A common perception is that people who hire illegal immigrants are necessarily exploiting them with below minimum wage pay and horrible working conditions. The story I linked to yesterday about the effects of illegal immigration crackdowns on some restaurants serves as a useful reminder that this need not be the case:
Mr. Malecot is an active philanthropist in San Diego, contributing to causes including Alzheimer’s and cancer research and education to help victims of torture. His employees describe him as a father figure who has paid for their dental work and babysitting, charters a fishing boat for the annual company party and provides every employee with a week’s paid vacation, extremely rare in restaurants.
Because of his financial troubles as a result of the case, he said, he can no longer afford some of these perks. The next court date is Nov. 29.
“He’s very generous,” Asunción Gallardo, a Mexican immigrant who has cooked at the restaurant for 16 years, said in Spanish, out of earshot of Mr. Malecot. “It’s like we’re all a family. We eat — he gives us three meals a day and food to go. And then he gives out food for the poor.”
People who favor crackdowns in illegal immigration often argue as if they are really looking out for the best interest of illegal immigrants, who are victims being exploited by greedy employers. And this may be true some of the time, but it is clearly not true all of the time. It is important to remember this when people try to overgeneralize about the working conditions faced by illegal immigrations in order to justify kicking them out.

5 comments
Comments feed for this article
Monday ~ September 13th, 2010 at 8:20 am
jazzbumpa
This anecdote is a transparent appeal to emotion. In the interest of full disclosure, let’s also point out that the Koch brothers are also great patrons of the arts.
And nobody said “necessarily.” At this point, you are arguing with your own mental construct.
Besides, you’re cherry picking. What do think is more common – the paternalistic Malecot, or meat packers and lawn service companies who play on the desperation of illegals?
Further, I’m not talking about kicking anybody out. that’s why I want to go after the employers – you know, attack business.
Cheers!
JzB
Monday ~ September 13th, 2010 at 9:38 am
Immigration
i hear you, but the fact that Mr. Malecot hired an illegal immigrants he too break the law and trash the US Constitution. And I agree with you that there are so many employers like Mr. Malecot who are not greedy and give what is due to their employees. But illegal is always illegal, whatever you call it.
Monday ~ September 13th, 2010 at 10:19 am
Johnnie Linn
It is clear that if the capital and labor markets are truly competitive, a country gains by allowing immigration of both. But if either market is not competitive–for example, if incoming capital or labor are agencies of a foreign power–then the country would not gain by allowing the immigration.
Monday ~ September 13th, 2010 at 11:17 am
Wonks Anonymous
James Fitzhugh wrote that the paternalistic relationship involved in slavery was superior to the raw industrial capitalism found in the north. Thomas Carlyle felt similarly.
Monday ~ September 13th, 2010 at 6:12 pm
jazzbumpa
We also shouldn’t lose sight of he fact that a BIG contributor to illegal immigration from Mexico was the displacement of peasant farmers by big Agri-business – a direct result of NAFTA.
JzB