A few points that came to my attention regarding the iGate/RBC scandal. I wanted to know how iGate brought people over to North America. I already assumed they would be lower paid, thus the appeal to Canadian companies, but what about the expense of sending employees to a foreign nation on contract and work visa’s.
This is what I have discovered from comments made by current and past employees posted on the Glass Door Website.
- “5. Onsite:
If you are going onsite, they will make you sign a bond of (payable 1.10 LK at India if you resign within 1 yr+3 months (notice period) after your visa applied, even if rejected) and (3 LK payable at US if you resign anytime in US). Even you can’t leave job after coming back from US for another 6 + 3 (notice period)=9 months. You want to go?
6. Notice Period: They do not negotiate on 90 days even they don’t compensate your earned leaves. No buy out option.”
This implies that you are financially responsible to the company if you do not want to work at the job or in the country they send you to. That you ‘owe them’ for sending you to another nation for a ‘job’. Not doing that job can result in financial punishment and ruin.
I doubt iGate is the only company using these practices to move workers from impoverished nation to richer nations, where the company gains large profits by relocating the employee to a higher paying market, while the employee doesn’t see the same increase in income. They may, if lucky, get a minor bump in wages if anything, but ONLY if they complete the tasks within the contracted period.
Now here’s an interesting quote for you to consider.
- “(a) […] the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs;”
This is the definition of Human Trafficking as accepted by the members of the United Nations since 25 December 2003.
Wikipedia expresses it quite well this way:
- “Unlike most cases of human smuggling, victims of human trafficking are not permitted to leave upon arrival at their destination. They are held against their will through acts of coercion, and forced to work for or provide services to the trafficker or others. The work or services may include anything from bonded or forced labor to commercialized sexual exploitation.”
So if a company, sets up shop in a poor nation, hires people to work in another nation at low wages (below that nation’s average wage for the job) with a bond holding them in financial obligation to the company for a set period of time such as a year, while that company collects money from a client for providing the services. How is that not Human Trafficking?