Dominican Diputados: Maids can't be forced to wear uniforms in public

NALs

Economist by Profession
Jan 20, 2003
13,372
3,150
113
A new law is in the works or at least was voted in favor by the Chamber of Deputies. This law prohibits patrons from demanding that maids and nannies wear their uniforms outside of the home where they work.

No more maids and nannies in uniforms when the family is out in some restaurant, attending a doctor's appointment, running errands, etc.

I personally think this is a stupid law. Now nannies will have to wear their own personal clothing while dealing with undisciplined children that throw food, vomit, and God knows what other things kids do that will leave their mark not on the nanny's uniform bought and supplied by her wealthier patron, but rather the clothes she buys with her own limited money.

That kid makes a scene and somehow rips the blouse, sorry nanny but you will have to pay for that out of your pocket.

The diputados claim that this new law is a way to discourage discrimination towards domestic servants in public places.

I do wonder how will this law be enforced. Will the patrons be fined if the maid leaves the house in uniform or will the police interrupts the maid/nanny from her work in order to ask her if she's being forced to wear the uniform in public?

Does the law leaves room for the nannies to choose to wear uniforms, especially the ones that have to deal with kids during their rebellious phases?

The law does has some positive aspects, such as regulating maid's working hours, making it an obligation for maids to be given health insurance by their patrons, better working and wage conditions, etc.

But prohibiting maids from wearing uniforms in public is plain stupid. It somehow implies that to be a maid is to practice a dishonorable profession, which it isn't. Many maids actually feel proud of their line of work and even have a sense of pride for working for the families that they work for. Many get so attached to the families they work for that they practically become part of the family and especially the kids see them as a second mother. What's so dishonorable about that?

https://www.diariolibre.com/noticia...as-llevar-uniformes-fuera-del-hogar-YF9546023
 
Last edited:

william webster

Platinum
Jan 16, 2009
30,247
4,329
113
NALS
I have never heard anybody else cite the benefits of uniforms for house staff before.

Once they start wearing it - they are pleasantly surprised.

Here in RD, I'm sure the employer likes that uniform to be seen in public...like a Lexus.

But I wonder what place the gov't has in the discussion
 

LTSteve

Gold
Jul 9, 2010
5,449
23
38
I think it's only a problem if they are wearing a "French" maids outfit. Only kidding but who really cares? Come on man!!!!!!!!
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,967
113
This is an area where a government has no business in being involved. It should be between the employer and the employee.
 

dv8

Gold
Sep 27, 2006
31,266
363
0
But prohibiting maids from wearing uniforms in public is plain stupid. It somehow implies that to be a maid is to practice a dishonorable profession, which it isn't. Many maids actually feel proud of their line of work and even have a sense of pride for working for the families that they work for. Many get so attached to the families they work for that they practically become part of the family and especially the kids see them as a second mother. What's so dishonorable about that?

this is my problem with this law. in previous articles about this project of a law a word "verguenza" was often used. verguenza is to suck dicks in barba negra, not to clean houses. good grief.

the maids i know all appreciate wearing the uniform: it's provided and paid for by the employer and they don't dirty/destroy their own clothing.
 

PJT

Silver
Jan 8, 2002
3,562
298
83
Fussing over a trivial matter

Much to do about nothing, fussing over a trivial matter. What is there to say as what governs the description of a uniform ? For some maids and nannies the uniform is the only reasonable clothing, other than formal occasion wear, they have.

There have been no huelgas or other types protests from the domestics and the Chamber wants this law. Yet, there are protests about corruption and it does nothing. The Chamber of Deputies should be more concerned about cleaning its house with or without uniforms.


Regards,

PJT
 

london777

Bronze
Dec 22, 2005
786
29
28
You are all wrong. The new law only says that the maids are not obliged to wear their uniforms in public. It gives them the choice whether or not to do so. This is right and proper.

While I defer to dv8's greater familiarity with the topic of "sucking dicks in Barba Negra", who is she to decide that it should be a source of verguenza? Maybe the chicas are as proud to do that as others are to wear a uniform of servitude in public (as our posters claim).
 

bob saunders

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
32,504
5,932
113
dr1.com
I can't imagine our maid wearing a uniform. I believe I haven't seen to many private employed maids wearing uniform but perhaps I don't circulate in elite circles enough.
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,967
113
You are all wrong. The new law only says that the maids are not obliged to wear their uniforms in public. It gives them the choice whether or not to do so. This is right and proper.

I would disagree that the government should be involved in any way. So for me, it is not right and proper.

While I defer to dv8's greater familiarity with the topic of "sucking dicks in Barba Negra", who is she to decide that it should be a source of verguenza? Maybe the chicas are as proud to do that as others are to wear a uniform of servitude in public (as our posters claim).
The choice should be between the employer and the employee without government involvement. But then, I am for the most limited form of government possible.

Other than that, this is indeed as important as the price of cottage cheese in Playero.
 

the gorgon

Platinum
Sep 16, 2010
33,997
83
0
The choice should be between the employer and the employee without government involvement. But then, I am for the most limited form of government possible.

Other than that, this is indeed as important as the price of cottage cheese in Playero.

do you think there should be any place for government intervention between an employer and an employee?
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,967
113
do you think there should be any place for government intervention between an employer and an employee?

Yes. If the agreement between an employee and an employer is not honored, then laws should be used to protect the party hurt by the violation of that agreement.
 

william webster

Platinum
Jan 16, 2009
30,247
4,329
113
I can't imagine our maid wearing a uniform. I believe I haven't seen to many private employed maids wearing uniform but perhaps I don't circulate in elite circles enough.

Oh yes... STo Dom...
drivers = white shirts / black pants

Women in uniforms

The world over actually
 

the gorgon

Platinum
Sep 16, 2010
33,997
83
0
Yes. If the agreement between an employee and an employer is not honored, then laws should be used to protect the party hurt by the violation of that agreement.

do you think that government should ever be in an intermediary role, in terms of formulating agreements between employer and employee?
 

JD Jones

Moderator:North Coast,Santo Domingo,SW Coast,Covid
Jan 7, 2016
11,698
8,129
113
this is my problem with this law. in previous articles about this project of a law a word "verguenza" was often used. verguenza is to suck dicks in barba negra, not to clean houses. good grief.

the maids i know all appreciate wearing the uniform: it's provided and paid for by the employer and they don't dirty/destroy their own clothing.


Hmmm.. Where is this "Barba Negra" place of which you speak? (asking for a friend)