19300: Esser: Re: 19298: Raber: Re: 19294: Esser: Re: 19279: Dreyfuss: RE: 19264 (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: D. Esser torx@joimail.com

I am not going on the record against factories in Haiti here, but there
are
different ways of running them and by many accounts Andy Apaid and
before him his father hasn't been very responsible or law abiding when
it
comes to that. I am speaking of abiding by Haitian laws and accepted
practices.

Companies did not leave Haiti because of the Disney boycott per se. They
mainly left because they found cheaper means of production elsewhere. I
can personally attest to some of the conditions in Disney's factories,
or better:
those of their sub-contractors. They were not up to Haitian standards
and
nobody tries to make comparisons to developed countries here. There
were instances of sexual exploitation, withheld pay, violence and
assorted
other behaviors not commonly associated with decent business practices.
That a Haitian company will not pay U.S. wages or can offer the same
benefits
than their counterparts in developed nations is a given. But each
country has
standards of accepted conduct and it was the Haitian workers that mainly
asked Disney to make sure that sub-contractors abide by the law.

You do not need to interview Apaid's workers, others have done that,
just
do some research. Of course jobs are such a rare commodity in Haiti
that most people would not leave their jobs even under the most
deplorable
conditions. I personally talked to women that were forced to have sex
with
supervisors under the threat of loosing their jobs (not in Apaid's
factories)
and these women didn't quit, because they had little other choice of
supporting
their families. Do you suppose that makes this kind of behavior
acceptable?

You write: "This is why if the political opposition would have taken the
Caricom deal, they would just inherit the violence up North.  Aristide
resigning is the only thing that would make the rebels lay down their
arms
(they say). "  This is very naive to believe people such as Chamblain
will
just fade into the woodwork and what would happen to democracy as an
institution if elected presidents just bow to whatever request an
opposition, that
wouldn't stand a chance at the ballot box, makes? The Fraph and
military
operatives have already indicated that they seek to reestablish
structures
in society that were abolished for the very reason that they were an
impediment
to democracy and lawful changes in the executive. The opposition isn't
really
coming out against the violence up  north because it serves their
purpose.
They didn't take the Caricom deal, because in eventual elections they
would
be swept out of political life again. By all accounts their electoral
support is
weak to say the least. The opposition is looking for a change of the
status quo
by unlawful means, because that is their best bet to attain their goals.

Your statement that Haitians are taking to fleeing the country in
greater numbers
because of Aristide supporters almost doesn't merit an answer. Because
of which
organizations did haitians flee in the early nineties. Did I hear army
and Fraph. Very
good! Now, do you suppose that a majority of people have such short
memories
that this is forgotten already. Isn't it the case that former Fraph
members and army
members combined with plain thugs are already ruling large parts of the
country.
Dear Raber, violence by street gangs and unruly supporters of mostly
lawful
governments are one affair, the specter of having a country where
officially
sanctioned paramilitaries roam the country with impunity again, quite
another.
Can you document the behavior of "chimeres", that are acting with the
support
of the government, committing the same acts as even the main stream
media is
reporting from the north? Sorry to disappoint you here, Aristide while
he may be
responsible for many things didn't cause the current breakdown of law.
Did he
release imprisoned criminals, shoot at his own police or stood idly by
while others
looted?
.