made the experience humiliating for several women. Two women had not signed contracts and had been excluded from social security and paid monthly wages less than the minimum wage. Yet voicing complaints about breaches of workers’ rights was perceived to be risky in terms of job security 163: Once I spoke out and got yelled at for what I said, so I learned not to say anything. They [inspectors] come from the labour office, or the labour syndicate. [...] They come and ask you: What’s the nature of your work? Are you comfortable? Are they fair with you? How is the supervisor? Meanwhile the supervisor is watching you from a distance. Maybe if you say something wrong they’ll write your resignation and send you home. Secondly, for many interviewees, women working outside of the home was generally perceived to be unacceptable, and certainly if working outside the neighbourhood. Such a stance was attributed to both ‘conservative culture’ and men’s traditional role in providing for the family, as well as the challenges associated with working far from home and travelling after dark. Concerns about the danger of this were somewhat mitigated by the shuttle bus operating between Jerash camp and the Industrial Estate 164, but for many mothers and wives such long days were incompatible with family duties165. An additional third concern of particular importance to women was the unseen cost to going out to work; the unpaid services that they would otherwise provide to the household or what might be considered the unpaid work burden of poverty that women often take on (Ghosh, 2011). Giving the reasons for not working in the Industrial Estate, one woman listed 166: First, the responsibility for their children; second, the distance that they have go; third, the housework, the cooking; fourth, and most importantly, her husband coming in from a long distance at the end of the day [arriving late] and her kids need her, and the house needs her. Whilst views varied amongst women and to some extent also amongst older men, male youth mostly thought that working in a garment factory was inappropriate 167. Nevertheless, we were told that overall such employment was more acceptable ‘these days’ than ‘before’. Importantly in light of the poverty levels in Jerash camp, acceptability often grew with a woman’s need to work to contribute to the household income for survival 168. Temporary relocation: improving outside camp work opportunities One potential way of circumventing the costs and difficulties associated with daily transport to and from the camp would be to stay temporarily in or close to the location of the work. Some young men working in Amman reportedly shared rental accommodation in Sweileh; however, it was most often dismissed as being too expensive. As a middleaged woman commented about her son: ‘when he goes far away [for work], he has to sleep Focus group discussion with women working in Industrial Estates, Jerash camp, 29 January 2016. 164 Focus group discussion with women working in Industrial Estates, Jerash camp, 29 January 2016. 163 165 N1, 27 Jan 2016, Jerash camp; FGD with women, 21 Oct 2015, Jerash camp. Focus group discussion with women working in Industrial Estates, Jerash camp, 29 January 2016. 167 Focus group discussion with women and focus group discussion with men, Jerash camp, 21 October 2015; focus group discussion with male youth, Manshiyyeh, 9 and 10 February 2016. 168 The association between the ‘financial needs’ of a household and the acceptance of women’s work has been confirmed by statistics (Milovanovitch, 2016, p.32). 166 Fafo Report 2019:34 104