Bharat Rakshak

A_Gupta wrote:In March 2011, the US authorities said none of room, board, health care, travel can be counted in this calculation.

On the face of it, it's difficult to figure why Devyani Khobragade is treated as a heinous offender by the US criminal justice system because, according to her prosecutors, she did not pay her domestic help $4,500 a month for her services. Being above average per capita income in the US, it's reasonable to assume that a majority of Americans make less than this amount. But Preet Bharara, celebrity federal prosecutor currently pursuing Khobragade with great ferocity, is hardly going after employers of a large number of Americans on this score.

It only begins to make sense if one factors in the cultural-economic context in the US. It's hurting from an economic downturn, whose tipping point was the Lehman collapse brought on by US failure to restrain its banking system from peddling toxic financial products.

But it's always convenient to have an outsider to blame. In the ensuing nasty mood, Indians become a convenient target. As Indians are new entrants in the global marketplace, President Barack Obama made it a staple of Democratic Party rhetoric to insinuate that Indians (like Chinese) were stealing jobs from the US.

And how were the Indians and Chinese doing it? By selling themselves cheap, by working for wages no decent American would countenance (that Indians have no other option needn't be mentioned in polite society). As this narrative of cheap labour took hold, the Obama administration passed several protectionist measures aimed at res-tricting competitively priced IT exports from India.

In a free market system, people should be free to sell their labour. As cheaper labour can confer comparative advantage, that's indeed how poorer nations can lift themselves up by their bootstraps, even as the high living standards of Americans and westerners are enabled by cheap labour in other parts of the world. International trade creates efficiency and increases total global wealth.

Yet cheap labour becomes an affront if others should do work Americans aspire to — such as software and services where Indians have competitive power. It's this trope of cheap labour that could be behind the hounding of Khobragade, as part of a 'civilising mission' of forcing India to adopt high wages (even if its economic conditions do not allow for it). That's why few in the West will notice the irony of Khobragade being asked to pay wages that are higher than her own salary, and treated like a common felon in violation of the Vienna Convention.

In reporting on the Devyani affair, there's a great deal of tut-tutting in the western press about low wages paid to domestics in India. None of these reports mention that even upper middle class Indian incomes scarcely cross what are considered poverty thresholds in western countries. The point, after all, is to be judgmental. Devyani has fallen victim to this climate of judgmentalism. A species of McCarthyism, if you will, but one that stigmatises poor nations and hinders their transition to high wage nations.

Interestingly, McCarthy in this case happens to be of Indian origin. Bharara is an Obama nominee who's reported to harbour political ambitions. If he goes up for high political office, acquiring a few Indian scalps on the way and thereby exorcising his origins would be useful. And what better Indian scalp, in the current political climate, than one on the 'cheap labour' issue — thereby assuaging what he takes to be a prime anxiety among Americans?

It would be a grievous mistake, however, for India to turn more protectionist in response to this protectionist streak in US politics. If India turns away from the world, it is liable to be trapped in dependency relationships and steamrollered even more easily. Rather, it ought to open its markets more and entice US and western businesses to invest in its economy. That will create mutual dependency and turn US businessmen into allies against bullies in positions of power.

Normally, two worlds are kept apart in the western mind. One is the expectation of high wages within the borders of western countries; the other is low wages outside those borders which enable the consumption of a wide array of goods and services by people resident in western countries. It's considered a scandal if the two worlds come into collision. But they do collide in case of poorer nations' missions in western countries. One outcome is the Devyani affair.

The two worlds also collide in case of US missions in poor countries. The Indian government has sought disclosure of salary structures of Indian employees within US missions in India. It should widely publicise the results, which are likely to be fascinating. My guess is that what Indian cooks, gardeners and other helps are paid by US missions is far closer to 'exploitative' wages prevailing in the Indian labour market than to the 'fair' wage of $4,500 a month. I would, in fact, be willing to wager $4,500 on this. Even though, as an Indian, that's a heck of a lot of money to me.

Candid confession: I'm not losing any sleep over this. I figure that even if i lose the bet, i could recoup the money in a month by offering to tend the US embassy's lawns in Delhi. I have no doubt Preet Bharara will defend my right to do so.

chaanakya wrote:http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types ... l#personal

Arjun wrote:

chaanakya wrote:http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types ... l#personal

I am assuming the March 2011 clarification disallowing deductions for boarding, healthcare etc is only for the A-3 visa, and does not apply to the minimum hourly wage requirement for domestic workers.

Why this discrimination between A-3 workers and domestic workers where A-3 workers cannot be paid in kind ?

JwalaMukhi wrote:The main issue is, this incident happened to extract something - which will become clear in due course and to send a message.

Madhusudhan wrote:Lessons to be learned:
- Huffing & Puffing, throwing a fit and doing a few superficial things does not help
- Retaliation should be quiet, effective and disproportionate (such as giving asylum to a high profile figure)
- When dealing with US, use legalistic behavior. Counter sue, file lawsuit on state department for contempt of court, smuggling Indian citizens, etc.

Arjun wrote:

A_Gupta wrote:In March 2011, the US authorities said none of room, board, health care, travel can be counted in this calculation.

Can you provide a link please ?

Minimum Wage.

The contract must state the hourly wage to be paid to the domestic employee. The rate must be the greater of the minimum wage under U.S. Federal and state law, or the prevailing wage for all working hours. Information on the prevailing wage statistics by occupation and metropolitan area is available on the Department of Labor's Online Wage Library & Data Center website.

The contract must state that wages will be paid to the domestic employee either weekly or biweekly. As of March 2011, the Department determined that no deductions are allowed for lodging, medical care, medical insurance, or travel. As of April 2012, deductions taken for meals are also no longer allowed.

1.Members of the consular post shall, with respect to services rendered for the sending State, be exempt from any obligations in regard to work permits imposed by the laws and regulations of the receiving State concerning the employment of foreign labour.
2.Members of the private staff of consular officers and of consular employees shall, if they do not carry on any other gainful occupation in the receiving State, be exempt from the obligations referred to in paragraph 1 of this article.

7a. Witness-2 and Witness-1 met with Devyani Khobragade, the defendant, at the Residence in reference to WITNESS-1 s potential employment for Khobragade in New York, New York as a domestic helper. Khobragade offered to pay Witness-1 a starting salary of 25, 000 rupees per month, plus an additional 5, OOO rupees for overtime.
...

8. Based on my review of a publicly available report of the US Department of Treasury, which sets forth the rate of exchange in effect as of September 1, 2012, I know that at that time, 52 .35 rupees was equivalent to $1 U. S. dollar. At that rate of exchange, 30,000 rupees is equivalent to $573.07 US dollars. At 40 hours per week, with approximately 4 . 3 weeks in a month, $573 . 07 dollars equates to a rate of $3.31 per hour.
....

9c. The Visa Application stated that an visa was sought for Witness-l, who was to be the personal employee of Khobragade beginning in November 2012 at an address in New York, New York.

9d. The Visa Application stated that Witness-l was to be paid $4,500 per month in US dollars.

...


24. Based on my interviews of Witness-l, I know, in substance and in part, that Witness~l worked for Devyani Khobragade, the defendant, as a household employee in New York, New York from approximately November 2012 through approximately June 2013 . Notwithstanding the terms of the First Employment Contract, Witness-l worked far more than 40 hours per week, and Witness~l was paid less than $9.75 per hour by Khobragade. In fact, notwithstanding the terms of the oral agreement between Khobragade and Witness-l and the terms of the Second Employment Contract, Witness-l was paid less than 30,000 rupees, or $3.31 per hour.

Sridhar wrote:The main issue, and one India must make in general, is that the A3 visa and the conditions accompanying it are in direct contravention of Article 47 of the 1963 Vienna conventions .....
....

This specific visa regulation has never been tested in courts, but in general, the courts have always ruled that treaty obligations supersede statutes - in this case , the visa regulation is not even a statute, it is a simple Government order issued by the executive branch of Government.

(2) MANDATORY CONTRACT- The contract between the employer and domestic worker required under paragraph (1) shall include--

(A) an agreement by the employer to abide by all Federal, State, and local laws in the United States;

(B) information on the frequency and form of payment, work duties, weekly work hours, holidays, sick days, and vacation days; and

(C) an agreement by the employer not to withhold the passport, employment contract, or other personal property of the employee.

JwalaMukhi wrote:If diplomats think that they could bring along their families with them, then maids see what they are missing. They do not have their immediate family available to them. Tough luck, it is a spartan military posting for the maids. But for the diplomats it is fairyland posting. This dichotomy leads to maids jumping ship at earliest opportunity.

It's as easy for an Indian diplomat not to bring maids to NYC as it is for an American diplomat to do without subsidized American cheese and beer in Delhi. These little perks are given to each other in the spirit of getting along as they should. After all, what does "diplomacy" stand for?

NEW DELHI: Even as the US remains reluctant to drop visa fraud charges against diplomat Devyani Kohobragade, the government has taken the line that the 39-year-old IFS officer had fulfilled all her commitments in contracts signed with domestic help Sangeeta Richard. Khobragade on Monday got accreditation from the UN in her current posting at India's permanent mission paving the way for full immunity after acknowledgement from the state department.

The government is insisting before the US that as per the contract signed between Khobragade and Richard on November 11, 2012, the diplomat had to pay only $1,560 (at $9.75 hourly wage and 40 hours of work per week) to the help monthly. Sources said this was being paid to her in the form of $560 (or Rs 30,000 transferred to Richard's bank account in India every month), another $375 as deducted from the salary to pay for her chargeable utilities like telephone usage, cable TV, non-work related conveyance, expenses and another $625 given in cash, occasionally with signed receipts. As there were several months where the weekly hours fell well below 40 working hours, the cash payment was apparently adjusted accordingly.

The government has conveyed to US authorities that the figure of $4,500, which is mentioned in the salary details box in form DS-160 that Khobragade helped Richard fill, has been "mistakenly'' quoted by US agencies.


It has also been discovered that all three tickets meant for husband Philip Richard and two children were purchased by the US embassy. Even tax exemption was availed. The tickets were paid for through Master Card, and the endorsement reads JNTAXEXEMPTEDUSEMBASSY. The three flew to New York three days before Khobragade's arrest.

The diplomat has been allowed exemption from appearing in court personally. Khobragade is expected to have full immunity which will preclude any court jurisdiction over her, even if the crime was committed before the period of immunity. This will not be a "perpetual benefit'' for the diplomat though. In case she continues to stay back after the expiry of her full immunity, or comes back to the US in her personal capacity, she will have to face prosecution.

The US embassy here has sought extension of Monday's deadline for filing the visa and other details of the Indians employed by it and its officers. This information includes salary being paid to domestic help employed by US diplomats in India. New Delhi has also sought information about spouses of diplomats and other officials working with the American Embassy School (AES).

India is expected to deliver new identity cards to US consular officials, which will ensure that they have only consular, and not diplomatic, immunity. The US sought to draw a distinction between consular and diplomatic immunity in the Khobragade case saying that she was entitled to only consular immunity in her capacity as deputy consul general. Until now, India had not differentiated between consular and diplomatic privileges for US officials and had given diplomatic immunity to all of them.

A_Gupta wrote: See "William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008".
Incidentally, William Wilberforce was a great anti-slavery advocate. He was also one of the political forces behind making the East India Company permit missionaries into India in 1813.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wi ... ristianity

The father of the infamous Macaulay who set out to anglicize India and Wilberforce belonged to the same church (the Clapham sect).

chaanakya wrote:

Theo_Fidel wrote: US Marshals conducted the arrest on behalf of US attorney. The US attorney has stated that only a strip search was conducted, no cavity search. .

Is there any video evidence that can rest this speculation at rest. The statement by Dk has come immediately after she was released on personal bond. Her statement would be more credible and statement of USMS and Attorney would be seen an as an attempt to cover up. I don't trust them or their system. They could be as unfair and racial and prejudiced as anyone else.

Dipanker wrote:I don't understand the recommendation of closing all the consulates? Shouldn't it be just easier to not bring any maid?

Theo_Fidel wrote:

JwalaMukhi wrote:If diplomats think that they could bring along their families with them, then maids see what they are missing. They do not have their immediate family available to them. Tough luck, it is a spartan military posting for the maids. But for the diplomats it is fairyland posting. This dichotomy leads to maids jumping ship at earliest opportunity.

This is absolutely correct. DK was getting paid USA wages while SR was getting paid India wages. Inherently unstable. Shows IFS incompetence IMHO.

It's as easy for an Indian diplomat not to bring maids to NYC as it is for an American diplomat to do without subsidized American cheese and beer in Delhi. These little perks are given to each other in the spirit of getting along as they should. After all, what does "diplomacy" stand for?

BTW a maid is not a 'perk'. This is a human being you are talking about.

Theo_Fidel wrote:AFAIK DK was being paid ~ $80,000 per year + allowances. While low for NYcity it is a good USA wage for a consul. There is no way actual SR wages can relate to this.

BTW it doesn't matter if GOI or DK engages a maid. They both will have to pay to local wage levels. Else no visa.

Dipanker wrote:
...

No we should close all consulates just because our IFS officiers can't bring along maids.


Or as some wise Roman said "In Rome do as Roman does".

saip wrote:I am not sure why people are talking of retaliation when all India was doing is removing the extra privileges that were granted, for whatever reason, to US diplomats. Even Indian ambassador is not exempt from airport frisking while a low level american diplomat is exempt at Indian airports. I hope now with the surrender of IDs same rules will apply to US diplomats in India.

Theo_Fidel wrote:
...
BTW a maid is not a 'perk'. This is a human being you are talking about.

A recent report in The Diplomat, which covers the Asia-Pacific region, says initiatives of an India-Japan alliance could form a bulwark against Chinese ambitions. A partnership that would of course include the U.S., Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe “set out grand visions during his first term as PM in 2006-2007 for a strategic quadrangle consisting of Japan, India, Australia and the United States — something China perceived as tantamount to an Asian NATO, out to balance a rising China.”The Pentagon has been pitching the same for at least a generation, probably since the moment after the phrase “Pacific Century” came into usage.
But maybe India didn’t get the memo. In Saturday’s Financial Times: “India’s deeply fractious parties have finally found a cause to unite them — resentment of the US. From Sonia Gandhi, head of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, to Narendra Modi, the Hindu nationalist candidate for prime minister, New Delhi’s leaders are outbidding each other in outrage over the strip and search in New York this week of Devyani Khobragade, an Indian consular official.”
Possibly there is something more behind the outrage in the curious case of Ms. Khobragade, something which was always there, lurking, awakening now as rumors of war with China are reported.To think that India would fall in line as a secondary partner to America, which India likely sees more correctly as “Anglo-America” after hundreds of years of brutal occupation by England, would be stunningly presumptuous.But this is the subtle context of American dominance today. It presumes that the worlds beyond our borders deeply desire to abandon their roots, their ancient, indigenous gods and god kings and queens and aspire to be externalized, globalized versions of Coke, Cal Klein, football and “the operative faith of the American people,” which Will Herberg in his study of American religious sociology called “the American Way of Life.” As Herberg once declared America to be a “cut flower culture,” we are today intent on cutting the rest of the world’s nations, cultures and tribes from their original roots and bearings.Arizona Sen. John McCain’s stunning naivety for a man of his age and experience is on display again, this time in Kiev. He naturally assumes that Ukraine — a historically Orthodox country like Russia — is and wants to be an extension of America and American influence; that is, an extension of himself. It is the stuff of Kafka (“In the Penal Colony” comes to mind, and the dangerous nostalgico politics of Spain’s Gen. Francisco Franco). It is the palest and most dangerous form of “Wallace and LeMay” imperialism and McCain its final avatar, decades out of sync with the age. It applies to India as well, and everywhere.America needs new thinking, and new thinkers on the interests of Americans abroad: Rand Paul/Dennis Kucinich 2016.

Dipanker wrote:I don't understand the recommendation of closing all the consulates? Shouldn't it be just easier to not bring any maid?