Nothing of that sort my dear friend. I am just trying to present** facts** in post#555.
Presenting? Hardly. Looks like exulting.
Serious question: does the typical housekeeper in India work 100-plus hours per week? Because that is what is alleged in the indictment.
No. Nothing I’ve said is elitist. Quite the opposite in fact. I’m trying to point out how elitist US immigration system is, especially where Indians are concerned, and how the maid would never have had the benefit of American wage laws if it hadn’t been for the consul. It’s ironic considering how you’re somehow trying to hold up the American immigrant ethos as the reason for their outrage.
ETA: Not to mention how ad hominem is not an argument
In this case, 100 plus hours a week sounds absolutely ridiculous to me prima facie. That’s 14+ hours a day. Consider that Khobragade and her entire family would be out of the apartment for much of the day during the week, either working or going to school. Do you really think her maid would be slaving away non stop in their absence? What would she even do? Clean the house all the time? Wash their clothes and dishes by hand? Cook every minute they were away?
As for Indian housekeepers - How do you measure the time a live in housekeeper works? In my experience(not that I’ve ever had a full time housekeeper, but based on observation) full time live in housekeepers in India don’t have ‘fixed’ working hours. They typically help out with cooking and cleaning, which is split up between cleaning in the morning, cooking lunch, free time in the afternoon/evening, cooking dinner, and free time after. This obviously varies from family to family, and there are cases of abuse, although, again IME, people tend to treat domestic servants well, because good ones are hard to find. I’m not denying for a moment that there are plenty of domestic workers in India that can and should be treated better.
(As a digression - it is important to keep in mind that legislation would likely backfire. For example, we have very stringent labour protection laws for labour that works in factories. The result? We have a hugely underdeveloped formal manufacturing sector, resulting in fewer manufacturing jobs, a large unorganised sector that has no protection for workers at all, and more problems for everybody.)
If you say so.
I am happy that countries do not have to pay the minimum amount as per American Law even while being in America. Because that is the particular country’s public money which it thinks, can be better spent…perhaps on 5 poor families.
So yeah, I am glad.
You come off as elitist because you’re saying that because she isn’t as qualified as other Indians in America, she doesn’t deserve the same rights. An Indian doctor in America is entitled to the same salary as an Anglo doctor; an Indian maid, OTOH, does not deserve the same salary as an Anglo maid.
Plus, there’s your language. She’s “only qualified to work as a maid”. She “cut to the head of the line”, presumably ahead of richer and more educated - in other words, better - Indians. This entire thread you’ve done everything possible to distance yourself from her, to show someone like her has nothing in common with someone like you. That’s elitism - you’re utter refusal to even toy with the idea of identifying with her.
Well, when my ancestors came to the United States at the turn of the 20th Century, they were far less qualified than Mrs. Richards in any way possible. They certainly weren’t screened for anything before they came. And you know what? They didn’t think they deserved any less than any other American. So if you if you ask me who *I *identify with, it won’t be the stuck-up diplomat who thought she *deserved *a maid - in Manhattan.
Your example on grad students living as cheaply as they can and sending everything they save back home is something I agree with, and is the perspective that I come from when I say the maid was in a good position by Indian standards.
Why do you bring up the 100k figure? Are you under the impression that is how much the diplomat was making? And nobody is (or at least I’m not) making the argument that the diplomat was paid badly and couldn’t afford to pay the maid and thus she should be able to get away with paying the maid less. I’m using it to reinforce the point that since she could not afford a maid under US minimum wage laws, the only other viable option in this scenario was that the maid not be hired. It was the correct option, but it would have left the maid worse off.
So anyone who is arguing that Khobragade is an evil evil woman should not do it from the perspective of wanting the maid to be better off. No. If someone is saying Khobragade should not have hired the maid in the manner that she did, you’re saying it is ok if the maid were worse off, but US laws should have been followed. That’s fine, and a perfectly valid position, in fact, it is the one that I hold. But have the balls to admit that your position makes the maid worse off and that you’re ok with that. Don’t try and claim moral high ground that you don’t possess.
Same message to bldysbba as given by AK84. You have tried beautifully for more than a dozen times I guess. AK84 has also tried well. I have also tried till page 8 or 9.
I’m sorry, but you are mistaken. The US law controls how much a maid may be paid in the US. What other countries feel is appropriate has nothing to do with it.
When you are in the US, you must obey US law. This is not optional, and you don’t get to lie about it either.
Regards,
Shodan
when you arrest someone for it, you end up giving bail and immunity, you end up getting one of yours getting expelled.
when the maids become government’s employees rather than diplomats you do not do anything even if she earns less than the minimum amount.
In India’s case too, nothing is gonna happen. Maids will become Indian govt’s employees rather than diplomat’s employees, will keep getting paid the same.
So suddenly it’s my fault that Americans primarily want richer and better educated Indians to immigrate to the US? And it’s Khobragade’s fault that she helped someone who would otherwise not make the cut that Americans impose?
The reason that I’m not identifying with this woman(or Khobragade btw - I’m not defending her in the least. Read my posts. She’s an idiot and a criminal) is because in my view what she did was wrong. She approached Khobragade for a job. They made an agreement that got her into a situation that was good. Much better than anything she could have managed in India. It was the only way she could have made it to the US. In my reading of the situation she then reneged on that agreement to get herself into a situation that was even better for her, but worse for the person she made the agreement with. If she did actually suffer abuse at the hands of Khobragade, then sure, she 's in the right. The way the incentives are structured though, it makes me think she didn’t. This is NOT because I identify with Khobragade and not her. It is a matter of how I see the incentives. Khobragade had nothing to gain from abusing her, and plenty of downside. The maid had plenty to gain from making an accusation of abuse.
Your ancestors have zip to do with this case and argument.
Serious question, do American laws determine how much a foreign diplomat would get paid?
To reiterate - this is the only point I’m making in this thread -
“So anyone who is arguing that Khobragade is an evil evil woman should not do it from the perspective of wanting the maid to be better off. No. If someone is saying Khobragade should not have hired the maid in the manner that she did, you’re saying it is ok if the maid were worse off, but US laws should have been followed. That’s fine, and a perfectly valid position, in fact, it is the one that I hold. But have the balls to admit that your position makes the maid worse off and that you’re ok with that. Don’t try and claim moral high ground that you don’t possess.”
It doesn’t matter if the maid would have been worse off. It. Doesn’t. Matter.
The same is true for many trafficed prostitutes. Some come here willingly. They make agreements to do so. They sometimes come from shithole countries that don’t care about their rights. If you bring them here, you will be prosecuted, and rightly so. And they are completely in the right to demand that they no longer be treated in an illegal manner.
It is not wrong to cancel an illegal agreement.
It is not wrong to demand a passport from a country that considers your having one to be a fundamental right.
It is not wrong to make an agreement with someone, and then report the other party for illegal activity. Even if you benefit.
It is wrong, when you get caught in the wrong, to throw a tantrum and lash out at unrelated parties and embarrass your country on the world stage. See current “retaliations” :rolleyes: by the Indian government.
It is wrong to continue to insist that your criminal consular staff are in the right.
Don’t fight the question, dude. If it were shown that Richards worked 100 hours a week, with no days off, would you still consider her “better off” than housekeepers in India who work for lesser wage, but (if I am understanding the part of your post I’m leaving out for brevity) much fewer hours?
(You can look at the bottom of page 14 if you want to see specifically was is alleged.)
Personally I doubt the US would approve the visa of a housekeeper who the Indian government would try to pass off as a consular employee. There’s no valid reason why a person who is simply providing personal, non-official services to other consular employees should be considered a government official for the purposes of getting a visa.
This may seem shocking to you, but perhaps Indian government officials should either pay their servants a wage that conforms to the country they are working in, or go without such luxuries.
“embarrass your country” - India cares about its image and abt friendly ties with the US. India was on the correct side over this issue. USA was embarrassed in many Indians’ eyes. Not in my eyes btw. You do not need my certificate but you are good people…
What “retaliations”? Only retaliation was your officer getting expelled. I believe Indian Govt. didn’t even do tit-for-tat.
Correct. Only thing is, she should have been expelled if the US thought so. Arrest and strip search is unacceptable.
Also, if she was expelled and not arrested or strip searched, there would be no significant issue with Indians.
We respect American law.
I think that is an option that was always open for India.
We will give them $500-$600 only. If the US wants them to be paid $1500 (which say, is the minimum), we can write $1500 in the visa application, give $500-$600 as cash and the rest is adjusted in food, house and insurance benefits(which Devyani’s maid was getting).
So, the actual pay is not gonna be more than Devyani’s maid in that case too but the maid cant file any case and blackmail.
So you’re suggesting that the Government of India condone visa fraud as official policy. Got it.
You do realize that lying about pay on visa application forms is not “respecting American law,” right?