Precarity, Power, and Abuse: Understanding Violence Against Contractual Workers in Public Institutions

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18016869

Abstract

Contractual employees in Pakistani state institutions were structurally disadvantaged employees whose positions lacked job security and were characterized by hierarchical power and little institutional safeguards. This qualitative research investigated the presence of power imbalance in the relationships between and among members of organizational structures of the government in terms of their daily waged and contractual employees and the experiences of verbal, psychological, and emotional violence. Based on the results of the in-depth interviews with sixteen contractual workers in various governmental institutions, the study examined the lived experiences of abuse, fear, and silence and the organizational circumstances under which such practices were condoned. Thematic analysis also demonstrated that precarious employment served as a disciplinary power that allowed the supervisors to dominate their employees through threats of loss of contract, humiliation, and discretionary power. Bureaucratic cultures were often normalized in violence and disguised as discipline or managerial power, which discouraged opposition and reporting. Organizational silence was also supported by the lack of available grievance systems and intimidation and fear of repercussions, which resulted in a continuation of abusive practices in the organizations. According to participants, the mental impact was profound in the form of anxiety, emotional burnout, and internalized blame, with the process of embedding structural inequality into everyday life being marked. Placing the findings in the context of the sociological theories of precarity, symbolic violence, and disciplinary power, the study revealed that workplace violence was institutionalized and not ethnographic. The study found that the Pakistani state apparatuses reproduced labor disparities through their dependency on the insecure employment regimes that emphasized control over dignity. The work demanded structural changes to enhance labor rights, curb discretion, and shift the employment of the state in the sphere of the economy to rights-based and humane employment.