And those Laws were broken. Not until a threat from an Advocacy Group, threatening Dhalla with the RCMP, did one of the woman get her passport and earnings This, during a meeting that Dhalla set up, that had her mother going and meeting the caregiver. Kinda kibosh’s the ” My Brother Is The Employer ” statement.

Prior to the call from the Advocacy Group, the owner of the Agency called, as did a local business owner. To no avail.

If Dhalla reads this, remember, the court of public opinion, is not a murder trail. The public does not need Forensic Evidence. The onus on Public Opinion, is not based on ” Beyond a Reasonable Doubt ” It’s based on “Probability”. If you’re voted “the worst” MP to work for on The Hill. Then in all Probability, you carry that home.

And to throw your family under the bus. ( see Probability )

And now, Mr. Anonymous has popped up. Why Anonymous.? Shy, not into the lime light, doesn’t want the media attention. or, “no” work permit.. “cash under” the table. Two law breaking peas in a pod.

And how a caregiver could claim looking after cooking, cleaning, laundry and four kids, with no mother in the house, as being overworked.. is beyond me. Please remember. Caregivers are employees. They are only required to work 8 hrs. a day. They do not replace the mother, they assist the mother…Mr. Anonymous’s story has no Mother in the home.. Who here can say she wasn’t overworked.

tj

Why is it so difficult for our politicians to own up to their mistakes or even just in case their actions unintentinally hurt someone? It is a fact of life. Miss Dhalla is not perfect and neither are the nannies. Let everyone learn their lessons and then move on to do the right thing!
If the law was broken, then it is a diffirent story. The authorities must then make their moves. In the mean time, Miss Dhalla could be well advised to take the high road. You aspire to be a public servant? Then serve the interest of the nannies. They are members of the public you swore to serve.

Reasonably, since Tongson was a live-in caregiver the Dhallas are allowed to deduct from her pay Room and Board on what was stated as $ 369.42.

So let’s do the math.

Assuming Tongson only worked 8 hours a day:

$ 9.25/ hour x 8 hours = $ 74.00/day

Again, assuming she only worked 5 days:

$ 74.00/day x 5 days = $ 370.00/wk

As per the payment given to Tongson for the month of May, the total was $1000.00 .

However, for the month of May there are four weeks and two days that Tongson must have worked, May -2, 5-9, 12-16, 19-23, 26-31. Thus,

May 1 – 2 …………………………………. $ 148.00
May 5 – 9 ……………………………………. 370.00
May 12 – 16 ………………………………… 370.00
May 19 – 23 ………………………………… 370.00
May 26 – 31 ………………………………… 370.00
————————————————————
Total pay for the month of May $ 1,628.00 (Supposed to be)

Actual Payment made in the month of May is $ 1,000.00 . Thus, there is $ 628.00 unaccounted for so far.

Subtracting the R & B $ 369.25, we then have $ 258.58 unaccounted for.

If as we already know the Dhallas pay a weekly $ 250.00 on an assumption that the nannies that previously worked with them get to work 5 days in a week, we have here a $ 50.00/day rate. Now, the Dhallas knew that the hourly rate is $ 9.25/hour.

If Alvarez worked for 9 days, and Tavinder should have a record how many days she worked, then the pay should have been $ 450.00 on the $ 50.00/day rate. But she got paid $ 370.00! Where then the $ 20.00 comes from? If they go by the rate of $ 50.00/day then Alvarez only worked for 7 days, and not as Alvarez claimed which would be $ 350.00 . Where did that $20.00 come from then? As a tip? I doubt, since both parties separated not in good terms.

If it can be provided an evidence that Alvarez worked for 9 days, e.g. Mon-Fri, then Mon-Thu, then the problem of pay is quite obvious. The days she worked probably fall between Mon-Fri of the first week, and then, perhaps, Mon-Tue of the following week. Well, that would be according to the Dhallas. On the other hand, Alvarez must have worked only till Tuesday of the second week. Of course, this is all assuming that she started on the first Monday of the first week considered.

Still, the $ 20.00 remains unaccounted for.

My guess is Alvarez worked from Monday of the first week till Tuesday of the second week before she quit but, she also counted Saturday and Sunday as part of the 9 days she said she worked. The $20.00 then makes sense!

According to this, the Dhallas paid her $ 10.00 for each day, perhaps thinking, “She only worked light on the weekend.” But that still count as work. And as the LOM form Dhalla submitted, “In the event that the foreign live-in caregiver works less than full-time hours in any particular week, she/he must be compensated for full-time work,” the Dhallas are still in violation of the pay, she should have been paid $450.00!

I’d like to see Tavinder’s record of payment on this.

Truth will prevail, by then hold your judgement so that you will not be judge.

My sister (Civil Engineer) was employed few years ago by a Doctor to look after their 3 children, she was made to work unpaid overtimes, maltreated, was not provided with food that she has paid for from the ROOM & Board deduction, was seldom given time off, was very unhappy (She has lost 15 lbs from stress). But she never quit the job because she did not want to take the risk of not being able to complete 2 years of employment in 3 years. This is how much a nanny is willing to take to keep their immigration at stake.

Anxious to normalize her status, Alvarez said she inquired of Tavinder Dhalla “about my papers” on several occasions.

“I cannot stay here (and) work with you as an illegal. I want to be legal,” Alvarez said.”

I don’t think there is much there for Alvarez as she knew what she had accepted (agreement) was not legal. And when Dhalla didn’t do what she said she would do (sponsor her), she quit. It seems there was some deception on both parts here. Deceive the government, and Canadians to their own advantages. Only Dhalla didn’t carry through. But if she had than Alvarez wouldn’t have quit by the sounds of it.

Quote: ” Ruby Dhalla told her she would get her proper documentation, Alvarez said, adding that Dhalla told her: “I work at the Parliament. I have a friend in immigration that can help me regarding your papers.”

When nothing happened, Alvarez decided to quit and look for legal work elsewhere. When she quit, she says, Tavinder Dhalla gave her $50 for a cab, and told her to return to get the remainder of the money from Ruby Dhalla.”

But when you clean your house you may skimp sometimes. When you are paying someone you expect way more of that person than you do yourself. Maybe not slavery but certainly the situation can easily become an overly demanding position.

“just a reasonably compensated job for unskilled workers”

Are they reasonably compensated? What was the number they put on a stay-at-home mother’s “work” if she were paid? Or are you saying that because they are “unskilled” they don’t need to expect much. And when is a nanny responsible for all the household chores. 2 totally different occupations when you are hiring someone. Can a nanny be expected to wash windows and do laundry? Or only to rinse clothes children dirty or wipe fingerprints from window when noticed? Keeping a house to homeowner doesn’t involve as much as when you hire housekeeper. Then you have expectations you would never impose on yourself.

“Terrible how someone so concerned about families can blame her brother. Sick!”

If I were her brother I’d be pissed off if she didn’t.

I have spoken with many new immigrants over the years that work in this field. This treatment is not unusual at all.

I hope that the caregivers will be compensated for all of the hours that have worked and never got paid.

But I think people should be asking themselves whether Intercede and these nannies are being used much in the same way Green Shift Inc. and Jennifer Wright were used as political cannon fodder, which I find is the more reprehensible issue.

When you speak of minimum wage, perhaps you should ask yourself whether that is on top of room and board. $1600/month (“minimum” wage at $10/hr for 40 hrs/week) less $600/month room and board is $250/week. I don’t think that this is unreasonable. If you scale to $8/hr, this is equivalent to a 50 hr week, which is a 12 hr/day shift.

The question of course is how one decides when those hours and requirements are met, and abuse of this can occur from both the employer and the employee, since work is generally not continuous and the job description is imprecise.

So when all is said and done, maybe one should be questioning why the CPC has blocked passing 10 of 36 regulations for immigrant workers under the commons committee studying precisely this issue.

But as one who actually worked for 18 years in these jobs I must point out the 1000./net/ a month is very much the going rate for these workers it can’t be considered outrageously low pay if it comes with room and board as natural addition. . I Myself worked for 750.00 per month with Room .but no meals/ and I ACCEPTED it when I was hired by a private payer . At another place i was paid 1200,00 per month. with room and Board.

Of Course i was trying to be employed through agencies which was way better with pay / with unions!/ and there were strickt rules on the job descriptions and the hrs involved..
At some other media report I read ‘ and they are not Good enough to sit at the family table…” Oh My !!! It is ridiculous .this exactly shows how twisted this story became… My meal times In MY room was a welcomed break for me…
both sides needs some time to be off and be left alone…

I am perplexed how the media is spinning this story without legs .. and facts checked . Shame!!!
My personal feeling is these “nannies” are actually went to complain to reach some benefits from mysterious sources …. in their status in Canada ..

From the nannies’ perspective, Ruby Dhalla is a powerful person. Therefore, it must have taken them a lot of courage get their stories out. They would not bring false allegations as they know this would jeopardize their chance of bringing their families to Canada. I think the nannies are credible and it is game over for Dhalla. Her lawyer waived receipts in front of the media as proof that the nannies are lying. Those receipts do not prove that the nannies are lying. The lawyer did that for the media. I doubt if he will do the same before the parliamentary committee. He will lose his credibility if he does.

I admire the courage of nannies in bringing the story out. Employers’ violation of immigration and employment are rampant.. Because of Dhalla, these issues have gained wide medial attention. However, the media should not focus so much getting the bad guy. They should focus on the systemic abuse of nannies and question instead why Canada still has the racist and anti-woman live in caregiver program.

I’m embarrassed for you.

If I hired a housekeeper, which I have done — I would expect the place to be cleaned; and for the housekeeper to do whatever I asked her or him to do in connection with the job. It’s not a difficult job.

There is nothing there that could be even remotely called “slavery”. Someone is looking for a way to stay in the country, I’d say.

Isn’t it true that the nannies were already working for someone else in Canada, when they decided to go and work for Dhalla?

Your comment about cheap labour makes absolutely no sense – just how much is room and board these days? Last I heard, here in Calgary — it’s $800 a month for a tiny room in a bungalow, and that does not include food. How much would room and board be worth at Dhalla’s house?

Whenever the facts do emerge – and you can be sure it will be many months from now – they will get considerably less attention than this initial flurry of media coverage. It’s like Judy Sgro. How many people remember that she was cleared of wrongdoing versus all the people who vaguely associate Sgro with scandal.

So it seems to me that if some of Dhalla’s political enemies were orchestrating this thing behind the scenes then maybe they’ve already accomplished what they wanted to accomplish.

I’ll leave it up to others to decide what they says about our political and media culture.