This was a very interesting article and rebuttal. While reading the article I could not help but feel an emotional connection to the women. Making their way to this country illegally to have a better life, only to find that things here would be worse than what they left behind. Even more shocking was the advertisements for jobs offering wages far below national and state guidelines. The gruesome living conditions coupled with the horrific hours for dismal pay had me cringe to my soul. Do we have slave labor going on in the country out in the open??
Ms. Nir’s article shed some light on a subject that most of us had no idea existed. At the end of the article I was questioning myself as to how much I was going to pay for my next mani pedi, until I read the rebuttal.
It is very interesting to see how easily I was persuaded by this article and the power it has to tarnish the reputation of all salons. The first claim was the advertisement of wages of 10 dollars a day. No such advertisements existed. There were low wages posted but none showing wages below state guidelines. Also how would Ms. Nir know what the ads were saying as she herself does not speak in any Chinese dialects. All of her information was translated to her which could be misquoted or misunderstood.
Ms. Nir also didn’t get the side of the owners of any salons. They were painted out as greedy shop owners having their employees work under horrible conditions for long hours for low to no wages. Having Ms. Nir interview workers was also a difficult pill to swallow. She did not understand what was being said to her. She also made mention to when the city does the inspections on the conditions of the employees that very little of them speak Chinese dialect. This comment also contradicts her own article as she cannot speak the language either but was taking the word of others to form an opinion.
I feel that the treatment of the New York Times was valid. It is unfortunate that this had to be published in the first place, but as a well respected news organization, more work should have been done to present the story for a non bias stand point. Having more sources and also speaking to women who are licensed could have told the story form another point of view. The biggest miss is not getting the side of the owners of the salon. Without a doubt they would have denied the allegations but it would have given some insight into how they see things. It would have also shown that not all salons adhere to these practices.