like SBCEHT. In Pena Canal’s case, the employer, a successful real estate executive, brought Pena Canal to California from Peru to serve as a nanny and housekeeper. She kept Pena Canal working around the clock for no pay for two years. “No one expected this successful woman who worked in real estate would do this,” says Avila. “But Pena Canal ended up confiding in parents at the school where she picked up the kids she cared for. The janitor at the school helped her, got the school secretary involved, and in a couple of months they built trust with her to convince her that she should leave.” Before doing so, one of the parents at the school went online and found Domestic Workers United in New York; workers there told her to call Avila in San Francisco. Ultimately, Pena Canal was awarded over $600,000 for compensatory damages and emotional distress, and her abusive employer was sentenced to sixty months in prison. “The process of convincing the court of the above was itself a product of community lawyering and grassroots advocacy at its best,” Avila says. “There is no way we could have prevailed if hadn’t been for the groundbreaking work of the many individuals behind the domestic worker movement both in New York and in California, whom I used as my experts to educate the court and advocate for dignity for my client.”
Despite the increased efforts of advocates and activists, many domestic workers still do not know their rights, or that the treatment they are receiving at the hands of abusive employers is a crime. Avila has observed that even workers whose cases do not rise to a trafficking charge live in fear of retaliation. “For the live-in nannies and housekeepers, the abuse I see is rampant. Employers are getting away with not even paying minimum wage. Most of my clients don’t complain, out of fear: fear that their employer will turn against them, accuse them of stealing, call the cops. My clients live at the beck and call of their employers. I had one client whose employer would ring a bell, call her when they wanted an apple, water, tea. That doesn’t always give rise to trafficking, but her situation is very bad, exploitative, devoid of dignity, not sustainable.” Avila says that employers often tell her clients things like, “I can’t pay you right now. If you leave, I will contact ICE and have you deported, and terrible things will happen to you.”
To make matters even more challenging for trafficking victims, some of the resources meant to assist them were for years restricted by a contract between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB). In 2006, HHS signed a contract with NCCB making the organization an intermediary between funding for TVPA and the organizations serving trafficked victims. However, NCCB did not allow advocates like IPS to provide any information about contraception or abortion.47 “I had to tell the women who came to me during intake that contraception and abortion services would not be provided,” recalls Tiffany Williams of the IPS. “During goal planning with the women who came to me, I had to state that we can’t cover that information, the relationship between HHS and NCCB mandated that. Looking back on those interviews I wonder if I could have phrased it in another way so as not to preempt care these women could have received.”48
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued HHS over the contract, winning a judgment in Massachusetts Federal District Court saying that HHS had violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution by contracting with an entity that imposed its religious beliefs on trafficked people.49 However, the First Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the ruling, holding that the federal government could still choose to contract with entities that refuse to offer reproductive health care to immigrant women who are victims of trafficking or who are detained by Homeland Security or are otherwise under government control. In her appellate brief to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, ACLU attorney Brigitte Amiri argued, “HHS has not come close to showing that it is absolutely clear that the circumstances giving rise to this case will not recur…. Furthermore, in addition to the TVPA contract, HHS has a long—and ongoing—history of contracting with [the Catholic Bishops] and accepting precisely the same abortion and contraception restrictions that are at the heart of this case.’”50 When the contract between HHS and NCCB lapsed in 2011, the Obama administration did not renew it and instead went with a different intermediary, stating in its request for proposals that it would “have a strong preference” for groups that offered comprehensive health care.
“There Is Not as Much Help as There Is Need”
While many employers of domestic workers still view them as undeserving of equal employment rights, the current movement is working to change this viewpoint. The surge in activism over the past decade has raised consciousness among domestic workers and the general public. A former community organizer, Rocio Avila credits these activists with being a force for change in how domestic workers are able to access the resources they need to turn around their lives. This advocacy has engaged many diverse actors, from community organizers who live and work alongside domestic workers, to the highest leadership in the federal government, all of whom are “in motion around a shared vision,” as National Domestic Workers Alliance director Ai-jen Poo has said.
There are numerous examples of government officials who are also allies of the movement; former labor secretary Hilda Solis, for example, who resigned her post in early 2013, pushed for minimum wage and overtime pay for domestic workers. Ultimately, though, it is today’s advocates for domestic workers’ rights who are helping to secure victories for domestic workers. Avila is a perfect example of this. Since graduating from law school in 2006, she has been representing domestic workers in Northern California in civil suits against abusive employers. Her clients have typically been denied the wages promised them, or even the legally mandated minimum wage. In the more egregious cases, her clients are human trafficking victims who have been physically or emotionally abused. All the work that she and her fellow activists have been doing on behalf of domestic workers and trafficking victims is still not enough, however; according to Avila, “There is not as much