Sarah's Story*
Sarah was a domestic worker who had worked in Singapore for 6 years. She was widowed, and wanted to provide for her children back home. Some years after working in Singapore, she met a man, N, on Tinder. N led her to believe they were in a relationship and told her he would take care of her family and children.
After some time, N asked Sarah to open a bank account in Singapore, to which he would transfer sums of money. Sarah was asked to withdraw the money he transferred, and meet N in Malaysia to pass him the money. N told Sarah this arrangement was to help him with his business.
Sarah did not suspect anything untoward as she trusted N. Eventually, Sarah’s friend caught wind of the arrangement and, feeling suspicious about the arrangement, reported Sarah to the police. As it turned out, the money N was asking Sarah to deposit was illegally-gotten. After a period of investigations, Sarah was charged with 3 counts of cheating and dishonestly inducing a delivery of property. HOME assisted Sarah in obtaining legal representation. She was prepared to plead guilty, face the punishment, and return home. She was aware that by pleading guilty, she would be convicted and subsequently barred from seeking future employment in Singapore, given that she would have had a criminal record.
However, during her plead guilty hearing, the judge was not convinced Sarah had meant to cheat or act dishonestly. Subsequently, after Sarah agreed to make restitution, she was given a discharge amounting to an acquittal (in other words, her charges were “dropped”), and she was instead given a stern warning. Sarah was relieved and hopeful as she thought she still had a chance to continue working in Singapore, as a stern warning does not amount to a conviction and, in the eyes of the law, she remained innocent.
Unfortunately, when she made an application for a new job, she found that she had been barred from employment. Disappointed, Sarah had to leave the country she had grown to love, and seek employment elsewhere.
As mentioned in our recent report, “I’ve Called the Police”, HOME has found that domestic workers who have been issued warning letters are overwhelmingly barred from seeking new employment.* Domestic workers already have other barriers to re-employment — employers are able to leave their contact details to give feedback which may dissuade prospective employers. They require the consent of their employers if they wish to change jobs. They are also susceptible to unfair termination, as employers are able to cancel their work passes with no notice.
As stern warnings do not constitute any finding of guilt (which can only be done by a court of law), HOME recommends that domestic workers who are issued with such warnings should, in the absence of any other factors that might cause debarment, be allowed re-employment. To do so will be in line with the principle that all accused persons are innocent until proven guilty —being investigated, with no convictions levelled against an individual, should not be a barrier to seeking employment.
* In a recent response to a Parliamentary question posed by MP Hazel Poa, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) stated that “[e]mployers may request to continue hiring their MDWs who have been given stern warnings”. This response presumes that MDWs who are the subject of police investigations remain hired by their employers, when the reality is that many police accusations are made by the employer, leading to a breakdown in the employment relationship. Thus, MDWs who have been given stern warnings usually seek employment with new employers after the conclusion of their cases. MOM’s response also indicates that for such MDWs to remain employed in Singapore, (existing) employers have to put up an appeal, and re-employment is not guaranteed.
*Worker’s name has been changed to protect her identity
**This story is as told to us by the worker.