Exploitation of employee or blackmail of employer? (Khobragade case) - Page 34

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Whatever made you deduce that "filing a missing person report is not
inappropriate" is the same as "accusing Sangeeta as absconding is not
inappropriate"?

Absconding = To leave quickly and secretly and hide oneself, often to avoid arrest or prosecution.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/absconding

Missing = Not present, absent, Lost.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/missing

In this case, both overlapped each other.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

The answer to "what should they do" will be an opinion. The answer to "what do they do" is a fact. The former is unimportant; the latter, I don't know.

Could it be possible that Devyani knew what was to be done in that situation or would that be an impossibility? 😆

Originally posted by: _Angie_

Could it be possible that Devyani knew what was to be done in that situation or would that be an impossibility? 😆

Some of you posited that Devyani was legally obligated to report that an A-3 employee has quit her job in a foreign country and if she didn't, she would be in legal trouble.

I asked to see verifiable documentation (or at least an internet article that explains the meat and potatoes behind the said legal obligation) to establish whether Devyani went by the book.

You guys provided nothing that backed your claims regarding the said legal trouble.

I am sorry, but I am finding these exchanges not too bright. From now on, I will respond only if I see a semblance of a reasoning behind a post.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Some of you posited that Devyani was legally obligated to report that an A-3 employee has quit her job in a foreign country and if she didn't, she would be in legal trouble.

I asked to see verifiable documentation (or at least an internet article that explains the meat and potatoes behind the said legal obligation) to establish whether Devyani went by the book.

You guys provided nothing that backed your claims regarding the said legal trouble.

I am sorry, but I am finding these exchanges not too bright. From now on, I will respond only if I see a semblance of a reasoning behind a post.

Let me see if this gets through that thick skull of yours.

A person may disappear for many reasons (a victim of kidnapping, a victim of murder, left of his/her own volition, for an altogether different reason). The understanding is that a missing person no longer has contact or communication with family, friends, employer, colleagues, acquaintances or pretty much anybody else known to the missing person. So, if I am in touch with my family but not in touch with you, you may not succeed in reporting me as missing. It could be construed as you are trying to track me down for reasons best known to you. You may try to lodge a complaint that I went missing but the police will decide if it is indeed a legitimate missing person case. Like I said, the missing could be voluntary as well. It could simply be a case of "I don't want to see your stupid face again".

http://www.hope4themissing.org/cfh/page.php?7#q17

Even if the missing person is found, the law enforcement will not disclose the person's whereabouts; they will just report back that the missing person is found and his/her welfare. For all they know, you could be a stalking or harassing the missing person.

What we have here is a employer-employee relationship. Not a parent-child, sibling, relative, friend or neighbor relationship. The law enforcement will look at the specifics of each case and take action accordingly.

Which is why I said (and listen carefully because that lunkhead of yours more often than not fails to use the faculty of reason) it is important to know what Devyani was supposed to do according to the rulebook (if there is one) A missing person complaint, while may be a valid start, was turned down by the authorities because they didn't find the complaint legitimate. Does the rulebook say that you have to start off with a missing person report when an A-3 employee disappears? Does it say that you have to inform INS? Does it say that you just have to terminate employment? Does she know? Does anyone know? Hello!

So the question then becomes - how you can be so sure that she would have been in legal trouble if she hadn't done what she had done back then. Do you work under the assumption that some action is better than any action or do you actually find out what action needs to be taken and just do it? In your own brain-dead example of a seller of a car trying to inform the DMV, would it be considered a valid action if the seller of the car instead goes and informs the police department or, I don't know, some local church, because the assumption here seems to be that "some action is better than any action" absent a valid rulebook?!

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Let me see if this gets through that thick skull of yours.

A person may disappear for many reasons (a victim of kidnapping, a victim of murder, left of his/her own volition, for an altogether different reason). The understanding is that a missing person no longer has contact or communication with family, friends, employer, colleagues, acquaintances or pretty much anybody else known to the missing person. So, if I am in touch with my family but not in touch with you, you may not succeed in reporting me as missing. It could be construed as you are trying to track me down for reasons best known to you. You may try to lodge a complaint that I went missing but the police will decide if it is indeed a legitimate missing person case. Like I said, the missing could be voluntary as well. It could simply be a case of "I don't want to see your stupid face again".

http://www.hope4themissing.org/cfh/page.php?7#q17

Even if the missing person is found, the law enforcement will not disclose the person's whereabouts; they will just report back that the missing person is found and his/her welfare. For all they know, you could be a stalking or harassing the missing person.

What we have here is a employer-employee relationship. Not a parent-child, sibling, relative, friend or neighbor relationship. The law enforcement will look at the specifics of each case and take action accordingly.

Which is why I said (and listen carefully because that lunkhead of yours more often than not fails to use the faculty of reason) it is important to know what Devyani was supposed to do according to the rulebook (if there is one) A missing person complaint, while may be a valid start, was turned down by the authorities because they didn't find the complaint legitimate. Does the rulebook say that you have to start off with a missing person report when an A-3 employee disappears? Does it say that you have to inform INS? Does it say that you just have to terminate employment? Does she know? Does anyone know? Hello!

So the question then becomes - how you can be so sure that she would have been in legal trouble if she hadn't done what she had done back then. Do you work under the assumption that some action is better than any action or do you actually find out what action needs to be taken and just do it? In your own brain-dead example of a seller of a car trying to inform the DMV, would it be considered a valid action if the seller of the car instead goes and informs the police department or, I don't know, some local church, because the assumption here seems to be that "some action is better than any action" absent a valid rulebook?!

Originally posted by: LeadNitrate

K and Birdie, would you two mind keeping your debates free of insults to one another? for the last few pages random insults like thick skull, and all sorts of words are being thrown around.

This goes for everyone.

As it is , the debate at this point is stagnated to some extent, please do not try to revive it by insulting each other.

Sorry LN. That was highly insensitive of me.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdfXGtO7nBk[/YOUTUBE]

Presented BAI - Channel [v]

Itna paise mai itnaich

woh saab toh thik hai par pagar kabhi milenga mind it

😆