Message-ID: <35A5D663.62377A73@mail.ptl.com.mt> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 10:52:51 +0200 From: mailto:vdimitroff@MAIL.PTL.COM.MT Subject: Re: BAD EXPERIENCES etc.. To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
I appealed for constructive dialogue, sharing positive experiences and ideas, but must clarify a few issues touched by SAM MWOKO in his somewhat emotional response:> Yes, it is very specific to call the locals
> incompetent and lacking knowledge etc.
I can't remember anyone on this list calling the locals incompetent or lacking knowledge. Neither did I (I am a 'local'). Can you be more specific and name this arrogant poster to the list?
> there is a law of one price which we apply
> everywhere. Capital must earn the same
> expected rate accross borders.
First time I hear of this 'one price' law. Is it a law in an academic discipline, or in international legislation? Capital does not (and SHOULD NOT) earn the same rate, even within the borders of one country. Otherwise it would not move, the entire system would make no sense.
> Why are donor consultants and those too carrying
> a specific passport better than the locals or those
> of color. To me that is no-market and racist.
THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE RIGHT! I stated the same in my (now I realize, controversial) posting. However, YOU are UNDERpaid, and not the others over-paid. I personally suffer this type of discrimination based on nationality and passport, but I would never fight for my OECD colleagues' rates to be lowered; this would be poor justice. Mine have to match theirs. Ironically, my compatriots who obtained Canadian and US passports, even with weaker academic credentials and work experience are getting 'the right' rates that I generally cannot. Sadly enough, this is not pushed by the developed countries, but almost entirely originates within 'local' culture. Reasons are many and complex; rather than drill into them, I'd like to hear suggestions for change.
Representatives of donor agencies and of recipient governments are on this list, as far as I have noticed. What would they comment on their consultant recruitment policies (the former) as choice preferences (the latter)? Can 'equal opportunity' policies be substantiated with some numbers? Can those who agree that the phenomenon exists propose any culture-changing moves?
Respondents who accept this shifted topic as a new discussion might chose to rename it with a 'was: bad exp.' extension to keep track.
V. Dimitroff
P.S. In line with my own call for being specific, I can substantiate my own statements above with ample detail from first-hand experience; it may be less relevant or interesting for the majority of list members, therefore anyone demanding details please e-mail me personally.