Separation Anxiety
"Factory gives jobs and hope to HIV people"
Sunday Times - 14 October 2007 - p. 14
This article tells the story of a toy-manufacturing company in Bronkhorstspruit, Gauteng, called The Cuddle Company, which only hires people who are HIV-positive or are otherwise affected by the disease (young people who have been orphaned by HIV/AIDS, for instance). The Cuddle Company is a commercial initiative of the Dutch non-governmental organization KidsRights, and in addition to providing jobs for people affected by HIV, the initiative also donates a portion of its profits to the St. Joseph’s Care and Support Trust at Sizanani Village, which provides antiretroviral drugs and operates a feeding scheme to those affected by HIV in the community. The toys manufactured at The Cuddle Company are made for export to Holland .
On one hand this seems like a simple feel-good story about a company that is concerned about something other than its bottom line, and not only that, it is also contributing positively to the community. But on the other hand, this story raises several problematic questions. Firstly, should we be content, as a society, to simply shun people living with HIV in the regular workplace and instead construct these "protected" workshops where they will only be interacting with other HIV-affected people? What are the societal root causes that are driving the creation of this initiative in the first place? Could this initiative actually be counterproductive by not only taking the government and employers off the hook, but also giving the public the idea that these kinds of HIV-only work environments are a preferred socio-economic solution to the "problem" of employing people with HIV.
Take this comment, for example:
"Angela Maake, health services manager for St. Joseph ’s, said: ‘For many here, it’s like heaven because where else would they find jobs? They can now lead normal lives."
Where else would they find jobs? Well, they have the human and constitutional right to find employment wherever they are qualified, regardless of their HIV status. And where this is not true, Maake and company should be looking at the root causes of why it is not true, rather than creating a parallel workspace (and parallel universe, essentially) where only HIV-positive people will interact with each other.
And here: "… Mkhwanazi believes that one of the biggest benefits is that HIV-positive workers can freely discuss their health issues with colleagues and management without fear of victimisation." As nice as it is that Mkhwanazi and his co-workers feel safe and supported at The Cuddle Company, HIV-positive employees anywhere should be able to freely discuss health issues with colleagues and management without fear of victimisation. In places where they can’t do this, we should be asking "How can we fix that?" rather than trying to avoid it.
All this said, The Cuddle Company does certainly seem to be a conscientious and generous employer: "The company also provides its 9 male and 36 female workers with lunch and free healthcare. “Workers on ARVs are also given time off during the month to collect their medication. This is perhaps the only company that allows its staff to do this during working hours." But again, this raises the issue of specializing this kind of treatment of workers and HIV-positive people instead of normalizing it and expecting it from all employers.
While initiatives such as this one run by KidsRights can be positive experiences for the individuals involved in them, we have to look at their larger impact on society as a whole, and the media needs to continue critically assessing the causes and effects of initiatives like this one.
But, above all, we have to realize that it is not good enough to simply tolerate people living with HIV in our communities. We have to be willing to interact and engage with them as regular human beings, with equal civil, political and social rights. Before we applaud initiatives such as this one for creating a supportive and healthy work environment for people living with HIV, we should be asking ourselves why we don’t simply expect it from all employers.
By Brendan Kennedy