I’m not worried about wage disparity. However, if, in fact, the US embassy is paying illegal wages, I think we all agree that India should take similar action to the US. 1) Provide ample warning that such behavior is unacceptable, 2) obtain strong evidence of illegal activity, and 3) arrest anyone without diplomatic immunity who is committing a felony even after the warning.
Much more mature than mouth-foaming ARREST THEM wharrgarbl. An opportunity to show the world that India is, in fact, ready to be in the grownup countries club, despite recent actions.
No one would have a problem with India making arrests if they had the same case we had in the US: clearly fraudulent wage practices in violation of local labor laws, and clear signs that the people involved both knew the laws and (thus) went to great lengths to cover up the illegal activity.
But the article posted above doesn’t have a scintilla of evidence of any such illegal activity. In fact, it seems to suggest the Embassy was paying over 10% above the minimum wage.
Even if there was wage disparity vs local staff, 99.999% of Indians would jump at the chance to work for 10% over minimum wage, so they’d clearly be much better off.
Oh, I missed the part in the article where it says he was forced to work extra days/over time without pay…oh wait, it doesn’t say that at all. Fancy that.
But that is gonna remain. For example Governments can pay 1600 dollars and workers willfully pay back 1500 for house rent etc.
USA simply can’t control that.
Countries across the world strive to do the best for their citizens and the US minimum wage is just a guideline and a number just for creating contracts.
Ah, so your case, is, ‘Yep, it’s illegal! But India will continue to screw over domestic help staff because…well, we can! Nyah nyah nyah’!
:rolleyes:
Such a scheme would almost certainly *still *be illegal, btw. I know you seem to have a hard time wrapping your head around this whole concept of ‘abiding by the local laws’ and all.
No, it isn’t. In the U.S. It’s LAW. Breaking it has consequences. Apparently you, and possibly a number of your countrymen, choose to ignore that. The U.S., clearly in an attempt to be the responsible adult in this relationship, is willing to let the unwarranted and possibly dangerous retaliatory measures taken by India slide, and is attempting to move forward and past this. This despite that the U.S. Have both relevant law, and morality, on their side.
The part I cannot understand is that you and others are so worked up about the consequences of breaking laws (and good laws, at that - the law where you don’t lie to the government with whom you are expected to foster relations, and the law protecting the weaker in our economic system). Reading about India, there seem to be plenty of things closer to home that deserve a great measure of indignation.
If you choose to reply to this, please don’t call me “my friend”. You and I are not friends.
Well, for starters you may want to check your math…
One wonders if you should be spending $60 million on a satellite when almost 80% of your population is poor and vulnerable, millions of people not even getting two meals a day, your country ranks 63rd out of 120 countries in the Global Hunger Index in 2013, India’s per capita daily protein intake is only 10mg vs the recommended average of 50mg, and thousands of kids die in India each year from malnutrition.
I could go on, but you get the idea…
Also, the US spent over $100 million in aid to India in FY2012. I guess we can save our money, if India has enough money to be launching satellites.
Are you aware that the contract signed and submitted to the US Government stated that the maid would be paid $9.75 an hour and that room and board would be provided on top of that wage? If the Indian government submitted a contract to the US government which said that wages would be $9.75 and the employee would be charged for room and board, I’m willing to bet that such employees would simply not get visas to come to the United States.
No country has the right to force another country to issue a visa, you know. The US is under no obligation to issue a visa to an employee of a foreign government.
As I said earlier: if you think that it is a waste of money for the Indian government to pay household servants in accordance with US laws and local prevailing wages, then Indian diplomats posted to the United States should not get government-paid household servants at your taxpayer expense. Problem solved.
No, you won’t. You’ll be paying them the minimum wage, and only taking very specific, legally allowed deductions from it, or you’ll be doing it illegally. Just because you get away with something doesn’t mean it’s legal.
Also, bear in mind that a contract that isn’t legal is not a valid contract in the US, so a maid contracted at below minimum wage is under no obligation to work, or fulfil any terms of her employment. That includes being told where to live, being told to return to India, anything.
truthSeeker2, what you are describing is wage theft. It’s not legal, which ought to be obvious: if it were allowed, the idea of minimum wage would be meaningless. The Indian government will not be adopting this “solution” to its problem. You can drop the hijack any time.
Those are all elective expenditures, however legitimate they may be. Check Asterion’s post about Indian grad students and how they live as cheaply as possible. Indians are perfectly ok with cutting out extraneous expenditure if it comes to being able to send money back home. In my value system, if you don’t get to buy new clothes for three years, or go to church every Sunday, but you’ve got a roof over your head, you’ve got food to eat, and your family income is increased by three times what you made earlier, you’re better off. If you don’t agree with that, it’s an opinion that you’re expressing, not a factual statement.
Not a problem at all. You can do - or not do - whatever you want with your money.
Your employer, however, is not free to pay you less than the minimum wage merely because he thinks you’re ‘better off’ not buying clothes for three years, not going to worship service, etc.
This is nonsensical bombast and posturing which reassures me that the lack of sensible opinions is not restricted to India. Which measures has India taken that are ‘unwarranted and possibly dangerous’? They’ve merely taken measures to ensure that diplomatic privileges are accorded on a reciprocal basis. That is how relationships should be.
The US does have the law on its side, but morality? No sirree. The economically weakest person in this brouhaha was Richards. Had US law been respected from the outset, she would have been considerably worse off than she is now. THAT is why the claims of moral high ground ring hollow. You’re not concerned for her well being if she’s not in your ambit, in fact your immigration policy virtually ensures that she would never on her own be able to make it to your country. One of her countrymen breaks one of your laws, brings her within your ambit, and in so doing makes her better off. Without the consul having thus made her better off, you wouldn’t give a damn about the maid, and suddenly you have moral high ground on the consul?
Pathetic.
