Good Idea... But For The Wrong Reasons.

[Bruce]

 

The whole point in the law is to protect the people who need protecting the most.

 

I agree with this, but sometimes there are unintended consequences. Canadian families were hiring caregivers from the Phiippines and other countries to help care for their young children as nannies or for older parents. The rules were fairly lax and they were more or less private arrangements between families and caregivers with placement agencies as intermediaries. Then there were highly publicized abuse cases. Although few in numbers, the do-gooders went wild over the exploitation of women. For example, they were not given day-offs. The Filipina woment were treated like "slaves" forced to work twelve hours a day for under minimum wage.

 

Rules were tightened. A new bureaucracy was created. Families now had to pay the minimum wage of the province, pay overtime, give the caregivers day offs, etc. The unintended consequence is the families could no longer afford caregivers. The number of new hires plummented.

 

Using the cruise industry as a parallel example, the contracts are ten months; twelve hours a day; no day-offs during the contract period. You are given cramped quarters in the bottom of the ship; three meals and snacks; uniforms you had to wash and iron during your off hours; and by US standards, a lousy wage. Filipinos and other nationals fight to get jobs on cruise liners. Why agree to these working conditions? The reason is wages are five to ten times better than at home and the working conditions at home are worse.

 

The do-gooders in Canada won at the expense of those whom they were trying to protect against exploitation. (I still like the Canadians.)

 

So, what's your point? That immigrant families should be permitted to exploit people from their native land without any govt. interference? Families now have to pay minimum wage, give days off, and pay OT when its worked? The horror!!

 

I think that's a good thing. If those families in Canada want to exploit cheap labor, they should move back to the Philippines. There's plenty of people there that they can pay peanuts to care for their elderly.

 

You, like many others are not thinking the process through to the conclusion. The term 'exploitation' is not set in stone. Fluid term and is subject to a wide range of meaning to an individual.

 

The bottom line is that there are many thousand of people in 1st world countries that can not afford to pay $400USD + a week for a nanny. Out of the question. And there are a few million Pinays, with no hope for anything at all but rain and heat and more babies while living in the Philippines. If, and I do say, IF there was a program in place where those unemployed Pinays could get employment in a 1st world country at say $100 a week (4,000p) + room and board, that would employ a million or more women around the world, into houses that could not afford the going local rate of $400 a week or more.

 

So, in thinking this out, you, the guy on the white horse and in the shiny armor.... act to prevent the EXPLOITATION of these women and stop any such program form happening.

 

YOU, go to bed at night with your belly full of food and pleasant dreams on how YOU acted to protect thses poor poor Philippine women.... BUT... Hey! What about those poor poor women?

 

They AND THEIR KIDS go to be hungry, no school money no medical money and no change on the horizion!

 

Do you even realize with 4,000p a week can provide to a famliy living in squalor? 

 

Perfect solution? Of course not. Potential for abuse? Sure there is. But....... But........ in doing it your way, there is NO chance for success, the squalor continues.

 

In allowing the employment of house helpers, at below the going rate for the host country, but ABOVE the rate for rural Philippines, it is a start! And then, once started, there can be some checks and balances added to help those who find themselves in a bad situation.

 

I am not attacking your point of view... as your views are very common. While we all like to think we are individuals, we at best, well 99.99999% of us humans, are really all members of groups. Some very small groups (astro-nuts) to huge groups (I like the color BLUE). In this suituation, your argument against the exploitation of (fill in the blank) is actually a very generic argument that is easily adaptable to many many situations. Poorly thought out and more of a retort than an actual reason to not do something.  

 

Become a police officer? Are you stupid? You may get shot! .... Very true but no consideration to the positive aspects of being a police officer from saving people to your pension.... Same argument for a firefighter.... And... Many of those people work for FREE, putting themselves in danger. EXPLOITATION?????

 

The best all around rebuttal is that old saying... 'Nothing ventured = Nothing gained'. If you as we say in the US, played the devils advocate and set aside your views for the moment... or say suddenly you left 7th grade debate team mentality and were put into a graduate level program (power point use etc) and were given the assignment to find the POSITIVE things that would happen if the govenment stepped aside to allow free enterprise in hiring and say prostitution et al.... How many kids would now be able to go to school? How many medical bills could be paid? How many kids sleep at night with food in their bellies? What other positive things can you discover, by allowing the individual worker to set the conditions that are acceptable?

 

Think of the positive possibilities (glass half full) instead of all the negatives (glass half empty). Nothing is perfect, but allowing a start and then minimum governmental intreventions would allow millions of people around the planet jobs that may not pay well, but would keep their families from starving and their kids from begging.      

Edited February 16, 2013 by Bruce

[JJReyes]

So, what's your point? That immigrant families should be permitted to exploit people from their native land without any govt. interference? Families now have to pay minimum wage, give days off, and pay OT when its worked? The horror!! I think that's a good thing. If those families in Canada want to exploit cheap labor, they should move back to the Philippines. There's plenty of people there that they can pay peanuts to care for their elderly.

 

President Obama proposed during his recent State of the Union address to raise the federal minimum wage from the current $7.25 to $9.00 an hour. The reason stated is a wage earner at the minimum level of $7.25 with a wife and two children will earn below the federal poverty level.

 

There was recently an opinion page article in the Philippine Inquirer that discussed a similar point. The Philippine minimum wage is $11 a day whereas the less developed neighboring countries are lower. My recollection was China's is $8.00 and Vietnam around $4.25. The writer was making a case that the Philippines is not competitive. You have millions of unskilled and semi-skilled laborers who are unemployed. Now P170 or $4.25 a day is not much, but at least it helps in the purchase of rice. Better than starving.

 

Light industries like garments are easy to move from one country to the next. They just load the sewing machines into containers. It moved from the American South to places like the Philippines (during the time there was a garment quota); then on to China; then to Vietnam. Now it will probably move to Myanmar where labor costs are even lower.

 

The agrument I am trying to make is a government imposed minimum wage maybe counterproductive. Certainly, increasing it from $7.25 to $9.00 won't add to the employment numbers. It will probably decrease. For example, the fast food industry will more likely cut back on workers by replacing their work with additional machinery.

[i am bob]

Bruce, go back and re-read all the things I wrote.  The only "Shining Horse" I am on is the one where I am saying let the Canadians in Canada have the jobs first within what the government states is the minimum conditions rather than bringing in somebody from another country at a lower wage and thus taking more jobs away from the Canadians who want to work. You know what happens if we go by what you suggest?  Let's make an example and go by your suggestions but changing the industry slightly, let's bring all the Filipino nurses and doctors to the US and let them work in the hospitals for a lot lower wages than the Americans are paid.  Now you will see a lot of American nurses and doctors wandering around unable to pay their basic bills because they can't find work.  I won't even look at if the doctor's and nurses are trained to the same standards but just think about how many hours they are working overtime and for how little money...  How's your heart feeling lately...  Got any chest pains?  High blood pressure?  Diabetic?  Ok, let's not even think about them being overworked and so tired that they are ready to drop.  How many of your own countrymen did you just put out of work so you could feel better about how you treated the poor of another country?  So what if we are making our own people poor and out of work- we can just raise taxes to support them and, along the way, I helped somebody from another country!  The problem with sending Filipinos to Canada as OFWs to work in the Home Care and Home Health Care sectors is that there are already too many Canadians looking for work in the same field but the jobs aren't available.  Should I repeat this again because it seems that it isn't getting across in any of my posts!  There aren't enough jobs for the Canadians who are trying to get work in these fields so why are we suppose to bring in more people from another country to work for lower wages in these fields???  Oh, and by the way?  For families that can't afford the wages of the Canadian workers, there are government subsidies available to assist in this.  So everybody who needs one can get somebody and does not have to do without.  

 

Now I am not going to just rain on your parade and run away.  I will offer a reasonable suggestion on things that can be done to help.  First thing to look at is, look at each individual country and find a field that has lots of work but not enough people.  Are there people who are properly trained to the standards required who can step in and fill these positions?  Start the line here for those who wish to be OFWs.  Let's go to the next country.  What jobs are largely available and not enough people to fill them?  Start another line up of those who wish to be OFWs.   Wouldn't this be a better system than just throwing more bodies at the wall and hoping they stick?  The way I suggest is less painful for everybody!

[Bruce]

BOB!

 

Translation error between Canadian and American English...

 

My reply was to THEMASON, a forum member. I quoted his post.  

[i am bob]

BOB!

 

Translation error between Canadian and American English...

 

My reply was to THEMASON, a forum member. I quoted his post.  

 

Well, kick me to the curb...  Just when it was starting to get fun!

 

:mocking:

[Bruce]

BOB!

 

Translation error between Canadian and American English...

 

My reply was to THEMASON, a forum member. I quoted his post.  

 

Well, kick me to the curb...  Just when it was starting to get fun!

 

:mocking:

 

Well buddy boy... good thing you are not Japanese! When those guys talk about saving face... they are SERIOUS! :cheersty: