Thanks George W. Bush!

[Osede]

Hey, maybe you guys are right. Maybe the employers aren't exploiting their indentured servants. Maybe there is no misrepresentation of what work will be performed and the conditions under which it is performed before the servants arrive that would violate informed consent. Maybe the employers aren't artificially tacking on "expenses" to the servants' bills, forcing their stay to be prolonged beyond their original agreements. Maybe everything works out perfectly and there is no exploitation.

But if there was any abuses of the system, how would you ever know? The workers won't speak out, they have very few rights. I suppose that such a wall of silence is ideal to keep the rich employers happy, but I don't think it's an ideal way to go about finding low-level employees for a nation.

Look, I was just trying to crack up about the fact that they allow indentured servitude in the UAE, I find it hilarious. I didn't realize the practice still maintained this much support.

i think you might misunderstanding. Most workers from those kind of countries aren't employed directly from the companies. Instead they will had to go thru some agencies who help the companies handling all the immigrant issue between two countries, which usually including the passport applciation, visa, air ticket. And those workers will need to pay the agency for these processing fee, which also called the "debt".

And also, agency will help both employee and employer to handle any abusing, dishornesty etc. Usually the countries did also establish the law on any abusing on workers to make sure they got the good working and living enviroment. In my country, any abusing will end up with 1-2 years of jail.

well if you can't agree with the visa holding, I had a bad experience with those worker. My family had hired an Indonesian maid to helping take care my illness grandpa. The first maid is very good and she did a great job, but she didn't want to continue after the contract end. But the second maid, she fucking try to steal everything she could. And yet, we been told from my neighbour's maid she did convience her to did some thing bad too. At the moment she got sending back, the agency did check her bag and found she took various good from us, including my sister's cloth. -_-

However, in United states, you won't see any this kind of workers around due to the complication of H-1 visa and only limited amount of visa will issue for every year(who will waste 2500USD to hire this kind of workers). Except those illegal workers.

edit:

Look, I was just trying to crack up about the fact that they allow indentured servitude in the UAE, I find it hilarious. I didn't realize the practice still maintained this much support.

well, you should glad that you live in a fully develope country, like US, JP and etc. In most under develope country, this is the one of the only way for their people to earn the income to support their family.

1USD = roughly 70,00 indonesia rupiah? or 7000 indonesia rupiah? 1USD to us is little thought, but it can become a huge amount to them after the exchange rate, and the living standard in those countries.

[archibaldcrane]

Hey, I get it, those shady, even darker-skinned people aren't trustworthy, so you enslave them to make sure they don't get shiftless. Truely, I understand. I can't imagine what your sister would do without her cloth.

[Charla]

Now now, don't go making fun of foreigners' typing skills. We're better than that on the internet *snicker*

[Khamsin]

Hey, I get it, those shady, even darker-skinned people aren't trustworthy, so you enslave them to make sure they don't get shiftless. Truely, I understand. I can't imagine what your sister would do without her cloth.

Are you condoning theft? I don't care how poor you are or where you come from, you can't go stealing other people's shit. It doesn't even matter if his sister never would have noticed it missing had they not checked her bag. It's not okay.

[Kuya]

Hey, I get it, those shady, even darker-skinned people aren't trustworthy, so you enslave them to make sure they don't get shiftless. Truely, I understand. I can't imagine what your sister would do without her cloth.

Are you condoning theft? I don't care how poor you are or where you come from, you can't go stealing other people's shit. It doesn't even matter if his sister never would have noticed it missing had they not checked her bag. It's not okay.

What in the world is wrong with your logic Khamsin?

edit: bolded so Shue can see it.

[Lordwafik]

Hey, I get it, those shady, even darker-skinned people aren't trustworthy, so you enslave them to make sure they don't get shiftless. Truely, I understand. I can't imagine what your sister would do without her cloth.

It is not slavery when the person signs a contract agreeing to hand over their Visa untill the contract's requirements are fulfilled.

But I guess you can ignore me so you can feel better calling it slavery.

Slavery is when Americans purchased African people from Slave Traders, and the africans became the "Property" of the americans for life.

The people you are talking about are optionally choosing to work as maids in other countries, under agreements, they are free to go so long as they pay off their debts. These people are hired and have wages, their services are what's purchased, not the people themselves.

[archibaldcrane]

Refuse to acknowledge the extreme power imbalance in this situation, and how rife it is for exploitation if you want. As I've said, maybe nothing goes wrong and everything is peachy like you would like to believe. On the other hand, I doubt it.

Taking their visas as a preventative measure is restricting their freedom under the assumption they are going to commit a crime (steal, break contract, etc). I'm always going to argue for personal freedom - it's how I'm wired.

Theft is always illegal, I'm not condoning it whatsoever. It's illegal whether the immigrants have a visa in their possession or they don't.

To put it another way, I think I should be able to get an 18-year old girl from thailand to come to america and be my personal ball washer for $1/day. If she signs the contract and agrees to this because that's a ton of money to her, what's wrong with it?

[Plow]

Refuse to acknowledge the extreme power imbalance in this situation, and how rife it is for exploitation if you want. As I've said, maybe nothing goes wrong and everything is peachy like you would like to believe. On the other hand, I doubt it.

Taking their visas as a preventative measure is restricting their freedom under the assumption they are going to commit a crime (steal, break contract, etc). I'm always going to argue for personal freedom - it's how I'm wired.

Theft is always illegal, I'm not condoning it whatsoever. It's illegal whether the immigrants have a visa in their possession or they don't.

I don't see anything wrong with allowing the employers to ensure their contracted employees who they get visas for to ensure that if they breach contract they can't just go get a job somewhere else. It is kind of the whole point of visas after all...

I mean it's not like they're killing people that try to leave or something.

[archibaldcrane]

I don't see anything wrong with allowing the employers to ensure their contracted employees who they get visas for to ensure that if they breach contract they can't just go get a job somewhere else. It is kind of the whole point of visas after all...

I mean it's not like they're killing people that try to leave or something.

Because while the company has a strong assurance that the employee can't leave, the employee has no such assurance that the terms of employment don't change.

If you want to say "well, because that would be illegal", then it should work both ways. The assumption in this system is that all immigrants are going to commit crimes against their employers, and that all employers aren't going to abuse their workforce.

[Plow]

I don't see anything wrong with allowing the employers to ensure their contracted employees who they get visas for to ensure that if they breach contract they can't just go get a job somewhere else. It is kind of the whole point of visas after all...

I mean it's not like they're killing people that try to leave or something.

Because while the company has a strong assurance that the employee can't leave, the employee has no such assurance that the terms of employment don't change.

If you want to say "well, because that would be illegal", then it should work both ways. The assumption in this system is that all immigrants are going to commit crimes against their employers, and that all employers aren't going to abuse their workforce.

That's like saying the assumption behind car insurance is that all drivers are going to get in wrecks and all insurance companies are going to handle all claims perfectly or something.

[archibaldcrane]

That's like saying the assumption behind car insurance is that all drivers are going to get in wrecks and all insurance companies are going to handle all claims perfectly or something.

I'll give you the bold - the rest is a stretch.

[Tajin]

You know you have played too much FFXI when:

Yaqoob Al Zarooni

looks like a Qiqirn name.

[aurik]

Agree with Archibald, indentured servitude is far too one-sided to be fair. I'm sure you guys have heard the stories about human traffickers who bring people in to do manual labor, but then pull a fast one by charging enough interest on the initial debt that the people can never pay off the debt. Or by falsifying records to achieve the same purpose.

There are some rights which cannot be signed away.

[Ksandra]

Hey, I get it, those shady, even darker-skinned people aren't trustworthy, so you enslave them to make sure they don't get shiftless. Truely, I understand. I can't imagine what your sister would do without her cloth.

It is not slavery when the person signs a contract agreeing to hand over their Visa untill the contract's requirements are fulfilled.

But I guess you can ignore me so you can feel better calling it slavery.

Slavery is when Americans purchased African people from Slave Traders, and the africans became the "Property" of the americans for life.

The people you are talking about are optionally choosing to work as maids in other countries, under agreements, they are free to go so long as they pay off their debts. These people are hired and have wages, their services are what's purchased, not the people themselves.

when he used the term "enslaved" I don't think he meant as in the slavery you describe. Indentured servitude is something that very much exists and peple have been "enslaved by it". Many employers find ways to extend the contract to the point where basically the employee can never finish it and are basically tied to their employer for life.

Most I can give as a term of intentured servitude is Egypt. My father was born/raised there and when you go to college for a specific degree you get hired by the goverment after completion. For my father he was an engineer major, and you are required by law to be placed wherever the government deems you're needed. I forget but I think the initial contract with the government is for 4 years (I could be wrong about the length). But guess what? if you do a good job then the government can force extend your contract. (if you do a bad job you may not have it extended but then will have an impossible job trying to find work elsewhere). More often than not you end up working for them for 20+ years. Whether you want to or not.

Luckily my father got an opportunity to come to the US and got out as quickly as possible.

While that explination is on a larger scale than personal employers, it is a sign of how the owners can abuse their control. They can find excuses to extend their contract.

You may say it's a choice, but it most countries it really isn't a feeling of choice but as survival. My father's family is a rich family, he grew up in a 2 bedroom flat with 9 brothers and sisters. I think he would have felt you were nuts to say "well you could just not get a job."


Equally you could say it's a choice for personal. I mean they could either freely go into indentured servitude or just you know die right? You know they'll do anything their employer asks of them or they'll be out on the streets. which gives the employer all the power.

but it's ok because it's better than starving to death right?

[Plow]

but it's ok because it's better than starving to death right?

The reality? Pretty much, yeah lol. They're better off, at least.



But really it's like anything, you have to consider that the downsides to what you're talking about are corruption. If it's regulated well and people are watched closely enough to ensure the abuses don't go on, I really see nothing wrong with it.


I mean we're not going to ban child care because some of the people doing it are bad people and do crazy shit.

[Khamsin]

Sure, abuse is a bad thing, but some people's definition of abuse is a little odd.

Consider the following scenario:

A man and woman live in a cramped shack with their 7 children in some third world country, living on pennies a day from whatever the man makes wheeling carts of produce back and forth from the local farm to the market all day. One day, the man hurts his back and can no longer work and the children aren't old enough to work enough to keep the family going. They manage to scrape by for a little while but the children are looking a little boney and the man isn't getting any better.

The woman hears of an opportunity from a foreign recruiter offering to pay fairly good wages by their third world standards in order to go abroad and work as a maid. The recruiter explains that with a visa and having worked abroad long enough, she could become a citizen and even bring her family over with her. In the meantime, she could have some of her paycheck sent back to support her family.

The fee is $10,000 and the wage is $4 per hour, which is so much more than what her husband was making and for much easier work. She would be required to remain in the employ of the company until the fee was paid off.

If she accepts, she will find that after sending money back to her family, paying for living expenses, food, or whatever else for herself, she can afford a little under $0.50 per hour of her wages to pay toward the fee. As such, it will take her 10 years to end her obligation to the company.

At this point, she is presented with a choice. She can accept or decline. As unbalanced of a deal as it may sound, is it abuse? Is it fair to make such an offer? I think that if all terms are clearly explained and are clearly understood by the immigrant when accepting the offer, then it is not abuse. If they surprise her 5 years down the road after she's paid off $10,000 that there were additional fees or interest or taxes or berthing fees when those weren't explained or made known up front, then it would be abuse.

As an aside, if there were only two options: For companies to make these offers to immigrants and take advantage of them, or to not make these offers at all and leave the immigrants with no way out of poverty or starvation, which would be better in the end? To have an unfair choice, or no choice at all?

[archibaldcrane]

Yes, it's the same argument that can be made for child labor factories making Nike shoes - at least the kids can eat.

It's just not a very good argument.

[Demosthenes11]

this all sounds like paradise compared to slavery...

[Ksandra]

but it's ok because it's better than starving to death right?

The reality? Pretty much, yeah lol. They're better off, at least.



But really it's like anything, you have to consider that the downsides to what you're talking about are corruption. If it's regulated well and people are watched closely enough to ensure the abuses don't go on, I really see nothing wrong with it.


I mean we're not going to ban child care because some of the people doing it are bad people and do crazy shit.

No but we have something called Social Services in place to try and take care of the bad people that do crazy shit. More often or not there's no regulation in place for indentured servants.

And yes it is better than starving to death. But is does that make it ok? I still disagree. Unless perhaps there are strict enough laws that are enforced over preventing the abuse. But that's not the case in most situations.

this all sounds like paradise compared to slavery...

So it's ok because it's not as bad as slavery?

[Faris]

First of all, thanks for the holiday bush.

Second, thanks for the derail.

Third, so many quotes, and all. But im just going to say, we get maids that have a degree in computer engineering, teachers, etc. Don't you wonder why they do they choose to come to the middle east to work? no, we dont force anyone, they choose to be here. Because their country doesn't offer what we offer. I asked my maid once (shes a college graduate) why dont you find a job in the philippines, maybe something you related to your major, or something you like. She told me: "I can get one easily, and i did before coming here, but being a maid in the UAE pays alot more than being a computer engineer in the philippines, I have 3 daughters to feed". So, in other words, the country is doing those people a favor by giving them such opportunities. How they are treated, is based on the family. I'm not going to lie, i see/hear some families treat their maids like total shit, makes it look like they're slaves. Some families are the victims when the maid steals their belongings/jewelry/clothes and run away(we were a victim of that). But the concept was never meant to look like its slavery
As for the holding their passport, we dont control them, its just a deposit or a guarantee kinda. So they wont cause any mishaps or violate any rules. But we cannot "hold" them here if they do not wish to work anymore, we just give them back the passport and drop them off the agency where they came from. After that, the agency proceeds with the necessary to book them a ticket for the next flight to the philippines. and thats that. Like it or not, its doing us great good in here. Safety, less crime, more jobs for expatriates, etc.

Very critical in your comments on a country you know very little about, especially you arch=\