In the winter of 2015, Edith Mendoza arrived in New York City to begin working in the home of a U.N. diplomat and his wife, Pit and Marieke Koehler. Ms. Mendoza, a native of the Philippines, had been employed as a live-in domestic worker for many years, but this was her first time doing so in the U.S. The Koehlers had found Ms. Mendoza through a website, “greataupair.com,” interviewed her via phone, and explained their need for someone to care for their four children and do some light housework. They ultimately offered her the position and entered into a written employment contract with her, all while she was still working abroad. Among other things, the contract stated that Ms. Mendoza would be working as “domestic staff” at a rate of $10.02/hour for a 35-hour workweek with time-and-a-half for overtime, Sundays off, transportation, and room-and-board. Ms. Mendoza presented the contract to the U.S. consulate and was granted a special work visa, one created by the U.S. specifically for foreign diplomats seeking to bring someone into the U.S. to work as home service personnel. So long as the Koehlers continued to employ Ms. Mendoza, the visa permitted her to stay in the country.
However, not long after her arrival, Ms. Mendoza found herself working under conditions drastically different than those discussed over the phone and promised in her employment contract. In addition to watching the four children – all under age 10 – her daily responsibilities included cleaning the six-bedroom and six-bathroom home, preparing meals for the family and occasional visitors, washing and ironing laundry, caring for the pet birds, and other household chores. Despite her employment agreement, Ms. Mendoza regularly worked more than 90 hours each week, required to do work well beyond the scope of an au pair’s duties, was not paid overtime, and was not provided independent transportation. The Koehlers did not even given Ms. Mendoza a code to disable the house alarm, meaning she could only enter and leave the home if someone else permitted. With no information about the town in which she was living and without any independent means of transportation, Ms. Mendoza did not leave the Koehlers’ home on her own for the first few months, leaving her isolated and alone in an unfamiliar place.
When Mrs. Mendoza inquired about her unpaid overtime, the Koehlers pointed to her “free” lodging and put her off until Ms. Mendoza simply stopped asking. When Ms. Mendoza’s health began to decline and she asked for time off as her doctor directed, the Koehlers refused, guilted for making the request, and, finally, threatened to fire her and turn her over to immigration authorities.
With the support of Damayan Migrant Workers Association and community members, Ms. Mendoza eventually fled and filed a federal lawsuit against the Koehlers. Unfortunately, because of the doctrine of diplomatic immunity, the court dismissed her case for lack of jurisdiction with the presiding Judge stating that “Notably, nothing in defendants' motion to dismiss based on diplomatic immunity challenges the factual allegations of the complaint. … If the allegations of the complaint are true, defendants' conduct was abhorrent and intolerable.”
Related Issues
-
Court CaseJul 2019
Women's Rights
Human Rights
IACHR Petition for Domestic Workers Trafficked by DiplomatsIACHR Petition for Domestic Workers Trafficked by Diplomats
The ACLU, along with co-counsel the University of Chicago International Human Rights Clinic and organizations including Andolan, Adhikaar, CASA of Maryland, Damayan, and the National Domestic Workers Alliance, has been fighting to hold the U.S. accountable for the A-3 & G-5 visa programs that have enabled the trafficking of domestic workers by diplomats and other foreign officials. Currently pending before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) is a petition on behalf of six former domestic workers and three advocacy organizations alleging that the U.S. violated its human rights obligations by failing to take meaningful steps to prevent, investigate, and remedy the exploitation of migrant domestic workers by employers covered by diplomatic immunity.