- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 3,070
- Points
- 0
When I read the contracts of these foreign workers, the terms seemed so ridiculous I felt like laughing.
For instance, a fine of $100 if a worker raises his voice against his boss. Failure to surrender one’s passport to the employer cops a $500 penalty and, purportedly, a trip to the police station.
And if a worker should so much as complain to the authorities about his employer, he will have to pay all the latter’s legal, transport and administrative costs, which the contracts stated to be some $300 per day.
But these contracts are not enforceable. Anything that is less favourable than the Employment Act is null and void – which I did not know until I was working on this story. I suspect many people don’t, either, much less foreign workers.
That is why the Ministry of Manpower hands out booklets to foreign workers upon their arrival in Singapore. These booklets are in various languages such as Thai, Bengali and Mandarin, to name a few. There is also a hotline number for workers to report abuses.
But here’s a problem.
Employers and agents, in many cases, seize these leaflets and brochures at the first opportunity, according to civil society organisation Transient Workers Count Too, “in order to put one more obstacle in the way of a worker who believes he or she has been wronged from appealing for help”, said TWC2 president John Gee.
While MOM’s efforts are commendable, the desired outcome of educating workers of their rights may not have been reached.
As for withholding passports, a number of employers of foreign workers and of foreign domestic workers practise this.
Their reason? To prevent the worker or foreign domestic worker from running away.
But the law is very clear on this. Under the Passports Act 2007, administered by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority, it is an “offence for a person to possess or control a foreign travel document that was not issued to him without reasonable excuse”.
But as the workers’ contracts suggest, some employers pay heed only when enforcement, rather than reason, is employed.
http://blogs.todayonline.com/behindtheheadlines/2010/02/06/foreign-worker-contracts/
For instance, a fine of $100 if a worker raises his voice against his boss. Failure to surrender one’s passport to the employer cops a $500 penalty and, purportedly, a trip to the police station.
And if a worker should so much as complain to the authorities about his employer, he will have to pay all the latter’s legal, transport and administrative costs, which the contracts stated to be some $300 per day.
But these contracts are not enforceable. Anything that is less favourable than the Employment Act is null and void – which I did not know until I was working on this story. I suspect many people don’t, either, much less foreign workers.
That is why the Ministry of Manpower hands out booklets to foreign workers upon their arrival in Singapore. These booklets are in various languages such as Thai, Bengali and Mandarin, to name a few. There is also a hotline number for workers to report abuses.
But here’s a problem.
Employers and agents, in many cases, seize these leaflets and brochures at the first opportunity, according to civil society organisation Transient Workers Count Too, “in order to put one more obstacle in the way of a worker who believes he or she has been wronged from appealing for help”, said TWC2 president John Gee.
While MOM’s efforts are commendable, the desired outcome of educating workers of their rights may not have been reached.
As for withholding passports, a number of employers of foreign workers and of foreign domestic workers practise this.
Their reason? To prevent the worker or foreign domestic worker from running away.
But the law is very clear on this. Under the Passports Act 2007, administered by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority, it is an “offence for a person to possess or control a foreign travel document that was not issued to him without reasonable excuse”.
But as the workers’ contracts suggest, some employers pay heed only when enforcement, rather than reason, is employed.
http://blogs.todayonline.com/behindtheheadlines/2010/02/06/foreign-worker-contracts/
