Foreign Labour in Dubai - the less glamourous face of globalisation

The NYTimes published an article about foreign labour in Dubai - and, despite some good efforts, it wasn't a great article, but definitely worth a read and not too long, so read it!!!

Foreign labour meant here is the poor, primarily from the Indian subcontinent but also from other poor Arab countries, which works in construction or other handy jobs. No, not the people who sip their chococcinos (that’s hot chocolate and coffee) sitting in their fancy offices in the Emirates Towers, to go ‘home’ to their fancy hotels... (inside joke here, never mind).

It’s the guys who find themselves working outdoors in 50 degrees Celcius, sometimes mistreated, and most often disillusioned. Those who haven’t gone home in 3 years, either because they can’t afford to ‘waste’ the plane ticket money or because they’re illegally here and will be unable to get back in Dubai afterwards.

The article described the bad work conditions, from the day they pay $3000 to an ‘employment office’ in Delhi to get a job in Dubai, to their day to day struggle with difficult jobs, mediocre work conditions, missing their kids back home.

Some friends and I had an interesting discussion about it actually, which started with Patrick quoting this section of the article in an email:

“Faced with complaints about low wages and difficult work, Mr. Kaabi (Min. Of Labor) repeats a point often made here: Many workers face greater hardships at home for less pay. “We don’t force people to come to this country,” Mr. Kaabi said. “They’re building a whole new life for their families.” Some come from backgrounds so impoverished, he said, “they don’t know how to use the toilet; they will sit and do it on the ground.” But Ms. Whitson of Human Rights Watch said, “That’s what exploitation is — you take advantage of someone’s desperation.”


Patrick described the reply as ‘powerful’. I beg to differ.
First because the lady from HRW (an organisation I’m not very fond of, unlike Amnesty International) is mixing up concepts here.

True, very often the rights of these workers are often flouted. They are forced to work during the summer’s peak sun hours, when most of us dread the thought of waiting outside our air-conditioned buildings for 2 minutes to hail a taxi.

Second, because the Kaabi dude is partly right: for many workers - not those quoted in the NYTimes article, obviously, because if they interviewed them it would be good journalism... :-P being in Dubai is indeed a great opportunity. That’s what international movements of labour are all about: workers out, remittances in. A house, education for the kids, etc. We were living the same in Egypt (still are, to a certain extent, but far less than in the 80s and early 90s).

AND, let’s face it: that’s the way the markets work. Supply, demand, clearing price. True, it is a example where the market clears at an ugly price (low salaries) and this is indeed capitalism in its most extreme form. But that’s how the world works; THIS is not exploitation, sorry HRW. It’s business practices.

Real exploitation, however, comes with forcing workers to work in insane summer temperatures; packing them in lousy unsanitary houses; cheating them of their pay, in cutting corners on safety measures and helmets in work places. Now THAT is exploitation. It is illegal, and if it isn’t, it damn well should be.


So where do we, chococcino sippers in fancy neckties, fit in this picture?
For Taufiq, it starts with pausing ‘to ponder how many workers died to make our ascent possible’ as we ride an elevator in a tall building; to let ‘our minds wander to the
laborers forced to live in makeshift camps in the desert’ when we enjoy an air-conditioned restaurant.

Okay. Then what?
Corporate Social Responsibility, says Patrick - for the government to include safety measures and other such basic things in their standard work practices.
Now that sounds like a logical thing to do, and should actually be obtainable.

Revolting against low salaries and bad big businesses making money off the back of their poor workers is ineffective. Perhaps even counter-effective.

I actually wonder whether mixing up the basic Human Rights issues (mistreatment, safety procedures, etc) with those of extreme capitalism doesn’t weaken the first. Meaning, crusading for better salaries and better sanitation in the housing complexes can lead to a rejection of the complete lot of demands, even though the latter should be completely inarguable. I think we should separate what we argue for - whether we agree with the way markets settle other things or not.

Damn, I’m such a free-marketer. The Kennedy School will disavow me.


(PS: Photos from the NYTimes, same article. you didn't really think I took these, did you??
PPS: If I ever get deported, please dispatch a good lawyer.
PPPS: the previous sentence was a joke. (well, mostly).