Decent Work Campaign 2022: What are the Conditions that Disallow Decent Work in Singapore?
9 May 2022
In our previous #DecentWork post, we set out some of the international labour standards found in C189 and its supplementary document, R201. Here, we will explore how, while migrant domestic workers (MDWs) are given labour protections within legislation in Singapore, they fall short of the standards articulated in C189 and R201.
Restrictions on labour mobility
In Singapore, a MDW who wishes to switch employers requires the consent of her current employer. If her current employer refuses, the MDW has little choice but to stay with the current employer or return home. If the employer grants a transfer, he or she has the right to determine which employment agency actions the placement. There have been many occasions where MDWs had to return to employment agencies that treated them poorly because they were desperate to stay in Singapore to work. This includes situations where the agents did not respond when assistance was required, verbally abused the MDW, confiscated their identity papers and personal belongings, did not give them adequate decision-making power when placing them with an employer or even engaged in deception regarding their working conditions.
Such restrictions on labour mobility make MDWs vulnerable to abusive and exploitative situations. Some MDWs choose to not report the violations against them, as they fear losing their jobs.
Since May 2020, to address the shortfall of MDWs due to border restrictions, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has allowed employment agencies to ‘take over’ responsibility of a MDW, such that employers do not have to bear the levy, as well as the financial responsibility of the MDW’s upkeep while she looks for a new employer. Under this scheme, once the employer consents to the MDW’s transfer, the employment agency cancels the work permit of the MDW, and has to pay for the MDW’s upkeep and maintenance, medical insurance, and repatriation costs if the employment agency is unable to find a suitable employer for the MDW within a stipulated time period.
This policy change perpetuates the inability of MDWs to exercise control over their employment status - whether or not the MDW is able to transfer under the employment agency’s responsibility still remains with the employer. There may also be instances where agents compel a MDW to take up employment she does not wish to, so that the employment agency does not continue to incur upkeep and repatriation costs. Article 15 of C189 emphasises on the need for legislation that will specify the obligations of the employment agencies toward the domestic worker. This includes agreements that prevent employment agencies from abusing their power for recruiting and placing MDWs.
Legislative and regulatory gaps in living and working conditions
The main labour law in Singapore is the Employment Act (EA), which governs basic labour rights. It sets limits on working hours and prescribes formulas for overtime pay, and provides minimum standards on notice periods, annual leave and paid sick and hospitalisation leave.
MDWs are not covered under the EA. Singapore rationalises MDWs’ exclusion from the EA on the basis that the nature of domestic work is ‘quite different from normal work’, making conditions of work difficult to regulate. This exclusion leaves MDWs bereft of core labour rights protection.
MDWs are covered by the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA). However, the EFMA offers a limited set of protections and entitlements which are not equal to those provided for under the EA.
The EFMA requires employers to provide ‘acceptable’ accommodation, ‘adequate’ food, ‘adequate’ rest, and ‘reasonable’ notice of repatriation. Failure to clearly specify these terms means MDWs’ well-being and working conditions can vary vastly between employers. This is exacerbated by inconsistent enforcement even when guidelines are issued. The tendency for state authorities to leave employment conditions to negotiations between employer/employment agent and domestic worker ignores the grave inequalities in bargaining powers between parties, and the limited ability of MDWs to contest the imposition of exploitative conditions, which may continue to deteriorate.
Lack of regulated rest hours
MDWs are not covered under the EA, which sets limits to working hours. It is therefore not uncommon for MDWs to report working hours that range from 16 to18 hours a day (in some extreme cases, even 20 hours a day), with the MDW also not having any rest days, particularly during the loan repayment period. This clearly contradicts the recommendations made by C189 and R201 which state that MDWs must be treated equally to all other workers with regards to daily and weekly rest. This means that MDWs should have clearly defined working hours in their contracts and should not be expected to work on hours that fall outside their working hours. If MDWs must work over and above their agreed upon working hours then they should receive overtime pay.
Over the years, an increasing number of MDWs have also undertaken eldercare duties, as Singapore grapples with an ageing population, which often involves ‘round-the-clock’ care. The presence of surveillance cameras in the home, which is very common in Singapore, makes it difficult for MDWs to take breaks or rest during the day without express permission from their employers.
Under the EFMA, MDWs are permitted only to perform “household and domestic duties” in their employer’s houses. EFMA does not define this term, and the lack of clarity may cause MDWs to perform duties that are not traditionally viewed as domestic work, such as giving employers massages and maintenance and repair work for the house.
The exclusion of MDWs from the Employment Act means that MDWs have no fixed working hours. Under EFMA, employers are only required to give “adequate” rest. In other words, time in which MDWs are resting but are expected to be on standby are not counted as “working hours”, which is a requirement under C189. There is also no concept of “compensatory rest” for work done on stipulated rest days, even though financial compensation is mandated under the EFMA for work done on rest days.
Weekly rest day legislation for MDWs came into effect on 1 January 2013, which mandated that MDWs are entitled to a weekly rest day or financial compensation in lieu. Arrangements on the matter of weekly rest days are meant to be ‘mutually agreed’ upon between employers and domestic workers but significant imbalances in bargaining power mean that, in practice, the number of rest days a domestic worker does or does not have is often imposed by employers and agents. Moreover, HOME sees many cases of MDWs having to work on their rest days, meaning that effectively workers only get a few hours off instead of a day off. HOME has seen cases where MDWs get as little as three hours off on their rest days. From end-2022, employers will be required to give MDWs a mandatory rest day once every month, which cannot be compensated away. However, when asked whether this rest day would be defined as 24 hours, the MOM replied that it would impose too much ‘rigidity’ on employers.
Food
While the MOM issues various advisories to employers on the recommended daily food intake for MDWs, these advisories are not given the force of the law, and enforcement is inconsistent. In focus groups conducted by HOME in 2017, it was found that some MDWs were only allowed to eat instant noodles and/or bread, others only leftovers, and almost all reported not being allowed to eat fruit. A number of MDWs also reported that they were not allowed to snack between meals and would have to drink water to stave off their hunger. Another issue surrounding food was the employers’ ignorance or lack of care about MDWs religious dietary requirements. Some Muslim MDWs reported that their employers would mix pork, which is not considered halal, with most of the food, meaning that they were only able to eat rice and leftover vegetables. This runs contrary to C189 which states that workers should be given adequate food that takes into account their dietary/religious requirements.
Lack of minimum wage
Singapore lacks a minimum wage for all its workers, both local and foreign. The lack of enforceable minimum wage guidelines leave MDWs vulnerable to long-term economic exploitation, where their wages remain depressed and do not reflect increased costs of living as well as the inflated placement costs incurred in overseas labour migration. Depressed wages and higher migration costs also lead to increased debt burdens and longer loan repayment periods. It can also result in MDWs forgoing rest days in lieu of financial compensation in order to earn a higher monthly wage, and being entrapped in vulnerable and exploitative situations as a result of their debt. C189 and R201 recommend MDWs should enjoy a minimum wage which should not discriminate based on gender.
Excessive recruitment fees
Currently, many MDWs are required to pay fees to employment agencies, both foreign and local, for being placed in a job in Singapore. These fees can, at times, go up to six months of the MDW’s salary. The Employment Agencies Act (EAA) limits local agency fees to one month of salary per contract year, at a maximum of two months fixed salary for a two-year employment contract. However, the EAA does not regulate training or agency fees paid in the home country, which is deemed to be outside its jurisdiction; and local agencies are allowed to collect fees on behalf of their counterparts in the home countries.
Singapore has no bilateral agreement with countries from which MDWs come, such that recruitment fees paid by MDWs are regulated. According to C189, recruitment fees should not be deducted from the MDW’s salary. Workers who are recruited from other Asian countries to work in Singapore should also be protected by bilateral or regional agreements between governments and agencies to prevent abusive practices like the collection of excessive recruitment fees.
Medical surveillance of MDWs
Female work permit holders, including MDWs, ‘shall not become pregnant or deliver any child in Singapore’, unless she is already married to a Singaporean or PR. MDWs who are found to be pregnant are to be repatriated; they may also be blacklisted. Meanwhile, MDWs have to undergo mandatory six-monthly medical examinations, which include a pregnancy test. These requirements also fall afoul of the standards set out in C189. Specifically, C189 states that MDWs should have the right not to disclose their HIV or pregnancy status and decline testing on the matter. Singapore’s required HIV testing and biannual pregnancy testing is in direct opposition to C189 and R201.
Social discrimination of MDWs
The EFMA states that employers shall ‘control and supervise’ their MDWs. An MDW is also prohibited from engaging in ‘any illegal, immoral or undesirable activities, including breaking up families in Singapore’. This broadly worded provision potentially criminalises MDWs who become involved in relationships with Singaporeans or PRs, and induces the moral policing of MDWs, as well as the intrusion of the MDW’s privacy.
It is regarded an employer’s responsibility to ensure MDWs do not violate the terms of their work permits. Liability for particular contraventions by the MDW is discharged only if an employer has informed a MDW of the conditions they are to comply with, and reports any violation to the authorities once they are aware of it. These regulations effectively incentivise employers to adopt draconian control measures to restrict and monitor their MDW’s movements, activities and communication, such as through the denial of rest days or the enforcement of strict curfews on rest days, and through the confiscation and withholding of MDWs’ mobile phones, passports and other key documents.
Living conditions and privacy*
Live-out options should also be accessible for domestic workers, and they should have the same levels of social security protection as other workers in Singapore. They should also be entitled to keep their travel and identity documents.
EFMA states that MDWs are to be given ‘acceptable’ accommodation. Currently, MDWs in Singapore are mandated to live with their employers. MDWs who live in accommodation that is not their employer’s home are deemed to be breaching their work permit regulations. The ambiguity of the term ‘acceptable’ means that there are huge disparities in the experiences of MDWs in these spaces. While some employers are able to provide a separate bedroom for their employee, whether it is a large room or a smaller ‘maid’s room’, many other employers’ homes do not have the space for this. In these circumstances, different approaches are taken to accommodate their MDW, affording different levels of comfort, privacy, and opportunity for rest.
MDW reported a variety of sleeping arrangements, from sharing rooms with children or elderly family members, to sleeping in storage cupboards, and other communal spaces. In these sites, MDWs are unable to have privacy, or rest when their work is finished. Rather, they are forced to wait until other members of the household have gone to sleep, or are also resting, so that they too can do the same. If sharing a room with another member of the household, MDWs also reported concerns about feeling unwell as they have no place to recover.
An obstacle that MDWs face is the lack of privacy stemming from inadequate accommodation. A 2015 study conducted by HOME found that lack of privacy was a risk factor for the mental health of MDWs. More than half of the MDWs in the study felt that they lacked adequate privacy in their employer’s house, 33% experienced invasions of privacy by their employer/their employer’s family.
During the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, many MDWs stayed home during their stipulated weekly rest day due to movement restrictions. Due to the lack of dedicated personal space in their employer’s homes, many MDWs ended up working during these rest days, some without compensation.
The living conditions experienced by many MDWs go against the C189 and R201 which state that workers should be given a separate and private room with a lock and key accessible to the worker in order to lock their rooms and maintain their privacy.
Redress mechanisms for MDWs
As MDWs are not protected under the EA, which is Singapore’s primary labour legislation, they have limited recourse to redress mechanisms for violations.
For example, MDWs do not have recourse to formal mediation and access to tribunals for salary settlement. They also do not have remedies available to them when they encounter workplace safety issues, as they are not covered under the Workplace Injury Compensation Act (WICA).
MDWs who are assisting the police in investigations do not have a guarantee to re-employment. Those who are accused persons often are not allowed re-employment, and even those who are alleged victims have to seek consent from the police before they are allowed to seek other employment.
MDWs are not guaranteed compensation under the law when they are victims of abuse. Even though the law stipulates that judges can order compensation for victims of abuse, many perpetrators choose to serve a longer prison sentence in lieu of paying for the compensation. Many times, MDWs whose employers have been convicted of abusing them are left with no compensation, despite the trauma that they have faced.
MDWs who are unfairly repatriated often have no way of filing grievances against agents or employers as they must be in Singapore to assist with investigations.
According to C189, the state, agencies and employers should work together to ensure that domestic workers are easily able to access dispute resolution mechanisms in instances of conflict, harassment, and abuse. Workers’ complaints should be investigated with due process, and they should be given ample notice during that period to seek new employment and accommodation. Redress mechanisms should also be afforded to workers who are no longer in the country.
Lack of established relocation and rehabilitation programmes
MDWs have little to no bargaining power to switch employers if they are unhappy with their working and living conditions. As they can be unfamiliar with possible methods of recourse in such situations, they sometimes choose to leave the employer’s house without the employer’s knowledge. They may go back to their agent’s office, go to a police station, or seek refuge at dedicated shelters for domestic workers. Abused workers may sometimes contact the police and be removed from their employer’s home. In such cases, the workers are often referred to shelters, such as HOME’s by police staff.
There is a paucity of available spaces in Singapore that are dedicated to the relocation and rehabilitation of workers who have experienced abuse or poor working and living conditions under their employers. This includes facilities that offer accommodation, food, and counselling for domestic workers who are unemployed and assisting in police or MOM investigations. During the height of Covid-19, due to the shortage of repatriation flights and the implementation of safe-distancing measures, shelter spaces for MDWs became extremely limited. However, limited recourse was provided by the State in providing alternative accommodation for victims of abuse.
According to C189, it is the state’s obligation to protect domestic workers from all forms of abuse, violence, and harassment. This should include the establishment of relocation programmes and a network of emergency housing.
Insufficient training for specialised caregiving
According to a 2020 report by HOME and AWARE, one in five households in Singapore hire MDWs for the purpose of eldercare. Many elderly individuals and their family members prefer the ease and affordability of being cared for in their own home by a MDW, rather than formal care in a separate facility. With the percentage of Singaporeans aged 65 years or older projected to increase to 25% by 2030, it is evident that the demand for MDWs as caregivers will only continue to increase. However, many MDWs are woefully inadequately trained to undertake caregiving duties.
There are several private course providers in Singapore that offer courses in caregiving for the elderly or infants. However, such courses are quite short, ranging from a few hours to a few days. Arguably, these courses are not enough to prepare domestic workers for round-the-clock caregiving that can be both physically and emotionally draining. HOME has seen cases of MDWs who burn out and leave the employer’s home abruptly as they are overwhelmed and exhausted by their caregiving duties. This disruption is challenging for employers who are in desperate need of a full-time caregiver for their family members.
For employers who require caregiving services for their family members, they often do not have the resources to compare employment agencies and the experience levels of the MDWs they would hire. The urgency of needing to find a caregiver prevents employers from considering the various factors that can affect a MDW’s suitability for eldercare. There is no standardised system to match MDWs to employers, and no obligation on the employer’s part to fully disclose the medical and daily needs of the care recipients. From June 2022, employment agencies are required to provide employers with a refund option of at least 50% of the service fees paid by the employer, if the MDW’s employment was terminated within the first six months of her employment. While this policy change aims to “encourage” employment agencies to take stronger ownership of a good match between the employer and the MDW, it does not incentivise them to ensure that MDWs are properly trained and prepared before being deployed to households, and might even lead to some of them coercing MDWs to remain in abusive and exploitative situations so that the refund does not have to paid to the employer.
C189 states that it is the responsibility of the state to ensure that appropriate training programmes and guidelines are established, so that domestic workers are prepared for the environment they will be working in. The convention also states that agencies must be held accountable for the treatment of their workers. Agencies whose clients are in need of caregivers should appropriately train their workers and not deceive them on their scope of work.
Workplace safety
MDWs are also currently excluded from the WICA, which is a no-fault system that awards lump sum compensation to workers who sustain injuries at the workplace that result in permanent incapacity. WICA also provides for claims related to medical leave wages (including hospital leave) and medical expenses. When a work injury results in the death of a worker covered under WICA, family members and dependents may also claim compensation, with the compensation ranging from SGD 76,000 - 225,000.
Being excluded from WICA also means that MDWs who sustain serious injuries at the workplace, that is, the households where they work, or in the course of their work, that result in disability or death are not able to claim beyond the personal accident insurance limit of SGD 60,000, an amount significantly lower than what is guaranteed by WICA. Personal accident insurance benefits provide less in terms of compensation, cover fewer types of injuries, and offer inconsistent coverage as this relies on the criteria of the assigned insurance company.
C189 states that every domestic worker has the right to a safe and healthy working environment. Domestic workers should be included in WICA or a similar piece of legislation that protects their right to workplace safety. Domestic workers should also be given access to advice and training on occupational safety and health. Adequate penalties should also be given to parties who violate occupational safety and health laws and regulations.
Gaps between public knowledge (for employers) and legislation
Employers are not given rigorous training about their responsibilities and existing regulations when it comes to ensuring decent working conditions for their workers. Currently, all first-time employers of migrant workers are required to undergo the Employers’ Orientation Programme, a three-hour programme which teaches participants how to ensure a safe, stable working environment for their domestic workers. Employers who have changed migrant workers frequently may also be required to take this programme.
However, three hours is arguably insufficient to prepare employers for the responsibilities of housing and overseeing a domestic worker’s basic needs. The short programme also may not equip employers to navigate the cultural differences that may exist between them and their MDW.
Moreover, there are no required updating sessions when new legislation is introduced, meaning that employers can be ignorant of important changes made to pre-existing regulations for MDWs’ working conditions.
C189 emphasises the need for employers to be made aware of good practices when employing domestic workers. They should also be informed on their legal obligations regarding immigration and repatriation. The convention also calls for the implementation of a public outreach service, which should inform domestic workers of their rights, in languages understood by them. More can be done in Singapore to ensure the existence of appropriate programmes regarding the above matters.
*For a policy paper on living conditions faced by MDWs in Singapore, see here.
Photo: Today Online
Resources:
Asian Development Bank, 2020. Singapore’s Long-Term Care System Adapting to Population Aging. Available at: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/637416/singapore-care-system-population-aging.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Association of Women for Action and Research & Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics. 2020. Neither Family Nor Employee: the caregiver burden of migrant domestic workers in Singapore. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a12725612abd96b9c737354/t/5fac89f79488406ed960a252/1605143091925/AWARE_HOME_MDW+Report+%2811+Nov%29.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Criminal Procedure Code 2010, s(359).
Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, Employment of Foreign Manpower (Work Passes) Regulations 2012, First Schedule.
Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, Employment of Foreign Manpower (Work Passes) Regulations 2012, Fourth Schedule.
Humanitarian Organization of Migration Economics & Liberty Shared. 2019. Behind Closed Doors: Forced Labour in the Domestic Work Sector in Singapore. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a12725612abd96b9c737354/t/5c3d7b534fa51aa111983e4a/1547533156689/FINAL+Forced+Labour+Report+V8.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Humanitarian Organization of Migration Economics. 2020. Covid-19 And Impact Of Circuit Breaker Measures On Domestic Workers. Available at: https://www.home.org.sg/statements/2020/5/15/covid-19-and-impact-of-circuit-breaker-measures-on-domestic-workers. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Humanitarian Organization of Migration Economics & Liberty Shared. 2015. Home sweet home? Work, life and well-being of foreign domestic workers in Singapore. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a12725612abd96b9c737354/t/5a1fe5610d9297c2b97526ff/1512039798091/Report_Home-sweet-home_work-life-and-well-being-of-foreign-domestic-workers-in-Singapore.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2022.
International Labour Organization. 2017. C189 - Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189). Available at: https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C189. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Ministry of Manpower. 2020. Changes to Work Injury Compensation Act in 2020. Available at: https://www.mom.gov.sg/workplace-safety-and-health/work-injury-compensation/changes-to-wica-in-2020. Accessed 04 October 2021.
Ministry of Manpower. 2022. Employers' Orientation Programme (EOP). Available at: https://www.mom.gov.sg/passes-and-permits/work-permit-for-foreign-domestic-worker/eligibility-and-requirements/employers-orientation-programme-eop. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Ministry of Manpower. 2022. Employment Agencies to Provide Refund Option for Service Fees if Domestic Worker is Terminated Early. Available at: https://www.mom.gov.sg/newsroom/press-releases/2022/0331-eas-to-provide-refund-option-for-service-fees-if-mdw-terminated-early. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Ministry of Manpower. 2020. Facilitating the transfer of Foreign Domestic Workers by Employment Agencies. Available at: https://www.mom.gov.sg/-/media/mom/documents/employment-agencies/ea-alerts/2020/0515-facilitating-the-transfer-of-fdw-by-eas.pdf. Accessed 22 April 2022.
Ministry of Manpower. 2022. Rest days and well-being for foreign domestic worker. Available at: https://www.mom.gov.sg/passes-and-permits/work-permit-for-foreign-domestic-worker/employers-guide/rest-days-and-well-being. Accessed 20 April 2022.
Ministry of Manpower. 2022. Types of compensation under WICA. Available at: https://www.mom.gov.sg/workplace-safety-and-health/work-injury-compensation/types-of-compensation. Accessed 13 March 2020.
Yang, C. 2022. Fixed uninterrupted rest time for maids on rest days 'imposes rigidity' on households: MOM. Available at: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/jobs/fixed-uninterrupted-rest-time-for-maids-on-rest-days-imposes-rigidity-on-households-mom. Accessed 20 April 2022.