Report On Migrant Chinese Construction Workers Show Systemic Abuse and Exploitation
5 August 2011
Singapore’s billion dollar construction industry has played a key role in the economic and social development of the country; yet, many of the migrant construction workers the industry employs are victims of discriminatory attitudes, inadequate policies, poor social support, and inconsistent enforcement of existing laws, says Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) in a thirty page report.
The report entitled ‘The Exploitation of Migrant Chinese Construction Workers in Singapore’ was written based on information gathered by social workers and volunteers assisting approximately 400 migrant Chinese construction workers in 2010; focus group discussions and in depth interviews with 41 workers, newspaper reports, documents and contracts obtained from workers, employers and government authorities. The report ends with recommendations to the Singapore government, urging policy reforms and greater enforcement of existing legislation.
Among the issues discussed are false information given by recruitment agents, salary arrears, poor quality meals, exploitative contracts and long working hours. It also documents cases of workers who have limited access to health care, live in slum-like conditions and who are physically and verbally abused by their employers.
Workers are vulnerable to immediate dismissals and cancellations of their work permits, resulting in reluctance of many to report abuse and exploitation. Some fear being ‘blacklisted’ by the Singapore government for making complaints and creating ‘trouble’ in Singapore. Such fears are justified because the Ministry of Manpower’s method of placing workers on a ‘blacklist’ is not transparent. Workers do not have the opportunity to defend themselves against their employers’ allegations since they would have been repatriated already. Avenues for appeal against being blacklisted are also difficult, since many of these workers are no longer in Singapore.
The government has responded to some of these problems by taking action against some errant employers. For example, in 2009, the Ministry of Manpower took 147 companies to task for failing to provide proper accommodation to workers. It was reported that approximately 2600 workers were relocated as a result of the Ministry’s efforts.
However, many continue to live in poor accommodation and the workers seen by HOME often complain of over-crowding, lack of ventilation, improper sanitation facilities, and sleeping quarters that are infested with pests and bed bugs. No reliable data exists to determine if Singapore has adequate facilities to accommodate the large numbers of migrant workers that are recruited into the country.
Even though the government has mechanisms of redress for workers involved in salary and other employment disputes with their employers, the number of prosecutions for such offences is low. For example, in 2009, even though 3700 migrant workers made employment claims against their employers, only 4 employers were prosecuted for salary arrears under the Employment Act.
The workers interviewed for this report also complained of being dealt with punitively and harshly by their employers when they expressed unhappiness about their working conditions; many of them had their salaries deducted or withheld with some employers resorting to physical violence when complaints by workers were lodged. The calculation of their salaries and overtime pay are also not transparent and reliable, with many employers disregarding standards set by the Employment Act.
Even when claims are lodged at the Ministry of Manpower, many employers pay little heed to their obligations under the law. Ministry of Manpower officials who deal with such disputes may during mediations leave many workers with settlement amounts less than Employment Act provisions. Claims that are brought to Singapore’s Labour Court may take several months before a judgment is made, leaving workers frustrated and without adequate social support because they are disallowed from alternative employment while waiting for their claims to be resolved.
Long working hours and fatigue have also been reported by the workers HOME interviewed. Even though Singapore’s labour laws limit the number of hours an employee may work, these laws are widely flouted by employers. The number of employers who are held accountable for over-working their employees is not known because such figures are not publicly available. The link between inadequate rest and work place accidents and deaths also does not receive as much attention by the authorities as it should.
HOME obtained and analysed 36 employment contracts between workers and employers which show blatant disregard for Singapore’s labour laws. Workers are asked to sign contracts which allow for unauthorised deductions to their salaries, denial of overtime pay, rest days, and paid medical leave. Other terms and conditions which violate labour laws include the following examples:
‘…Party B (the worker) will subject himself willingly and unconditionally to the punishment of the employer. The punishments include: compensation (depending on the situation), deduction of salary (a one time deduction not higher than half a day’s salary, based on the average daily salary), fines (a one-off fine not more than half a day’s salary, based on the average daily salary), cessation of work (not more than 3 days) etc. Should party B object to, or create trouble due to the punishment being meted out, his penalties will be doubled until such time that party B is fired and sent home.’
‘The worker shall not initiate rest without reasons, and will be fined $30 per day for doing so.’
‘Party B (the worker) shall work eight hours a day, starting from 8am till 5pm. If overtime is required, the employer shall increase the working hours. Basic rates shall be paid for work done on public holidays and Sundays.’
Access to adequate health care is also hampered by the reluctance of employers to pay for medical bills, even though such entitlements are guaranteed under Singapore’s employment laws. The workers interviewed in this report were often subjected to frustrating delays in medical treatment or were punished for lodging work accident claims with the Ministry of Manpower. The study also found disturbing evidence of collusion between employers and private medical practitioners in denying workers medical leave or granting medical leave with periods that do not commensurate with the seriousness of the worker’s injury.