Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Double standards by US.US firm found guilty of underpaying Indians at $1.22 an hour.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by antimony View Post
    Right, and all of you wanted to follow him right into that.
    I wanted to skewer his pomposity a bit. Fun too.

    It was about Zraver, not about you.
    Cool.

    We all know BM. We have seen his posts and know where he stands. The reciprocity of Zraver in that manner was unexpected.
    I wouldn't have chosen to express myself the way Z did, but he raised a legitimate issue.

    Looks like you are saying that we brown boys have out easier than you white boys. Is that the way you want to go?
    I'm asking a question and making a statement.

    Question: Do you think if a white poster consistently directed racially or ethically loaded abuse at a non-white poster we would act differently? I'm not talking about Mods here (they have enough problems), I'm talking about general treatment by the board. Its a legitimate question. I know what I think, but my perception may be incorrect.

    (I would also point out that BM isn't the only expat Indian to employ this sort of abuse, fortunately it isn't widespread)

    Statement: If I encountered another poster engaging in this sort of abuse consistently I would like to think I would call them on it and very possibly take it further. I wouldn't be polite. I don't know if I would behave differently based on the ethnicity of the poster, but I do feel I would be more comfortable tackling someone of a similar background. I'm not really sure why. I certainly don't tolerate that sort of behaviour offline.

    If you choose to take that as a 'white v brown' thing I can't stop you, but it isn't my intent. I'm trying to discuss what I see as a difficult situation in an adult way. If you think I've got this wrong then by all means say so. I'm not trying to provoke conflict but discuss the way people choose to handle a particular type of behaviour. I'm looking at a behaviour, not skin colour. Perhaps there are things I'm not seeing in this.
    sigpic

    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
      see here:

      BBC News - US firm fined for underpaying Indian workers

      See the relevant quote,

      The point I want to make is the contrast of the treatment meted out to US firm executives and the treatment of DK Khobograde. The US executives were not hauled before jail and stripped searched and accused of visa fraud which is plainly here.

      And zraver and others were ranting and frothing at the "inhuman treatment" by the diplomat for engaging in slavery like practices and trafficking and using pretty strong language. Furthermore, there were posts of how US government would mete out the exact same treatment if similar practices were found elsewhere in US.

      Can anyone tell us why these members of this firm, see here: About EFI: Senior Leadership Team, were not arrested, strip-searched, and made to pay high amounts of bail and undergo such humiliating treatment that DK Khobograde underwent?

      And many american and western posters were wondering and questioning why India and several posters like me were protesting at such treatment and we were ridiculed for such views.

      Talk about double standards.
      Sorry guys for coming on a bit late on this thread.
      A lot of discussion and cussing has been done in the last 10 odd pages.

      One point needs to be remembered is that in the maid's case, she was assisted and helped by the various diplomatic staff that she had worked for. This case had nothing to do with US policy or standards towards any country. In this case DK was singled out for special treatment, because of alleged mistreatment (real or made up).

      Sangeeta's in-laws had worked for and knew some very powerful US diplomats who seemed to have helped her.
      The list includes:-
      - Geoffrey R Pyatt - US Ambassador to Ukraine.
      - Uzra Zeya - former deputy executive secretary to former US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton.
      - Timothy Haley - Regional Security Office
      - Wayne May - Regional Security Office

      As per Indian intelligence officials, Uzra Zeya allegedly played a major role in converting the entire low wages controversy into a human trafficking issue. Later, Zeya’s department gave Sangeeta Richards the trafficking victim status and also expedited the T-visa application for her family.

      For our US friends:
      Wage disparity between US and India is rather high. The wages that your labour laws have for a maid are very high for most countries. The equality and dignity of labour that exists in US/ EU is yet to be enforced in India. A fact is, that the wages for the maid as per US was higher than what the Indian diplomat was earning, but the wage earned by Sangeeta was very handsome when it compared to her counterparts in India. For this reason, a UN mission is highly prised for the Asia armies, while not so for the US army personal - the issue is wage disparity.

      A maid used a system to her advantage, which pitted two nations against each other.
      A strong IFS lobby took sides with their kind.
      A group of US Diplomats tried to "help out the under dog".
      Last edited by lemontree; 30 Oct 14,, 10:35.

      Cheers!...on the rocks!!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by lemontree View Post
        Sorry guys for coming on a bit late on this thread.
        A lot of discussion and cussing has been done in the last 10 odd pages.

        One point needs to be remembered is that in the maid's case, she was assisted and helped by the various diplomatic staff that she had worked for. This case had nothing to do with US policy or standards towards any country. In this case DK was singled out for special treatment, because of alleged mistreatment (real or made up).

        Sangeeta's in-laws had worked for and knew some very powerful US diplomats who seemed to have helped her.
        The list includes:-
        - Geoffrey R Pyatt - US Ambassador to Ukraine.
        - Uzra Zeya - former deputy executive secretary to former US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton.
        - Timothy Haley - Regional Security Office
        - Wayne May - Regional Security Office

        As per Indian intelligence officials, Uzra Zeya allegedly played a major role in converting the entire low wages controversy into a human trafficking issue. Later, Zeya’s department gave Sangeeta Richards the trafficking victim status and also expedited the T-visa application for her family.

        For our US friends:
        Wage disparity between US and India is rather high. The wages that your labour laws have for a maid are very high for most countries. The equality and dignity of labour that exists in US/ EU is yet to be enforced in India. A fact is, that the wages for the maid as per US was higher than what the Indian diplomat was earning, but the wage earned by Sangeeta was very handsome when it compared to her counterparts in India. For this reason, a UN mission is highly prised for the Asia armies, while not so for the US army personal - the issue is wage disparity.

        A maid used a system to her advantage, which pitted two nations against each other.
        A strong IFS lobby took sides with their kind.
        A group of US Diplomats tried to "help out the under dog".
        Wow, never knew the maid had such powerful contacts within the US ranks. Thanks for clarifying on this Captain. So this was intentional on the part of the US authorities, and I bet they didn't expect this to be blown up to this magnitude, at least on this issue MMS govt lodged a strong protest and saved face.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
          I wanted to skewer his pomposity a bit. Fun too.

          I wouldn't have chosen to express myself the way Z did, but he raised a legitimate issue.
          Did he indeed?

          Let me tell you what my specific beef here is: I have no problem whatsoever in you mocking or countering Blade's arguments. I myself do not agree with him on 90% of issues.

          What I have specific objections to is in limiting the discussion by mocking his intent and also in insinuating that "brown" posters have more leeway on this board to racially abuse others compared to "white" posters. That is not and more importantly, should not be true.

          Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
          I'm asking a question and making a statement.

          Question: Do you think if a white poster consistently directed racially or ethically loaded abuse at a non-white poster we would act differently? I'm not talking about Mods here (they have enough problems), I'm talking about general treatment by the board. Its a legitimate question. I know what I think, but my perception may be incorrect.

          (I would also point out that BM isn't the only expat Indian to employ this sort of abuse, fortunately it isn't widespread)

          Statement: If I encountered another poster engaging in this sort of abuse consistently I would like to think I would call them on it and very possibly take it further. I wouldn't be polite. I don't know if I would behave differently based on the ethnicity of the poster, but I do feel I would be more comfortable tackling someone of a similar background. I'm not really sure why. I certainly don't tolerate that sort of behaviour offline.

          If you choose to take that as a 'white v brown' thing I can't stop you, but it isn't my intent. I'm trying to discuss what I see as a difficult situation in an adult way. If you think I've got this wrong then by all means say so. I'm not trying to provoke conflict but discuss the way people choose to handle a particular type of behaviour. I'm looking at a behaviour, not skin colour. Perhaps there are things I'm not seeing in this.
          I will tell you exactly what I think. I have seen posts and thread that show other countries in a poor light. In the South Asian threads, there are many directly particularly against Pakistan (though lately there have been some focus on India). While some of our Indian posters take some sort of titillating satisfaction in that, I don't.

          Next when some Indian posters highlight the same issues for the West, it is "tit for tat" or "bad intent". Why? Even though the intent may be wrong (an attempt to get back) aren't we supposed to discuss each thread on its merits?

          I don't know if you have noticed, but I have been countering BM on this very thread purely on its merits, which he seems to have overlooked in his zeal to see someone stripped.
          "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

          Comment


          • Originally posted by commander View Post
            Wow, never knew the maid had such powerful contacts within the US ranks. Thanks for clarifying on this Captain. So this was intentional on the part of the US authorities, and I bet they didn't expect this to be blown up to this magnitude, at least on this issue MMS govt lodged a strong protest and saved face.
            Only made possible in the face of strong Indian media exposure and Indian public mood.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by antimony View Post

              I don't know if you have noticed, but I have been countering BM on this very thread purely on its merits, which he seems to have overlooked in his zeal to see someone stripped.
              Uh please point out the points that I overlooked? I thought I addressed them completely.

              Comment


              • Okay, the WAB is race neutral....period.

                If someone is acting differently let a mod know.

                As for tit for tat. You need to self-monitor.

                And one can be proud of one's country. But we must all avoid becoming jingoistic.
                “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                Mark Twain

                Comment


                • Originally posted by lemontree View Post
                  Sorry guys for coming on a bit late on this thread.
                  A lot of discussion and cussing has been done in the last 10 odd pages.

                  One point needs to be remembered is that in the maid's case, she was assisted and helped by the various diplomatic staff that she had worked for. This case had nothing to do with US policy or standards towards any country. In this case DK was singled out for special treatment, because of alleged mistreatment (real or made up).

                  Sangeeta's in-laws had worked for and knew some very powerful US diplomats who seemed to have helped her.
                  The list includes:-
                  - Geoffrey R Pyatt - US Ambassador to Ukraine.
                  - Uzra Zeya - former deputy executive secretary to former US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton.
                  - Timothy Haley - Regional Security Office
                  - Wayne May - Regional Security Office

                  As per Indian intelligence officials, Uzra Zeya allegedly played a major role in converting the entire low wages controversy into a human trafficking issue. Later, Zeya’s department gave Sangeeta Richards the trafficking victim status and also expedited the T-visa application for her family.

                  For our US friends:
                  Wage disparity between US and India is rather high. The wages that your labour laws have for a maid are very high for most countries. The equality and dignity of labour that exists in US/ EU is yet to be enforced in India. A fact is, that the wages for the maid as per US was higher than what the Indian diplomat was earning, but the wage earned by Sangeeta was very handsome when it compared to her counterparts in India. For this reason, a UN mission is highly prised for the Asia armies, while not so for the US army personal - the issue is wage disparity.

                  A maid used a system to her advantage, which pitted two nations against each other.
                  A strong IFS lobby took sides with their kind.
                  A group of US Diplomats tried to "help out the under dog".
                  So basically that puts to rubbish any claims of slavery or human trafficking as propagated through this thread.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                    So basically that puts to rubbish any claims of slavery or human trafficking as propagated through this thread.
                    Of course. That was made clear in the thread concerned or at least i tried to put that point across.

                    She needed those pretexts to get her permanent residence. Thanks to preet baoria.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                      Uh please point out the points that I overlooked? I thought I addressed them completely.
                      You are looking at this mainly from a perspective of "look, you do it too". I am saying that this is quite possibly a visa rules violations instead of just a DOL issue. In the past (a few years backs, before crackdown by authorities) there was a practice by the big names in Indian S/W of getting Indian employees work for clients, especially for short duration projects and where L1/ H1B resources were not available. They would bring these guys on a business visa, continue paying their Indian salaries and also pay a per diem in the US that would take care of food and lodging. Highly illegal from a visa rules perspective (as the Indian employees worked instead of just participating in business meetings) and they have largely stopped after fines and blacklisting. No stripping though.
                      "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                        Was referring to your second post in this thread. What was the need for 'poor & misinformed' lawyer' ? That is what i mean by personal attack. But there was more behind my comment and had to do previous threads where you threw others. This is what i'm asking you to stop.
                        It was not a personal attack at all. You could have PM'd me, or asked me anyway. There was no need to take sides if you were confused. Blade is a lawyer right? Educated in a US Law School? So, the guys whom EFI paid less than minimum wage got some 1000's of dollars through US justice. Now tell me, if there is a provision in US law, that employers who pay less than minimum wage, can get off by paying some 1000's of dollars in fine, what's wrong in it? Is it a white man's burden and shit that espouses from time to time in this board? Either US changes the law or people like Blade needs to bring about a change. Blade being a lawyer, didn't know about this simple law, that he wanted EFI management arrested, strip searched etcetera? There was no argument at all from the beginning of this post.

                        Oh and btw, you can ask both sides to stop. Right?

                        Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                        once you survive here a few more years you will understand. It ain't easy.
                        I know. Been here for a year I guess.

                        Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                        No authority or entitlement is implied. You can challenge any one, just make it a challenge.
                        Then, please be fair.
                        Last edited by Oracle; 30 Oct 14,, 18:45.
                        Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          Nope, I merely codified them, we try to be a family here, as much as we might disagree. If someone is willing to devote enough time to write a small book- up to a multi-volume collection they are worth more than a newbie. I see by your own post count you've been an active member in the year you've been here, that is what this board needs.
                          Thank you. I learn something new everyday. Godbless!
                          Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                            Of course. That was made clear in the thread concerned or at least i tried to put that point across.

                            She needed those pretexts to get her permanent residence. Thanks to preet baoria.
                            Some of our posters are missing a crucial aspect of this DK business. She was not punished at all. She was not deemed guilty of anything by the US justice system. She was not even fined.

                            The only thing that happened to her was that charges were filed and she was arrested and booked into jail. Being booked into jail does not mean you are guilty of anything.

                            Had she not had diplomatic immunity, she would have had her day in court with likely a very good attorney and all of these issues and more would have been gone over with a fine tooth comb, with the jury ultimately deciding whether she was guilty of any of this.

                            Since she claimed immunity, this was moot. She was not punished at all.

                            DK was not specifically selected to be humiliated. India was not specifically targeted. She was only strip searched because that's what SOP for prisoners booked into US jails. God knows there have been enough suicides, stabbings and all forms of contraband smuggled into jail because prisoners were not checked.

                            And the charges were filed because her maid leveled very serious accusations at her that was accepted by a US Attorney. US Attorneys love going after high profile people. The higher the profile, the better. If you think DK had it hard, if you think she was treated unfairly, just talk to Martha Stewart.

                            US attorneys are some of the most ruthless, calculating, insidious and devious glory hounds on the planet. They are not so much Homo sapien as Canis praeconia. The entire system incentivizes them to go after the most high profile targets possible. It's not personal. It's not racial. It's not directed against India. It's just business.

                            It sounds bad, but our Indian posters might be more appreciative of such a system, if they were to pause for a moment and reflect on its merits on fighting public corruption.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by citanon View Post
                              Some of our posters are missing a crucial aspect of this DK business. She was not punished at all. She was not deemed guilty of anything by the US justice system. She was not even fined.

                              The only thing that happened to her was that charges were filed and she was arrested and booked into jail. Being booked into jail does not mean you are guilty of anything.

                              Had she not had diplomatic immunity, she would have had her day in court with likely a very good attorney and all of these issues and more would have been gone over with a fine tooth comb, with the jury ultimately deciding whether she was guilty of any of this.

                              Since she claimed immunity, this was moot. She was not punished at all.

                              DK was not specifically selected to be humiliated. India was not specifically targeted. She was only strip searched because that's what SOP for prisoners booked into US jails. God knows there have been enough suicides, stabbings and all forms of contraband smuggled into jail because prisoners were not checked.

                              And the charges were filed because her maid leveled very serious accusations at her that was accepted by a US Attorney. US Attorneys love going after high profile people. The higher the profile, the better. If you think DK had it hard, if you think she was treated unfairly, just talk to Martha Stewart.

                              US attorneys are some of the most ruthless, calculating, insidious and devious glory hounds on the planet. They are not so much Homo sapien as Canis praeconia. The entire system incentivizes them to go after the most high profile targets possible. It's not personal. It's not racial. It's not directed against India. It's just business.

                              It sounds bad, but our Indian posters might be more appreciative of such a system, if they were to pause for a moment and reflect on its merits on fighting public corruption.
                              This point hits off on most of the relevant points in this case:

                              From the Indian POV:

                              The diplomat (regardless of what her actual technical status is) was arrested for trivial reasons, humiliated and strip searched (never mind that this is SOP). Must be a case of American high handedness and an intention of making India look bad, probably racially motivated for good measure.

                              BUT, the US Attorney is an Indian, and the State Dept. has no control on his actions. So what gives?

                              Because a cutthroat US attorney decided to go after a high profile case based on the case of someone (the maid) who knew very well what she was getting into) to go after someone who should have known better.

                              Bottomline, everyone involved needs to sit down and eat crow, but at least Preet Bahara has the law on his side.

                              By the way, as an immigrant myself, I have zero tolerance for DK's position. I do all my own stuff, including (horror ) tie my own shoelaces. Indian bureaucrats are used to an imperial lifestyle, with govt. appointed servants, bungalows and other perks. They are the ones with the "colonial mindset", not Law enforcement officials doing their job. My only complaint is her treatment, GIVEN HER POSITION. If she had been a private person, I would not have cared, regardless of her color, nationality, religion, <insert your own method of dividing humanity>.
                              "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by citanon View Post
                                Some of our posters are missing a crucial aspect of this DK business. She was not punished at all. She was not deemed guilty of anything by the US justice system. She was not even fined.

                                The only thing that happened to her was that charges were filed and she was arrested and booked into jail. Being booked into jail does not mean you are guilty of anything.

                                Had she not had diplomatic immunity, she would have had her day in court with likely a very good attorney and all of these issues and more would have been gone over with a fine tooth comb, with the jury ultimately deciding whether she was guilty of any of this.

                                Since she claimed immunity, this was moot. She was not punished at all.

                                DK was not specifically selected to be humiliated. India was not specifically targeted. She was only strip searched because that's what SOP for prisoners booked into US jails. God knows there have been enough suicides, stabbings and all forms of contraband smuggled into jail because prisoners were not checked.

                                And the charges were filed because her maid leveled very serious accusations at her that was accepted by a US Attorney. US Attorneys love going after high profile people. The higher the profile, the better. If you think DK had it hard, if you think she was treated unfairly, just talk to Martha Stewart.

                                US attorneys are some of the most ruthless, calculating, insidious and devious glory hounds on the planet. They are not so much Homo sapien as Canis praeconia. The entire system incentivizes them to go after the most high profile targets possible. It's not personal. It's not racial. It's not directed against India. It's just business.
                                Thanks for taking the time to post.

                                DK to me is an unfortunate event. In the past.

                                Very simple reason. Harping on it implies US-India relationship is thin. real thin. Lacking in substance.

                                I'd like to think its much more :)

                                Double stds is a point i've not understood and am not making.

                                I would treat these two as separate incidents from the outset. Commingling is always tricky.

                                The underlined bit i would use to characterise tv media in india. Feral is another good word here. If they did not get a rise out of you then they failed is the motto.

                                Originally posted by citanon View Post
                                It sounds bad, but our Indian posters might be more appreciative of such a system, if they were to pause for a moment and reflect on its merits on fighting public corruption.
                                if india legalises corporate lobbying then a lot of the so called corruption will reduce. But it will also reduce the choice of parties to the well heeled and you end up with corporates having a major say at the expense of the people. i don't know if that will work in India yet. There are too many voices and if people get left out then bombs go off.

                                elections are expensive, we seem to have one or the other every year some where in the country.
                                Last edited by Double Edge; 30 Oct 14,, 20:56.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X