Guest Writers, Main Stories, Top Story - Written on Friday, January 30, 2009 19:04 - 23 Comments

A response to MOM but rejected by the Straits Times

The following is a letter sent to the Straits Times by Ms Stephanie Chok, a volunteer providing help to migrant workers. It is in response to the Ministry of Manpower’s Deputy Director, Ms Julia Ng’s letter to the Straits Times forum. (See below)

The Straits Times has rejected Ms Chok’s letter for publication.

Dear ST Forum,

Ms Ng’s letter aims to counter a remark in an earlier Straits Times article in which Jolovan Wham, Executive Director of H.O.M.E., was quoted as saying ‘foreign workers here are given little real protection’.

Ms Ng stated that foreign workers wage claims are usually resolved before they return home except in exceptional circumstances. The veracity of this statement depends on what Ms Ng means by ‘resolved’. Workers may have accepted settlement terms and agreed to return home, but whether or not the settlement terms equal a fair and just outcome is a different matter. In the past few months, many foreign workers from Bangladesh and China have been repatriated and statements from MOM often claim their cases have been ‘resolved’. Yet it is not always the case that these workers are paid fully what they are owed nor are mediation processes necessarily fair.

While a salary case is pending, workers are generally unable to work and cannot afford to stay in Singapore for too long. When cases drag on, workers tend to grow desperate and, under pressure, agree to ’settle’ for whatever is given. The alternative, of prolonging their stay with no guarantee of a higher settlement, weighs mediation outcomes heavily towards employers’ interests.

Furthermore, it is not unreasonable to expect workers to be compensated for breach of contracts. Citing ‘impracticality’ and an economic downturn is questionable. A bad economy does not excuse unethical business practices nor flexibility in upholding the law. It must also be pointed out that there have been many cases in which construction workers from China have been fined hefty ‘breach of contract’ fees despite the fact that their contracts have terms less favorable than the Employment Act and should be void. Companies then deduct large sums of money from the workers’ unpaid salaries, citing ‘breach of contract fees’, before repatriating them. In the past few months, MOM has allowed these ‘breach of contract fees’ to be deducted from workers salaries during mediation meetings.. How is it that this is not considered ‘impractical’ in an economic downturn?

It is encouraging to know that the MOM is taking the recent media coverage seriously and is acting to ensure employers uphold the Employment Act. We look forward to greater enforcement of existing laws and prosecution of errant employers so that all workers will be protected. After all, it is not the mere existence of laws that provide protection but its active and consistent enforcement.

Ms. Stephanie Chok Juin Mei

———

ST Forum, 20 January 2009

Help with foreign workers’ wage claims

I REFER to last Wednesday’s report, ‘55 foreign workers get the boot’, in which Jolovan Wham, a migrant worker activist, was quoted as saying that Singapore’s labour laws offer little real protection to foreign workers. He implied that they are unable to seek redress once the workers’ work permits are cancelled.

This is inaccurate. Wage claims of foreign workers are usually resolved before they return to their home countries, except in certain situations such as when the company is being placed under liquidation. In those circumstances, it would take longer to pursue the workers’ wage claims. Nevertheless, as long as foreign workers have lodged their claims with the Ministry of Manpower, their cases will be investigated and pursued, even if they have returned to their home countries. Any money recovered will be remitted to them.

Mr Wham also called for foreign workers to be compensated for the remaining period of their work permits when their employment is terminated. This is impractical as we cannot ignore the reality that in an economic downturn, the demand for workers will fall. This will impact both local and foreign workers.

When employers and workers are unable to settle employment disputes on their own, they should approach the ministry for advice and assistance in seeking a resolution. If workers have wage claims or other complaints, they should report to the ministry early for help to recover their entitlements. Separately, the ministry has stepped up its enforcement action to ensure that employers pay their workers in accordance with their employment contracts and the Employment Act. Employers who have violated the law may face prosecution and debarment from employing foreign workers.

Julia Ng (Ms) 
Deputy Director, Corporate Communications 
for Permanent Secretary 
Ministry of Manpower

 

Related posts:

  1. Rejected for publication – letter to the Straits Times forum page
  2. A response to Straits Times forum page letter – by a TOC reader
  3. Blog Feature: Straits Times changes headlines 4 times in one day
  4. Straits Times Forum, is this a sick joke?
  5. Letter on ethnic stereotyping gets heavily edited by Straits Times



23 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Tan Soon Whatt
Jan 30, 2009 22:17

If not for the power of the internet,
we the mere mortals may
, just may, never learn that such articles existed.

Farquhar
Jan 30, 2009 22:45

Ms Stephanie Chok couldn’t have put it better.

Jason
Jan 30, 2009 22:56

Going forward…. Moving on…

Andrew Loh
Jan 30, 2009 23:54

Stephanie is so so right and on the money. I can see why the ST refused to publish her letter.

Those at MOM – the minister, directors, dep directors, etc – are all out of touch. To them, as long as it’s brought to MOM’s attention, they will do something about it , or pretend to do something about it.

I can’t help but feel that all this while, all that MOM is doing is just a public relations exercise.

I refuse to accept that they do not know about how the scam is perpetrated. They know it – how the whole thing works. They have known for years. Yet, they have done nothing. And over the years, thousands of migrant workers have been swindled by these “labour agents” while MOM sits on its ass.

For example:

When Manpower Minister Gan said that the percentage of foreign workers facing problems is only 0.2% of the foreign worker population, it just shows how out of touch he is. There are hundreds and even thousands of these workers who do not and dare not complain because of threats, intimidation, exploitation, physical abuse, mental anguish, etc.

So, the minister says the number is small but he does not know, or pretend not to know, that there are reasons why the workers dare not complain.

Look at those who do – they are sent home, with heavy debts to repay.

So much so that some of them, when they reach their airports, they do not return to their home towns and villages because they’re afraid of their creditors, who include loansharks.

I wonder when the last time someone high up in MOM visited any of the dormitories and spoke with the workers.

I am guessing that Gan himself has NEVER done so.

Maybe his ivory tower is too high up.

Be practical ! This is Singapore !
Jan 31, 2009 0:19

Not new, PAP and any other agencies are profit driven. Foreign worker no job no pay tax, so why for taking care of them. No money no talk lo.

Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)
Jan 31, 2009 0:21

Nothing gets done because there is no WILL to do it. There is no conceivable benefits to remedy the situation. Dun forget, for every worker that comes, no matter how long they stay, MOM gets levy

tiredsingaporean
Jan 31, 2009 1:46

This is just one of those ugly things of our govt being hidden away from the people, indeed! This is Singapore today!

Dos
Jan 31, 2009 1:53

This is how the ST ensures only the gahmen gets the final say, so taht our people think the gahmen is the best.

Meanwhile the ST will print all sorts of nonsense letters of complaint to fill up space. Sometimes even repeat broadcast like that ‘How do I love SIngapore? Lemme count the ways…’ crap.

Clear eyed
Jan 31, 2009 2:55

The only thing the govt here is interested in is the levy it can collect for each worker brought in. For $$$ it can close its eyes to scams, injustice, exploitation, criminal behaviour, etc. Its view is that the workers are mere digits, lesser mortals and cash cows to be milked, just like Singaporeans, and their suffering is not its concern. By allowing the scams to exist, it is a partner to the crime.

sicktothebones
Jan 31, 2009 7:40

Truth or propaganda? – MOM, MOE, NEA, MAS. SMRT, SBS, HDB – bouquets. let me count the ways we love them. They are doing a very good job.
Truth or myth? We are an ungrateful undeserving complaining lot.
Why do people buy fruits and food, burn hell money, cars, condos, credit cards to pray and ensure those in the other world have enough material goods. Do lesser mortals have to worship the great immortals with such mundane goods to guarantee good life in the thereafter?

smallvice585
Jan 31, 2009 8:11

MOM’s modus operandi is simple – we always have the last say. Set the bar extremely low and anybody can clear it. Then say civil servants working at MOM have met or exceeded expectations. If not done in this manner, how to hard-sell the illusion that Singapore’s civil service is efficient and that it is always get the job done?

ashamed
Jan 31, 2009 8:18

The ministry is doing what they do best – shying from responsibility – citing economic down turn for non-compensating is just not ethical!

patriot
Jan 31, 2009 10:18

When greed occupies the soul of man,

his mind gets corrupted.

When conscience leaveth the spirit of man,

man becomes evil.

When society is infested with corrupted

and evil kinds,

it is hopeless.

patriot

gj
Jan 31, 2009 11:24

As usual,MOM says something and what goes on in the ground is something else. Just like in all the other ministries. Like the six days childcare leave.The gov’t says its mandatory,and without conditions but companies say otherwise.
Wake up guys!

Hong Mui Hoong
Jan 31, 2009 16:26

Singapore 1st to go under into recession.
I’m proud of Singapore.
It is prolly the most pro business country.
Companies can behave like USA MNCs – hire-fire at will. as long as they can say its last resort. but who really knows how many resort?

MOM also very solid.

The Bottom Line.
Jan 31, 2009 17:58

“Employers who have violated the law may face prosecution and debarment from employing foreign workers.” Julia Ng (Ms), Deputy Director, Corporate Communications, for Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Manpower.

That last sentence is the bottom line that we are taking issue.

“Employers who have violated the law MAY face prosecution ……”

MAY, which also means MAY NOT.
It is not WILL, or SHALL, which is more definite in consequence.
In other words, the Ministry of Manpower has the Power to waive the option of of prosecuting or not prosecuting. And I am inclined to believe that, for want of expediency and efficiency, the ministry would not prosecute the employers; perhaps only a letter of warning or verbal reprimand usually took place.

So, what has happened in the last ten or twenty years? How many employers have been prosecuted? Who are the employers prosecuted? What about those employers who have political clot or are govt-linked-or-related companies?

If the officials in MOM are doing their job properly and upholding our laws conscientiously, their official reply through the press about the specific complaint/statement made by a foreign worker/victim should have been more specific and directed after a thorough investigation on his case has been diligently carried out. General sweeping statements to refute the accuracy of the complainant/victim’s case is not going to help much. It does not clarify the situation, nor does it put MOM is a better light.

I tend to agree with the victim’s statement that “the Singapore’s labour laws offer little real protection to foreign workers” and that the implied notion that the workers were unable to seek redress once their work permits were cancelled is true, or at least probably true.

Justice must be seen to be fair and just in order for it to be fair and just. Refuting a specific case with a general reply that aims to to cure-all ills would not be appropriate in this case in point.

What is the bottom line? The bottom line says it all!

Roderic Sng
Jan 31, 2009 18:27

Law is one thing.
The devil is in the execution.

Snitch
Feb 2, 2009 9:26

Was it not Mr Gan who could get the foriegn student numbers right when he was in MOE. The best we can hope for it that his figures about foriegn workers are correct.

BlindMan
Feb 2, 2009 14:22

We are getting somewhere with all of this, inch by inch.

Change is the only constant and with the internet the masses are gathering online to read, understand and exchange views.

Spoke to a taxi driver and he has gone online for alternative news and its times like these that word gets around quickly :)

Towards a better way of Singapore life.

BlindMan

cold water
Feb 2, 2009 16:01

#19 Blindman,

Not say I wanna say,
but these online readers are actually the non apathetic ones.
Many of these usually are also readers in other social blogs or forums.
so, the real number of such readers in terms of unique individuals is pretty small, imho, and could be just a few thousand out of 4.5 million. Thus, negligible. Why would someone apathetic become a reader of social/political blog or forum, as the name implies?

Poovanthan
Feb 2, 2009 23:43

All foreign workers should be treated equally by the police. The police procedure seems different when the case involves foreign workers.

kelly
Feb 5, 2009 1:29

Anyone who cannot respect their hardworking Singaporean neighbours will not respect foreign workers who they view as 2nd or 3rd class. Seriously the majority police of today aren’t an ounce of what Harmon Singh used to be (he helped wiped out most of hooligans back in the 60s to 70s).

I still have the evidence the loanshark left behind (who has been terrorising our neighbourhood) that the police didn’t care to collect nor come around when I called them. (Perhaps i should contact the loanshark and tell them hey I WILL SELL THIS EVIDENCE TO YOU, WANT OR NOT?? lol Just kidding)

The SPF basically sitting on their butt doing nothing. TOC wants to cover my story?

X
Feb 5, 2009 19:12

Whoever dares to approve it will probably be fired.

It’s the state media after all, right?

Leave a Reply

Comment


theonlinecitizen on Facebook

Uncategorized - Jan 15, 2010 10:12 - 126 Comments

It is affordable – Mah Bow Tan

More In Uncategorized


Uncategorized - Jan 15, 2010 10:12 - 126 Comments

It is affordable – Mah Bow Tan

More In Uncategorized


Uncategorized - Jan 15, 2010 10:12 - 126 Comments

It is affordable – Mah Bow Tan

More In Uncategorized