Andrew Loh

Note: The following report has been edited to reflect more accurately what had transpired in the case of Asmad Kadir. This is because of clarification the writer has obtained with his sources.

Asmad Kadir (not his real name), who is owed some S$2,100 for 5-months’ work as a labourer, asked to meet with his employer at the Ministry of Manpower building on 14 May.  His employer had wanted to meet with him at his (the employer’s) office. However, having been assaulted previously at the office (see story below), Asmad asked for the meeting to be held at MOM instead.

At that designated time on Thursday, 14 May, after having arrived at the MOM’s building at Havelock Road, he called his employer’s brother, who goes by the name of Ganesh.  Asmad was told to come out of the building and meet with Ganesh. Asmad refused. Ganesh tried to coax Asmad into agreeing by promising Asmad that if he came out and met him, he would pay Asmad the entire amount owed to him.

An hour of negotiation ensued which lasted till 6pm, when the MOM building was to be closed. Asmad then had no choice but to go out and meet with Ganesh. There, Ganesh and another man, Biji,  insisted that Asmad signed the receipt for the money first before they paid him. Asmad told them he would not and that he will only sign after he has received the money. They got into a heated argument. The two men then seemed to relent and asked that they proceeded to a side street where Asmad will be issued a receipt.  “I feared for my safety,” Asmad said, “but I still went to the location with them.”

When they arrived at the new location, Ganesh and Biji  tried to force Asmad into a microvan by manhandling him. In the scuffle, Ganesh punched him, causing his lips to bleed. Biji grabbed the right side of his face. In the struggle, Asmad’s shirt was torn and he managed to free himself and fled. “This is not the first time Ganesh has assaulted me,” Asmad said in the police report he lodged against his employer’s brother.

Asmad Kadir, 28, has been working with Ocean Marine Engineering in Singapore since 2007. In February this year, he asked for the five months’ worth of salary owed to him to be paid.

He was called up to his employer’s office to discuss the issue. Asmad explained to his employer that his family back in Bangladesh needed the money urgently. In the course of the discussion, his employer slapped him across his left ear three times. “After I was slapped, I lost consciousness for a few minutes,” Asmad said in a separate police report he has made. His employer then asked him to go back to the dormitory to rest. Later that day, he felt “a lot of pain” in his left ear and called his employer, who promised to bring him to a doctor the next day after work. His employer did not do so.

It was only one week later, on 5 March, that Asmad himself went to see the doctor. He was given two days’ medical leave. When he showed the certificate to his employer, he did not believe the certificate was geuine. Subsequently, his employer gave him some ear drops and told him to go back to the dormitory to rest – but that he would have to report for work the next day.

Asmad’s problems, however, do not end there.

MOM’s dispute settlement

On 13 April, in a salary dispute mediation session overseen by MOM between Asmad and his employer, it was agreed that Asmad’s employer would pay him half of the salary owed and the other half “upon repatriation”, as stated in the agreement. However, till date, Asmad said he has been paid only S$300 out of the S$2,100 he is owed.

Because his work permit has been cancelled, and he is still awaiting full compensation and the outcome of the two police reports, Asmad needed to obtain a Special Pass which would allow him to remain in Singapore until these are resolved. On 15 May, he approached MOM, with all the documents he has, including the two police reports.

However, the MOM officer refused to look at the documents. She told Asmad that he would have to go to Changi airport where an employee of the Insurance Company and his employer were waiting for him to pay his full outstanding salary and to repatriate him. Asmad also said the officer said he had to “go home”.  Asmad can only speak a smattering of very simple English words and did not fully understand what the officer had said. He did not want to go to the airport as he was afraid that his employer would not pay him the full amount and repatriate him.

Without the Special Pass, Asmad is now considered an overstayer and could be forcibly repatriated anytime by the authorities.

As for the police report made  by Asmad on 14 May, the police has notified him that “preliminary inquiries into your police report is completed and it discloses an offence under Section 323 of the Penal Code… which is a non-seizable offence.”

Thus, in order for the police to proceed with further actions, Asmad would need to lodge a Magistrate’s Complaint at the Subordinate Courts. The Magistrate would then order the police to act as she sees fit.

Asmad may not get a chance to do so without a Special Pass.

He too will have to forfeit the salary still owed to him.

Asmad is now being taken care of by aid workers.

Opinion:

There are several serious questions raised in Asmad’s case.

  1. MOM should take a very serious view that physical assault on employees by employers and their henchmen can happen right at its doorsteps.
  2. According to what Asmad told The Online Citizen, it seems that he was a victim of an attempted kidnapping. This is a very serious offence under Singapore law and should be treated as such.
  3. MOM should have staff who are proficient in the native languages of foreign workers who approach them. If the frontline staff is not proficient in these, they should be told to refer such workers to officers who are in a better position to help, instead of dismissing workers’ complaints.

If Asmad is forcibly repatriated on a technicality – because he does not have a Special Pass – it would signal to employers that such ill-treatment and abuse of foreign workers are tolerated by the authorities. And employers will be emboldened to continue to do so.

Asmad wants to return to his family in Bangladesh.

It is not unreasonable for him to expect to be paid for the work he has done before doing so.

Asmad still has hearing problems in his left ear.

——

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

LTA cannot forbid any individual or company from parking along private residential estates

It has been said that roads in private residential estates are public…

三个月内电动扶梯铁板故障两次 网民呼吁当局正视

电动扶梯铁板突然凸起,吓得正准备推着婴儿车上楼的妇女即刻停步,险些就遭殃了,因此在部落格上贴文提醒民众,然而该建筑内也非首次传出电扶梯故障事件,因此网民呼吁当局正视问题,避免发生事故了才采取行动。 据贴文指出,有关事件假榜鹅水滨坊(Waterway Point),于上个月29日下午3时许发生,出问题的电动扶梯位于建筑底层一楼。 身在事发现场的一名女士在部落格(Punggolbabies)上写道,当时她正背着宝宝,推着婴儿车准备使用电动扶梯到底层一楼时,听到该电扶梯的铁片传出撞击的声音,就看到脚下的踏板铁片凸起。 她表示很庆幸当时有看到这一幕,否则踏上铁片就不知道会如何,而且当时还抱着孩子。“我随后就叫后头的公众往上走,不要下来了。” 部落格上,她也分享了有关的故障手扶梯。 当局指有外来物体导致故障 据在当地工作的店员指出,当时有听到巨响,看到一名抱着宝宝的妇女惊恐地站在电扶梯旁,幸好有人在上方将电扶梯按停,才避免其他人受到伤害。 针对有关事故,水滨坊发言人在受询问时指出,有“外来物体”导致电扶梯的数个阶梯铁板移位。 他指出,事发后该电扶梯就直接被封锁了,且有保安在现场指引顾客,而受影响电扶梯也在经过维修后,确定安全了才开始开放使用。 他也促请顾客们尽量不要在电扶梯使用婴儿手推车或购物车,并建议他们使用电梯,避免电扶梯因为相关的设备而出现故障。 “根据调查显示,婴儿车的车轮若卡在电扶梯踏板之间,会导致踏板无法正常运作,甚至脱落,进而致使电扶梯的安全机制被启动而停止运作。”…

Activists continue to call for MOE to implement change to discriminative policies relating to LGBT students

Three days after the protests against discrimination of LGBT students outside of…

Missing 27-year-old Singaporean found dead at a car park

A body, found on the top of a multi-story car park, is…