Haitians in DR

[gary short]

Nals.....pure baffle garb content.......

[something_of_the_night]

Just one question, Nals:

Have you even seen a batey... from a distance...from the comfort of a rented yipeta...as you increase speed to 120 mph?

[Kyle]

wow, i need a week to read this thread....

[cobraboy]

Nals makes some correct points, from a economic market model perspective.

(edit) This situation is common around the world in markets surrounding illegal immigrant communities. The US is suffering with the problem with 12,000,000 illegal Mexican immigrants right now. The market is usually distorted in the unskiiled labor job market.

[cobraboy]

Originally Posted by Kyle

wow, i need a week to read this thread....

Nah. If you have a good grasp of economics and markets, you'd breeze right through it.

[Kyle]

sorry cobra. i majored in physical education in college.

[macocael]

¡ay dios! and now I have to answer all this longwinded argumentation. NALS makes some good points about economic theory, but again, once we look at the situation on the ground the subtleties tend to blur the theoretical framework. That is the simple point I am making. Ok, when I get some time, I will try to answer some of the key points. Again, it comes down to exposing certain assumptions that dont bear up to scrutiny. I will mention one here. who in their right mind would argue that people will return to backbreaking farmwork should the wages rise considerably? If you think that a life of consumerism is merely a matter of earning higher wages and thus can be had in the campos if only wages were sufficiently high, then you are mistaken. Consumerism is by its very nature an urban phenomenon and requires an infrastructure that isnt present in the campo; moreover, as I just pointed out the wages have nothing to do with it, since the work is perceived, rightly, to be physically intolerable. This is anyway a ridiculous argument since agricultural production cannot sustain high wages, so really this is going nowhere, but I think we can reasonably agree that people are not pavlovian dogs, and wages are not the only motivation behind their actions. People's actions are "overdetermined"-- that is, there are many complex motives at work. Yes, I would agree that many people end up as wage slaves, they do things they'd rather not simply because the job pays well, but everyone draws a line somewhere and it would take more than higher wages to induce a movement back to the campos. They dont move to the city just because they think can find higher wages, and once they are in the cities, they tend to become urbanized and wouldnt think of living in the campos again. Just as Dominican immigrants to the states become americanized and Haitians to DR become dominicanized and they settle in.

Actually, on that last note, there is in fact much movement back and forth for the Haitian laborers, and not because of coercion -- many laborers return regularly to Haiti to tend to matters at home and then return to DR for more work. I find your argument in regard to Haitian desire/will to return somewhat convoluted:

"I have never met a Haitian in the DR who is willing to move back to Haiti. Of course, if Haiti was a different kind of place, yes many would move back; but wanting to move back and being willing to move back are two different things."

Aside from the fact that your personal encounters with a few Haitians dont count as evidence here, (and when are you ever here, NALS?), the rest of it is not evidence of anything really. First of all, many do regularly --- they go back and forth. But let us confine ourselves to your main point: Common sense dictates that many would go back if they could, and that many would never have left in the first place. But that fact doesnt really help to substantiate anything other than the very simple thesis that they come here seeking jobs and better wages. Fine, all well and good. but having said that, we havent said really all that much in terms of describing the specific situation of the haitian migrant laborers or their effect on the Dominican economy. such a statement is nothing more than a basic orientation in our investigation, a general framework. It is too simple to provide us a concrete picture of how it all works in reality. Essentially your thesis is that Haitians come here because of a lack of remunerative work in their own country, and they enter into an economic system which enforces low wages because of their illegality and their numbers. Fair enough. But I am merely adding that wages were already quite low in these areas and that had nothing to do with Haitian labor: their numbers and illegality are contributing but not exclusive factors; moreover, the assumption appears to be that this situation thus functions to exclude Dominicans from potential employment opportunities, presumably because they are competing with another labor pool willing to work for less and constituting such numbers that employers have no incentive to adjust wages or conditions so as to entice workers. The Dominicans wont work these jobs for these wages, in essence. My point is simply that they werent working these jobs anyway, they were already in the process of leaving such work well behind, and that they arent interested in competing in any shape or form for such work regardless of the wages offered. My basic point is that there is no real competition between the two labor pools. there are other sectors however, where both labor pools are working side by side, such as the hotels, and here you will find a very complex situation that requires further examination.

Finally one other quick point. You bridle at my suggestion that your characterization of the Haitians as unskilled is offensive. But your statement was a bald generalization: "Because they lack skills and/or are not legal in the country, they are not able to demand equal pay as citizens or legal immigrants." You are characterizing this rather large and diverse labor pool as uniformly "unskilled". You did not bother to qualify this statement, as you did subsequently, by explaining that "It does not meant (sic) absulte (sic) lack of skill, but rather different kind of skills compared to other types of skills in more modern sectors of the economy." This explanation is still not clear, by the way, because you do not in fact know just what skills these people possess, but at least we are beginning to make reasonable distinctions here instead of blanket generalizations. Your little lesson about taking things at face value doesnt actually apply to the statement of mine that you pick to illustrate your point, because that was not a blanket generalization about all haitians in DR; I was clearly referring to the pool of illegal haitians and not all haitians. Context helps to determine these things and I think the context was sufficiently clear. In your case it was not.

OK, more jousting later. Time for lunch.

[KeithF]

Originally Posted by NALs

Your questions seem to imply one thing (to me at least): You may not be fully aware of basic economic theory.

A patronising beginning, saved by an interesting debate!

And one that suggests to me there isn't a simple answer.

The initial question though was why are there Dominicans living in apparently extreme poverty, rather than being employed instead of the Haitians? And I think from the answers below, it is because of labour laws. So, is there a sizable group of Dominicans who are also working illegally?

As for other points raised, monetary reward is too simplistic. [Hertzberg's 'hygiene factors' etc?]. I can't see any level of monetary reward that would make me want to become a strawberry picker as I'm not that concerned about monetary rewards, it is not my primary motivator. Nursing is not a particularly well paid job, although I'll admit, I'm now at a level where I earn quite a bit more than the average wage in the UK But I can also say, in all honesty, I've never applied for a job based upon the wages and indeed, have twice moved to jobs that paid less because they rewarded me more in other ways. Yes, I have a 'minimum threshold' before I have that luxury but once beyond it, there is freedom to choose. Largely, my wife (also a nurse) and I 'gained that luxury' by choosing not to have children. Where there are dependents to be provided for, a willingness to take any job is raised. If I had children to put through school and meet their health needs, I might be forced to consider that 'well paid' strawberry picking job at some point. Certainly, it would be rare to take new jobs with pay cuts if that impacts upon your dependents well being.

However...

Your local population who are turning their backs on farming. If you paid them enough, you argue they would return. In the UK, many 'affluent' city dwellers have purchased holiday/weekend property in the countryside. This (basic supply & demand) has caused a massive increase in the price of rural property. Due to planning restrictions, more [affordable] property can not be built, so the young are leaving for the towns. Farming is seen as low skill, low paid & hard work. Even those who want to do it, can't afford to buy property in the village that they grew up in. So, the 'indigenous' population migrates to the city for a 'better way of life'. They are replaced by migrant workers, largely East Europeans, Polish predominantly.

But, if the wages on the farm were increased sufficiently to attract or retain the original workforce, and enable them to buy a property [or whatever they aspire to] then the farms would cease to be economically viable. And that is the same for cabbages in England or bananas in Dominican Republic.

So...

Why isn't the government doing anything about it? In the UK, they are considering things like 'key worker housing' and have tried schemes in London, where they are now experiencing a shortage of skilled professionals, nurses, teachers, paramedics etc, who can't afford to live there. And we are largely accepting that we need migrant workers (who are here legally due to being in the European Union).

In the Dominican Republic, presumably the government could, if it desired, clamp down on illegal workers, fine companies that breach rules and strengthen unions. But this would potentially, stifle growth in the construction industry and put prices up generally? Holidays to DR would become more expensive if everyone was 'legal', so the key reason for coming to the DR in many peoples eyes would be taken away. And the coffee, sugar and bananas still wouldn't be harvested because the people who historically would have done it have migrated themselves?

Where DR appears to me to be incongruous, is that you have a broadly socialist government that appears to be leaning towards a free [labour] market economy by not implementing the existing laws? Do they (at government level) or the people generally, see it as a 'problem' having Haitian workers? As I understand it (and I'm happy to be shot down on this point) there are 'simmering' racial tensions regarding Haitians?

With high unemployment, as I see it and bearing in mind the responses so far, the Dominican Republic has three choices...

1. Do nothing, GDP is increasing, tourism is growing. Accept a largely illegal, migrant work force is needed to under-pin economic growth.
2. Clamp down on illegal work force and reduce unemployment, with a knock on improvement in quality of life for those people who currently can't work, but at the risk of halting growth or even moving in to recession.
3. Remove, or at least, re-evaluate the labour laws in such a manner that Dominican people can be employed instead of illegal workforce but recognising that this would potentially lead to a (further) driving down of wages for the poorest (least educated) elements of the work force.

Any alternatives that I'm missing?

[Kyle]

on another note, the haitian women are undercutting the dominican girls at the bars and the clubs.

[cobraboy]

Originally Posted by Kyle

on another note, the haitian women are undercutting the dominican girls at the bars and the clubs.

Is that all you ever think about?