Reimagining organisational responses to domestic and family violence: applying a feminist ethics of care to the work–violence interface in non-metropolitan Victoria, Australia

ABSTRACT

In this article, we apply the theory of feminist care ethics to the issue of workplace responses to domestic and family violence (DFV). Specifically, we aim to understand how prevailing approaches to the intersection of violence and work can be reoriented to centre feminist principles of care, distinct from the masculinist logics on which they currently rely. Our discussion draws on semi-structured interviews with experts on the work–violence interface, primarily based in the non-metropolitan Gippsland region of Victoria, Australia. It identifies three key themes, consistent with feminist care ethics, which can be used as a basis for reimagining workplace responses to DFV: 1) the importance of attentiveness as a practice of care; 2) the need to reimagine employer responsibility for a more caring and gender-equal workplace; and 3) the value of flexibility in responding to DFV. We argue that the data highlight the need for workplaces to structurally embed care in their initiatives on DFV. The analysis also points to the transformative potential of approaches in which care is centred, though, at present, these examples are the exception rather than the rule.

KEYWORDS:

• Domestic violence
• gender equality
• feminist ethics of care
• women and work
• rurality
• organisations

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the generosity of the study’s participants in lending their time and expertise to help improve understandings of the intersection of domestic violence and work in non-metropolitan settings. They would also like to thank Professor Peter Fairbrother for his unfailing support in the early stages of this project and Dr Jess Megarry for her contributions to the research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. We understand that the language used to describe the reality of violence enacted in intimate and familial contexts, and the actors involved, is contested. We use the umbrella term ‘domestic and family violence’, alongside the terms ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ for ease of comprehension, as well as to highlight the importance of naming victimhood (Convery 2006).

2. In this paper, we examine the dominant form of DFV: that perpetrated by men in heterosexual couples against women partners and their children. This does not imply that DFV is absent from LGBTQIA+ communities, but rather that these contexts require separate, specialised analysis, given that the gendered drivers are distinct (e.g. Leonard, Mitchell, Pitts and Patel 2008). Furthermore, our participants overwhelmingly discussed men’s violence against women in their interviews. As such, our analysis and framework respond to this specific context, although grounding organisational responses to DFV in a feminist ethics of care is likely to benefit workers and organisations more broadly.

3. A fourth theme, ‘context’, also emerged from the data, which highlighted the importance of being cognisant of intersecting socio-cultural and economic contextual factors in building appropriate and effective organisational responses to DFV. The volume and breadth of topics that emerged under this theme led the research team to the decision to communicate these findings through a separate paper. It is thus important to note that the analysis in this article is offered as a starting point for embedding care at the work–violence interface, to which an understanding of ‘context’ can and should be added.

4. It is important to note that our analysis is structural. While we engage with specific examples emerging from the data that detail caring and compassion enacted by individuals, our discussion of the data is a call to embed care at a structural level across organisational approaches to DFV. Our documentation of examples of care should not be read as a neoliberal imposition of further unsupported emotional labour on workers, particularly as this work is likely to fall predominantly on women (Hochschild 1983; Macdonald et al. 2021). Moreover, we seek to avoid neoliberal narratives of self-care that orient women, in particular, towards individualised modes of self-policing in response to gendered structural problems (e.g. Gill and Donaghue 2016). Rather, this paper calls for care and compassion to be structurally embedded in organisations, radically transforming their approaches to DFV.

5. This research was classified as low risk and granted approval by the Business College Human Ethics Advisory Network at RMIT University (Approval: 21,415 – Domestic Violence and Workplace Responsibility).

6. Final themes for analysis were: voices of women; material experiences of women; flexibility versus rigidity; non-violent conflict resolution; contextual and narrative understanding; networks of relationships and responsibility to others; attentiveness and the activity of care; erasing public/private dualisms; care as a moral imagination; relationality and interdependence.

7. In order to protect the anonymity of participants, we have, firstly, used pseudonyms, and, secondly, referred to participants’ professional background under the four major categories identified in the research approach.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Kate Farhall

Dr Kate Farhall is an Honorary Principal Research Fellow in the Centre for People, Organisation and Work at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. Her work focuses on using critical feminist analyses to address gender inequality in a range of contexts, with a particular focus on questions of sexuality, violence against women, rurality and work.

Kaye Quek

Dr Kaye Quek is a Senior Lecturer in Global Studies, in the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. Her research focuses on feminist politics and theory, women’s rights and gendered violence. She is the author of Marriage Trafficking: Women in Forced Wedlock (Routledge, 2018).

Laura McVey

Dr Laura McVey recently completed her PhD in Marketing at RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. Her research examines the intersection of markets and violence against women, specifically through the context of the online pornography industry.