We have a blackmailing, exploitative maid in case asking for $10k and arrangement for green card. Devyani agrees for $10k and a flight back home(to India), refuses to help arrange Green card. The FIR has many more revealing details.
Delhi high court, Ministry of foreign affairs - Basically the state of India asks its strategic partner(USA) multiple times, to not file a case for the maid as she is an absconder and a possible fraud and a blackmailer.
What India gets, is an email from the Consular General (representative of Indian state) telling about the humiliating treatment -
Riiiiight… just ignore the lying, exploitative employer…
And I don’t get this “absconding” thing - are you saying an employee is not allowed to quit her job? Are you saying that it is legal for an employer to confine an employee? If you say yes that is precisely why Americans view that “job” as indentured servitude.
As for what Khobragade claims happened - why the hell should I take her word over anyone else’s? Because she’s of a particular social class? That’s not the way we do things in this country. We have three parties here and they’re not in agreement. This is why we have courts, to sort these disputes out rather than rioting in the streets or ransacking unrelated businesses.
Indian diplomatic officials have conspired to import labor under illegal contracts and paid illegal wages. You’ve already agreed this is illegal. This is not the first time they’ve done this, as per the cite I responded to. That is a pattern.
And if she wasn’t handcuffed, that is wrong. Given how angry people often get when arrested, and how may people in my country carry concealed weapons, this is a good safety measure for police that I am sure would be taken if I was arrested.
Diplomats are different? Yes, sometimes. If engaged in diplomatic activity like negotiating treaties, it’s reasonable for international law to remove the threat of arrest as a possible intimidation tactic. But we should want any exceptions to equal justice under the law kept to a minimum.
If I understand correctly, you think that even if the arrest had nothing to do with manipulation of Indian foreign policy, she still should get special treatment as some kind of acknowledgement that India is a great nation. If so, why should anyone who isn’t an Indian nationalist agree? Why should I care more about your nationalism than justice?
I don’t go quite this far because of mixed feelings about the American legal system. She probably will be given a choice between having her day in court, at risk of a prison sentence, or walking after pleading guilty to lesser charges. Even if mostly innocent, this wouldn’t be a real choice.
I would favor allowance of a sub-minimum wage when a consular official arrives with a servant from his or her own country where wage levels are lower. But all other US labor laws should apply. And no plea bargaining.
Since it is her first offense, I have no problem with a conviction leading to probation. We have too many people in prison (even if one too few who was handcuffed).
Some info regarding this case, again just want share do not intend to persuade anyone here -
Sangeeta Richard’s in-laws last worked for Uzra Zeya,who is now US Asstnt Sectretary–Bureau of Democracy/HumanRights/Labor in the USA.
It was Sangeeta Richards who approached Devyani Kobragade for employment.
It was Sangeeta Richards who insisted on the second contract as a means to reassure her that Rs 30,000 pm will be paid to her family while she works for Devyani Khobragade in the USA.
Sangeeta’s in laws worked for the US embassy (in particular for someone involved in HR/Labor issues). These person(s) in the US embassy may have orchestrated the whole thing.
I suppose it’s also possible the information here isn’t complete: did Richards insist on the second contract knowing it paid her far less than the legal minimum wage and the wage Khobagrade told the U.S. government Richards would receive? Did Richards understand the legal protections she was waving? If the answer to those questions is ‘no,’ it doesn’t matter who approached whom.
truthSekker2, you have been critical of the maid for her attempts to adjust her US immigration status while in the US. In essence, you are saying that the maid should not be allowed to become a US green card holder while she is in the United States, and that she should go through the normal process of applying for a new US visa once she returns to India.
And yet, you seem to be supportive of the Indian government efforts to adjust the diplomatic status of Khobragade while she is in the United States solely for the reason of evading prosecution. It’s established fact that her consular official status does not confer immunity from felonies – there is absolutely no disputing this fact. Even the Indian government isn’t really pursuing that argument, as evidenced by the move to give her a diplomatic posting with the United Nations. Why are you not critical of Khobragade’s efforts to adjust her visa status while in the United States? Shouldn’t she be required to return to India as soon as she is allowed to, submit her applications through normal channels, allow the United States to consider the request for her posting in this country, rather than trying to pull a fast one while she’s out on bond?
It doesn’t matter in any case, because if I tell my employer that I desperately want to be paid $3 a hour and work 19 hours a day, it is their responsibility to say that they cannot allow that due to labor laws.
Of course. But in saying Richards asked for the separate contract, truthSeeker2 is implying she understood she was working for well below minimum wage, wouldn’t get overtime pay, would work more than 44 hours a week, and that she understood she was legally entitled to sue under some conditions but wouldn’t, and so on and so on. In fact, she could have asked for and signed a contract without knowing those things.
She quit because she could make herself even better off than she was. She couldn’t have gotten into that position without Khobragade, but once there, by accusing Khobragade of abuse she could make herself even better off. She disappears and in a week a lawyer calls up the employer with a demand for more money and an unrestricted passport? And she makes precisely the kind of accusations that enable her and her family to qualify for a special category of visa? Yeah, I’m not buying it. Again, none of this detracts from the fact that Khobragade was in the wrong and should be prosecuted. She didn’t wrong this maid though, not with the facts presented. If any abuse or confiscation of her passport is established, then sure.
For what must be the gazillionth time in the thread, I absolutely agree, it was mandatory, but try mandating that every Indian domestic servant should be paid American minimum wages, and you’ll realise what I mean when I say it isn’t an option. Their jobs will disappear because they will become unaffordable. This particular job existed ONLY because of the agreement that the woman be paid below American minimum wage. Without that (admittedly illegal) agreement, the woman would be in India, unemployed, or making a half or a third of what the agreement promised her.
No it was not on the table. Under American minimum wage that woman was unaffordable. Was the right response to sign a contract to pay less than minimum wage? No, the right response is not to hire the maid. That way Khobragade doesn’t break any laws. But the maid IS, most definitely, worse off.
I agree with this. But during Richards employment, both her and Khobragade were better off. This situation could not have come about without the illegal arrangement they made that they should not have made. However, once the illegal agreement was made, they were both better off. By disappearing and accusing Khobragade of abuse, Richards is MUCH better off, while Khobragade is worse off.
Then a maid wasn’t on the table. Once a maid is contracted and agrees to work in the U.S., she has to get the minimum wage. And in fact Khobragade said she would pay her even more than that.
Assuming the authorities believe Richards, that is. If they don’t believe her, she’s even worse off - and possibly facing criminal charges in India. I’m not convinced by the “she knew what to say to the authorities” claim in part because there is a long gap between the report of the abuse and this arrest. It’s been about six months, so I think the prosecution must be satisfied with the evidence.
And about a third of what she was supposed to be making or what an American doing the job would have made.
