al-‘Ucha

The word al-‘Ucha in Arabic refers to a tent, and it refers to the makeshift camp that workers establish during labour disputes, strikes, and occupations. As part of my research, in Souss Massa, southern Morocco, I have visited different al-‘Ucha. During these occupations, women either mobilise for their rights to fair labour conditions or to fair compensation in case they are laid off. One important aspect is that the terms “occupation” and “encampment” do not fully capture the strategic reshaping of spaces through such practices. That is why I chose to transliterate the word instead of using occupation. The word al-‘Ucha has significant meanings for the workers, as it is a slogan I have encountered in various farmworkers’ mobilisation in the region, implying that “our [farmworker] rights will only come through al-‘Ucha.” 

It embodies the space where women farmworkers engage in meaningful political action. Just as Frances S. Hasso and Zakia Salime (2016) showed about the occupation of women and men in public spaces during the Maghreb and Mashreq revolutions and uprisings, one of the most striking features of al-‘Ucha was the centrality of the streets and public space, and its occupation by rural agricultural women workers. These women insistently claimed the space, streets, sidewalks, pavements, and dusty roads in an unprecedented manner. 

Furthermore, the women protested during the day and at night, creating new relationships with their surroundings and with one another. They built inclusive communities that transcended their differences. As they congregated in the streets, their bodies and identities were shaped and reshaped. The significance of al-‘Ucha lies in its challenge to the notion that public spaces are masculine domains associated with power, while private spaces are feminine and powerless. It also highlights the social and political processes that determine which bodies, practices, and voices are deemed acceptable in specific spaces and at certain times. Moreover, taking into account the nexus of body and space (Hasso and Salime 2016:4), al-‘Ucha’s materiality embodies different ways that “irrupts and interrupts normative orders.”

While al-‘Ucha is not exclusively practised by women farmworkers, in all the sites that I have visited and the occupations recounted during our discussions and interviews, women predominantly sustained and perdured it. It is the women who steadfastly occupy public spaces, ensuring that authorities or employers do not dismantle the tents. They not only establish a sense of community within these spaces but also actively nurture it. Through the act of cooking and forming bonds with neighbouring dwellers, they weave a tapestry of connection and support. In essence, the women from al-‘Ucha “crisscrossed the boundary between private and public space by domesticating the public space” (Gökarıksel 2016:224).

Moreover, the space is transformed by the women protesters into a makeshift home by setting up tents, carpets, and pillows to create sleeping areas. Each Al-‘Ucha had unique architectural improvisations, with scrap materials fashioned into beds and flags, banners, and signs repurposed as makeshift curtains. Furthermore, these makeshift living spaces fostered a strong sense of communal living. The women did not only lay claim on the pavements and sidewalks, but their bodily presence reconfigured the materiality of these same places. The peculiarity of al-‘Ucha is that the pitching of the tents materialised by these women shows the ways in which politics is not confined to business and private spheres; it crosses the lines and moves from the realm of the private to the public and, more importantly, from the realm of urban spaces to marginalised rural ones. In other words, the women from al-‘Ucha demonstrate that politics, and in this case, demanding a right to dignified jobs, is not confined to the institutional walls of unions and organisational politics.

The power of al-‘Ucha, which is a material space of appearance, is derived from the coming together of rural women’s bodies and their ability to persist in their power while holding each other. However, its limit lies in the fact that these same rural women’s bodies are often effaced, disenfranchised, and abandoned. The distinctiveness of al-‘Ucha is that it represents, precisely, the body of those “disaggregated from the plural” and the ways in which they lay claim in political space; it also shows how to make sense of those who can never be part of that “concerted action” and exist outside of the sphere of politics (Butler 2011). While workers who have been unfairly laid off protest loudly on the pavement, sidewalks, and streets, the bodily presence of these women, through cooking and keeping the place together, is a statement by itself. By occupying that space and persisting in that occupation, they are presenting a physical challenge. This means that when their bodies are used to express their political views, it is not limited to just spoken or written language. In this sense, al-‘Ucha is transversal and can give a collective voice to so many kinds of bodies precisely because it is rooted in the shared materiality of their precarity. 

Al-‘Ucha refers to a type of disobedience that goes beyond the legal framework of union strikes. Verónica Gago’s (2020) conceptualisation of the feminist strikes in Argentina offers a thoughtful insight into the radical nature of such actions. Her theorisation illuminates the depth of the movement by prompting us to question not just whom we are disobeying, beyond the figure of the boss, but also what and whom we are striking against, moving beyond mere resistance to hierarchical leadership. By interrupting the obedience that capital imposes upon us, these strikes create a space for contemplating alternative modes of existence. Gago’s framework encourages us to explore the complexities of power dynamics, pushing us to reconsider the very fabric of our societal structures. In this regard, through my several discussions with farmworkers, civil society actors, and union representatives, I understood that the practice of engaging in such a “repertoire of contention”1 is normalised during labour disputes; it is a political tactic that has seen a significant resurgence in the Souss Massa region. Al-‘Ucha has become a site for the convergence of various labour disputes and mobilisations, representing a new cycle of protests. This dynamic of contention and protests goes hand in hand with the ongoing transformation and changes in state and capitalism. Collective action seems to adapt and transform due to conflicts between protesters, authorities, and employers. Al-‘Ucha became a set of frequent claim-making routines available to workers. Engaging in al-‘Ucha shows the innovation and creativity of workers’ contentious mobilisations. For these women workers in the Souss Massa region, al-‘Ucha represents a form of resistance that allows them to make demands of those in power. By engaging in this action, the workers are telling us that they will not return to their homes until their demands are met. Al-‘Ucha is also the moment when the farmworkers leave the farm and packaging station to make contentious actions and claims not only to their employer but also as a way to look for the possibility of engaging with political authority. 

• 1. For Charles Tilly (2002), the notion of “repertoires of contention” makes it possible to theorize the means used in social movements, strike waves, guerrilla wars, revolutions, national liberation struggles, or democratization movements.