With a driver, your life is in the hands of someone who has nothing to gain from getting in a car crash. With a cleaner, your possessions are in the hands of someone who might have plenty of incentive to steal your stuff and sell it.
Have a bit of imagination, there's got to be plenty of ways for a driver to exploit you being in their car for criminal profit too. Provide wifi and slurp data; kidnap you; notify an accomplice that you've left the house empty and it's ripe for burglary; clone a payment card (and/or steal a pin) when you pay; take your DNA to plant at a crime scene for blackmail purposes ... erm, what else, clearly I'm not nefarious enough ...
This casual assumption that all housekeepers are thieves is galling. Its a kind of working-class bigotry that is tossed around by the entitled without even noticing they are doing it.
Of course folks have plenty of incentive to not steal - they have self-respect.
Almost all maids won't steal, but it's a great cover for thieves who want access to houses. You can't know which is which unless you get a good recommendation or hire the person and test it out.
Its the other way around. The vast majority of housekeepers are not thieves however thieves pose as housekeepers very easily. Thieves (and other criminals) pose as all kinds of different occupations.
Almost no actual landlord will take your security deposit and run but there's plenty of people on Craigslist posing as landlords to do just that. So the moral of the story is try not to be taken in by a scam.
Huh. The Uber driver could rob you too; they could rape or murder. They could kidnap. They have, really, far more opportunities to harm you. But the ol' housekeeper is alone in getting assumed to be a thief.
Probably this was not meant. But its been a hot button, the casual assumption that housekeepers are thieves, since forever. I guess I read that into the comment too readily.
Yes, the Uber driver could rob you or worse, but they would also be guaranteed to get caught, so they probably won't do it.
I think you are picking on a rather objective and dispassionate observation about incentives to take a grandstanding against classism, I appreciate the sentiment but the execution is flawed.
Modeling the behaviour of personal assailants from the POV of their rational risk-reward expectations does not match reality very well. They are largely people who are not in control of their impulses.
Guilty as charged. But those cold dispassionate observations can inject casual bias as well as heated comments. That was what was galling. The 'oh you know how the domestic help is always stealing stuff' injected casually was more than my bs-meter could handle.
I said that a cleaner might have incentive to steal. You've turned this into "all housekeepers are thieves" and "the domestic help is always stealing stuff". That's not what I said, it's not what I meant, and it's not what I think.
I'm glad to hear that, and I believe it. What I'm very sad about is, its the first thing that's brought up whenever housekeeping is mentioned. The casual assumption that its a huge problem, happens all the time and is the major issue.
