manlion
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2013
- Messages
- 7,568
- Reaction score
- -3
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why do many think that it is a god given right for the diplomats to have a maid or a nanny? Not everyone in US can afford a maid - even the people who earn twice or more than what the consular official under question earn. They end up paying $1000-2000 for day care per child and spend additional dollars for the evenings and weekends if they want baby-sitters and do all the remaining household chores by themselves. And men are pretty handy at doing basic fixes at home as the labor is expensive. Even Indians living here in US do the same. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
You seem to be repeating same crap again and again.
Diplomats does not require a maid as a matter of luxury but necessity.Various duties discharged by diplomats in their private capacity are semi official in nature. On top of it, time of a diplomat is valuable enough that he/she should not be made to do domestic work.
Imagine a situation in which an ambassador has to devote 2-3 hours a day for household chores.It would mean that those are 2-3 hours that he has not spent working or socialising which is a "job" of a diplomat.
Diplomats could not afford to pay minimum wages to their maids upfront because they themselves make less than the specified minimum wage. They make less than specified minimum wage because constitution of India states that no public servant could be paid better remuneration than president of India.Indian government has compensated for the handicap by providing facilities in kind to people posted abroad.Similar approach was employed for maids.The complication arose because since 2011, US state government stopped counting perks in salary of a domestic help.
Till now there was a sort of tacit arrangement whereas US embassy did not questioned low basic pay provided by Indian diplomats and in return India did not applied any of it's uselessly stupid law on US Diplomats.Arrest of this diplomat was sort of betrayal of that understanding and tantamount to entrapment. If US wanted to hold the law to letter,it begs a question as to how come immigration department of US okayed the visa application of the maid when her postulated income in US would be more than that of the diplomat.
While the minimum wage in NY may be $4800 a month, the maid was provided with Proper Housing,medical insurance,Food,water, clothing and electricity along with 2 paid ticket to India every year apart from close to $1500. For those who believe that this is an irrational wage, try living at $5000 in NY and see what you are left with after spending out of your pocket on these expenses.( even ignoring that facilities provided by embassies like housing are of much better quality than those of open market.This is not the instance of a single diplomat.If this law is applied in letter, whole of the Indian delegation to US would end up in jail. Not only that delegation of every developing country would follow suit as not even a single country adheres to this law in letter as it is impossible to be adhered to.
Also you an @Solomon2 should define your criterion for slavery.By US's minimum wage criterion, Indian chief justice, comptroller and auditor general, service chiefs, Prime minister, DG's of all states and every government official barring president and vice president would qualify as slaves.This lady was never forced to work as maid and was free to leave for India whenever she wanted ( unless US wanted to give her a working Visa ) and was compensated adequately when non-monetary benefits are taken into account.You people seem to be making a joke of concept of slavery to sound cliche.The reason that the plight of maid has not found traction in India is not because Indians believe that Diplomats have divine right to exploit maids but due to the fact that even the current salary of the maid is higher than that earned by middle class Indians and not to mention while having zero out of pocket expense.
India, till date has not taken any disproportionate action in this matter. The only thing that India has done is that it has withdrawn extra privileges accorded to US diplomats over and above those that are accorded to their Indian counterparts.Since you people are so fond of throwing book at Indian mission, you should be cheering these steps of India.
Repetition appears to be necessary.You seem to be repeating same crap again and again.
Diplomats yes, consuls no.Diplomats does not require a maid as a matter of luxury but necessity.Various duties discharged by diplomats in their private capacity are semi official in nature. On top of it, time of a diplomat is valuable enough that he/she should not be made to do domestic work.
Why should consuls live in Manhattan rather than in cheaper suburbs? I really do know an ambassador who lives in a rent-stabilized one-bedroom apartment himself while his wife and son live outside the city. Metro-North rail service plus the subway are sufficient for their needs.Indian government has compensated for the handicap by providing facilities in kind to people posted abroad.Similar approach was employed for maids.The complication arose because since 2011, US state government stopped counting perks in salary of a domestic help.
How do you know maid had zero out of pocket expenses?The reason that the plight of maid has not found traction in India is not because Indians believe that Diplomats have divine right to exploit maids but due to the fact that even the current salary of the maid is higher than that earned by middle class Indians and not to mention while having zero out of pocket expense.
You're talking about two different things. India can withdraw extra privileges yet the action can still be disproportional.India, till date has not taken any disproportionate action in this matter. The only thing that India has done is that it has withdrawn extra privileges accorded to US diplomats over and above those that are accorded to their Indian counterparts.
I think the flip side to this Administration is that it may not want U.S. officials to enjoy "extra privileges" abroad. Remember, the prosecutor and president spent their childhood in "Third World" countries, so they may detest such things as much as you do.Since you people are so fond of throwing book at Indian mission, you should be cheering these steps of India.
Diplomats yes, consuls no.Diplomats does not require a maid as a matter of luxury but necessity.Various duties discharged by diplomats in their private capacity are semi official in nature. On top of it, time of a diplomat is valuable enough that he/she should not be made to do domestic work.
Maid had A-3 visa. The kind of passport India granted her isn't relevant in int'l or U.S. law.The US will lose the case.
Apparently, the maid had her visa issued on a diplomatic passport. By issuing her the visa on such a passport, the State department implicitly accepted her duties as being part of the Indian diplomatic mission.
Maid had A-3 visa. The kind of passport India granted her isn't relevant in int'l or U.S. law.
Diplomats yes, consuls no.
Why should consuls live in Manhattan rather than in cheaper suburbs?
http://m.paycheck.in/main/salary/salarycheckers/politicians-vip-paycheck
I really do know an ambassador who lives in a rent-stabilized one-bedroom apartment himself while his wife and son live outside the city.
How do you know maid had zero out of pocket expenses?
You're talking about two different things. India can withdraw extra privileges yet the action can still be disproportional.
I think the flip side to this Administration is that it may not want U.S. officials to enjoy "extra privileges" abroad. Remember, the prosecutor and president spent their childhood in "Third World" countries, so they may detest such things as much as you do.