~by: Jolovan Wham~
First call for help
In 2005, barely one year after I started my job as a social worker, I received a call from an Indian shipyard worker who complained that he and his colleagues were trapped inside a room and were unable to leave, despite requests to the men who locked them up to release them. Earlier in the day, they were seized and manhandled by several burly men and forced to enter a vehicle. After that, they were driven to a shop house and told they would remain there until their departure to India. I learned from the workers that their employer had decided to cancel their work permits and engaged the services of these men to repatriate them. As we received more of such cases over the years, the migrant worker NGO community started calling companies that engaged in such activities ‘repatriation companies.’ When I received the call for help from that Indian worker, I had no idea what ‘repatriation companies’ were. But I managed to get the address of the place they were locked up in and decided to find out for myself. When I arrived, I spoke with Mr Peter Ng, the owner of A Team Repatriation Services, and he told me that the workers were being terminated because they had ‘attitude’ problems. The workers were all huddled together in a room with mats on the floor for them to lie on. They could move about freely in the premises but were not allowed to leave it. When he refused to let them out even after I had negotiated with him, I decided to call the police for assistance.
The Police and the Ministry of Manpower Respond
When our boys in blue arrived, they laughed at me and said that this company was operating a legitimate business. Immediately, I questioned how confining someone against their will was a legitimate business activity. When I pointed out that the penal code criminalises wrongful confinement, they asked me if I was willing to indemnify the employer’s $5000 security bond if the workers went missing. I argued that the security bond and the wrongful confinement of the workers were 2 separate matters and it was not the responsibility of the police to protect the employer from the forfeiture of the bond. They ignored me, and after exchanging a few cursory remarks with Mr Peter Ng, they left the scene and refused to take any further action.
Since then, the migrant worker NGOs have received calls from many foreign workers, both men and women, who complained of being seized and locked up inside repatriation companies. In 2008, a Chinese construction worker told me that despite repeated phone calls to the police to be released, they refused to take action. When I brought the worker to lodge a complaint against UTR Services Pt Ltd, after he had been confined by them for almost a month, it took a lot of persuasion before the police finally decided to allow the worker to lodge a report. Even after the report was lodged, no further action was taken against the repatriation company.
According to Manpower and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam ‘the number of complaints made against the handful of repatriation companies has also remained small over the years. Since 2010, MOM and MHA received seven complaints against three such companies, a fraction of the approximately 16,000 non-domestic work permit holders repatriated to their home countries in that time.’ In an interview with AFP, Ravi, the owner of UTR services Pte Ltd said that his company repatriates an average of 2000 workers a year. Therefore, just because MOM and MHA only received 7 complaints since 2010 does not mean that workers are not aggrieved about being locked up and sent back. In many of these cases, the workers would have been intimidated into submission through threats. They would have been told there is nothing they can do because their work permits have been cancelled. In some other cases, their hand phones were confiscated that they were unable to seek help. Those who pluck up sufficient courage to call the police would have had their pleas fall on deaf ears.
Another incident happened in September last year. A Chinese migrant worker was locked up for 2 days at A Team Repatriation Services. He had a work injury and his employer was unhappy that he was giving her ‘problems’. The worker was told to meet his agent near where he lived to settle any outstanding issues he had with the employer. However, when he arrived, he was caught by men from the repatriation company. When we called the police, they refused to order the repatriation company to release the worker. I pursued this matter all the way to the Attorney General Chambers Office only to be informed by them that they are not taking any further action.
In most of the cases I have handled, I usually sign a letter stating that I would indemnify the employer $5000 should the worker go missing before the repatriation company grants the worker’s request to be released. This year alone, I dealt with at least 3 workers whose cries for help were ignored by the Police. When we brought these workers to lodge complaints for wrongful confinement, they were reluctant to accept them. Had the workers not been accompanied by a Singaporean who insisted the police accept their claim, they would have left without making a report. In parliament last week, Tharman Shanmugaratnam said that ‘the government takes seriously all cases where members of the public, workers or NGOs claim that repatriation agents may have breached the law. If the worker is confined, MOM and the Police will ensure that the worker is not confined against his will and that his issues are addressed in a timely fashion.’
It is impossible for us to take this statement seriously when this is not the response of the authorities to migrant workers on the ground. While MOM will assist the workers with salary and work injury compensation claims, their response towards workers complaining about being locked up is woefully inadequate.
MOM, Police and SCDF to the Rescue?
Last week, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) together with the Police and the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) conducted a ‘Joint Proactive Enforcement Inspections on Repatriation Companies’
http://www.mom.gov.sg/newsroom/Pages/PressReleasesDetail.aspx?listid=397
Photos of Joint Inspection on repatriation companies conducted by MOM, SCDF and Police
Source: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.259140884135186.60600.103944372988172&type=1
In a statement issued by MOM, they said they did not find anyone who was wrongfully confined, or had any outstanding employment issues during the inspection. They also said that ‘MOM and SPF will ensure that anyone who breaks the law will be taken to task. To ensure perpetrators are held accountable for their actions and workers are rendered assistance as soon as possible, foreign workers who are locked up in repatriation premises should contact the Police by calling 999 to seek assistance.’
Platitudes such as this, which urge workers to call the police, sound hollow and empty when they have been trying in vain all these years for the police to take their complaints seriously. Moreover, what was the purpose of this joint inspection? What were the authorities expecting to achieve? Were they hoping to find workers who were wrongfully confined so that the repatriation companies could be prosecuted? If this is so, why have the Police been ignoring workers who call 999 for assistance? Why are they so reluctant to allow workers to lodge complaints of being wrongfully confined after they have been released from the repatriation companies? Just one inspection does not negate the fact that there were many more workers in the past who were confined against their will and forcefully repatriated.
This joint inspection also reveals a poor understanding of the power imbalance between workers, their employers and the repatriation companies. Repatriation companies often use threats of blacklisting, jail and cane for overstaying offences to confine workers against their will. Did the enforcement officers interview the workers in the premises of the repatriation company, or worse still in the presence of the repatriation company staff? Were the workers brought to a neutral place to be interviewed with translators who spoke their language to find out why they were living there, and how they ended up there? How was the inspection conducted, how were the questions asked, and what kinds of questions were asked? To conclude that ‘no infringements were detected’ based on just one inspection conveniently ignores and belittles the efforts of migrant workers and all those in the NGO community who have tried unsuccessfully for years to persuade the authorities to take the issue of wrongful confinement more seriously.
Why Repatriation Companies Continue to Exist
On November 19th, Channel News Asia reported that an average of 3 workers a week went missing and some employers were even offering rewards for missing workers who were found. Employers go to great lengths to locate missing workers because they fear losing their $5000 security bond. I have no doubt that repatriation companies will soon go out of business if MOM and ICA did not impose security bond requirements on employers. Workers do not decide to run away and risk being jailed and caned for overstaying offences because they enjoy annoying their employers and getting caught by the authorities. Many of them have strong ties with their own communities with loved ones back home to support. Poor employer-employee relations, ineffective dispute resolution methods and exploitation are the key reasons many workers decide to abscond. They often complain of employers who assault, verbally abuse them, and terminate their services when they bargain for better working and living conditions, or when they make enquiries regarding their salary or other employment related issues. Some employers insist on repatriating their workers even though the worker in question had paid thousands of dollars in agent fees and has not earned enough to recover his or her losses.
Singapore’s employment laws, which do not provide effective redress for wrongful dismissals, and allow the unilateral cancellation of work permits by employers, are among the reasons workers leave their employers after a dispute. The $5000 security bond condition imposed on employers is a punitive method of controlling workers, places an unfair burden on employers, and does not deal with the root causes of workers who decide to abscond. If employers are worried about this, they should recruit workers through ethical channels, pay them properly, and handle work place conflicts professionally. Progressive labour laws and proactive regulatory oversight over exploitative practices will also provide better protection to migrant workers and reduce risks of workers ‘running away.’
Repatriation companies and security bonds exist because we want cheap labour but refuse to deal with the problems which are a result of treating human beings as exchangeable commodities, other than taking short cuts and punitive measures to resolve them. The political will to close them down is weak because the authorities are convinced that repatriation companies play a useful social control function. It is easy for politicians and bureaucrats to turn a blind eye to this because for every foreign worker who has to suffer the indignity of being captured, confined and forcefully repatriated, for every foreign worker whose dream of a better life is shattered, there are a thousand more waiting in line for an opportunity to work here.
–
Jolovan Wham is the Executive Director of Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) which responds to the special needs of migrant communities.
Oh.. TOC putting our Policd force in bad light… I think maybe someone will pay you a visit for a kopi session… Anyway, anything new?
This has been happening for the longest time! Employees are threaten, force to work extreme long hour, if anyone not doing what the employers want, just send them back home in the manner described above and let the rest of workers to see.
Everyone knows about all these stories, but no one dare to report. Report also useless. Some companies specifically employ foreigners to work (even though the job can be done by a local) because can misuse them to the fullest.
To these employers, they just treat these workers as slaves, not human. Worst, these workers paid thousands of dollars just to come here to be tortured.
Actually, this is normal in a construction industry. Worker’s do not have any form if rights. Imagine, they are paid as low as $25/day without OT. I dun think any Singaporean could work in this env. I also heard some co. will send workers back once they are injured and even ask them to sign disclaimer form stating that their injury had nothing to do with third company.
Hence, workers nowadays are like kings that start to be picky at times. They will say so pay, they rather work as cleaner then site worker.
So I think it is hard to strive a balance in this issue and any changes must be planned carefully.
Repatration companies are gaining notoriety as employers of thugs to handle to migrant workers. The police and MOM are closing their eyes to malpractices by repatration companies. Confining a person against his wishes is illegal and the police must act to uphold the law. The writer is right to say that it is not the police business to protect employers from forfeiture of bonds. The ill-treatment of migrant workers who are repatriated cannot be condoned. They should not be treated like slaves with no human rights.
“they asked me if I was willing to indemnify the employer’s $5000 security bond if the workers went missing.”
While we appreciate the concerns the writer brought up in the article, may we ask the writer: so are you willing to pay the $5,000? Just like the case of a household maid who went out one sunday off and came home pregnant.
While you attempt to highlight the welfare of the foreign workers which we have no fuss about it, it is also not fair to penalise the employers and hold them responsible for someone else’s (employers’) action.
We are very interested to want to know, if this organisation HOME is initiated by the ruling party (pap).
It’s elementary. The bond must be scrapped. Then the worker will have to bear personal responsibility as other expatriate employees. And the employer will have no excuse to abuse them too.
There are 2 sides on a coin. No law maker is able to cover both sides of the same coin, no matter how much they want to. However, this should not be an excuse for exploitation, for a law maker and as a regulator.
@Alamak, the big boss of my ex-company (a local SME) once told me this, “The law is made to be exploited.”
OK, so lets get this straight. You want less Foreign workers, so when the government wants to reduce numbers, you want them to do it with more dignity? Fine i understand that.
Can we have an article applauding government efforts in reducing number of foreign workers? Or is ToC just a platform for government bashing?
@lame_ToC
You miss the point altogether.
To expect any better from the SPF will be joke. They can’t even take proper statements from Singaporeans. In most cases they tell you it is not necessary to make any statement, less work for them what else, and when they do take statements, they can’t care less, making unbelievable mistakes, if you don’t check and correct them.
Then they take donkey months to investigate. You wonder about the quality of their investigations? And then come up with crap reports of the investigation. Don’t expect much from the SPF as it appears they only make charges against people who go against ministers, or people who have money to employ lawyers.
As for the AG, this is another piece os sh.t who will only prosecute if it a crime avaunt the PAP or their cronies, not the normal Singaporeans, what more if this is a foreign migrant worker. They don’t give a shit.
VERY SIMPLE, All interview concerning repartriation by repartriation company must be done in MOM premises.
MOM must approve all repartriation cases.
Humanly speaking, Human Rights do not exist
in our little island, which is ruled by the
ruthless PAP regime.
I do not know what to say! Except for,
“Monkey see, Monkey do!”
No case. Move on!
POLICE ALSO DON’T WHEN YOU POST ON FB USING HAND PHONE, THERE GOT INDICATE ON THAT FB POSTING THAT IT IS POSTED FROM HAND PHONE.
Primary school kid also knows.
“…what was the purpose of this joint inspection? What were the authorities expecting to achieve?”
The “inspection” by MOM is just a public relations exercise….nothing more.
In S’pore, employers are kings. They can get away with many things not normally tolerated in other developed countries.
If this were to happen in a Western country, it would be enough to bring down a govt. But in Singapore , everyone simply takes it as a way of life. As long as it does not affect your bread and butter, Singaporeans dont really care. Very sad, really!!!!
The bond is a problem. But for the bond and the consequence of any alleged breach, employers will not resort to such almost inhumane services and there will not be such repatriation business. But whether for such general workers or maids, the government uses the bond to impose unreasonable burden on the employers. This is their way of “delegating responsibility”. But this is not right. Comparing the way our MOM handles foreign workers on employment pass and the way the MOM handles foreign workers under other passes or permits or allow them to be handled, it is clear that there is much, much less respect by MOM for the dignity of the lesser paid foreign workers. It speaks of the way our government and civil service view and treat such people from certain other countries. I hope the ministers and civil servants will put themselves in the shoes of these workers. It is not right and reflect badly on us Singaporeans. This is something the MOM should change. I wonder what Tharman and Chuan Jin think of our concerns and what they intend to do about it. Hoping to hear their comments (via facebook or otherwise) shortly.
What is Jolovan Wham trying to tell us? We should give repatriate foreign workers the chance to roam around the island while awaiting repatriation. The risk of losing security bond of $5000 by employers should not be an issue or reason in confining repatriate migrant workers. The police is biased in helping the employers to confine the migrant workers. The government should not impose security bond.
Let’s say if you happen to know that some men are going for a suicide mission to bomb a certain place with a suitcase of explosives. People will be hurt if the mission is successful. Together you and your friends apprehend these men, bind them up and confine them inside a ditch till the police arrive. Thereafter someone come around and accuse you of wrongful confinement and want your blood instead of giving you a hero accolade, is this not preposterous?
In the case of migrant workers, it may appear to be less harmful than some terrorist but if they were to allow them to escape prior to repatriation process,which mostly likely than not they will, the consequence may be serious. These migrants workers who do not have a job and flout the immigration law may resort to crime to survive and the loser is who our own people and may not be just as simple as money. If unlucky lives are lost and young women are raped to satisfy their urge.
Jolovan Wham should just cool down and find a reasonable solution to propose to the government for change in handling this issue instead of blaming everyone who is just trying to do their job to the best of society needs. Police is human and their laughter is no mockery, your line of persuasion resembles humor.
Let’s face it many maids and foreign workers are treated like slaves here. They do not know where and who to complain to. I have seen caese how our local bosses treat their foreign workers, worst than dogs. And these same bosses go round on weekends with their fat bellies and family and children gleefully dining away like idiots at top class restaurants and hotels. The reason why we are having so many foreign workers and maids here is because these heartless cruel ugly people in our midst, and believe you me there are thousands such Stinkyporeans, employ these foreigners on the cheap and bully them like slaves. They take advantage of the lax immigration employment policies for such category of workers. I remember reading many years ago in an international magazine of the bad reputation here, we are seen as drivers of modern slavery widely perceived being extensively practiced here. Somehow not much news written about it here. We are only in appearance a first world country, but actually if you look deeper we are a stinko and smelly society. We are far from being a refine, compassionate and caring society. Most of these bosses have no souls. There are many many such like people around. Hence the existence of these hooligan repatriation companies and their strong arm tactics. Nothing unusual here. Only wondering whether the authorities here are really serious to want to stamp out these evils. Or are they sleeping.
If what Jolovan Wham painted is the true picture of foreign workers in Singapore, why are there so many of them want to work in Singapore, legally as well as illegally and even swimming illegally across Johore Straits? Can Jolovan Wham help to find the missing workers who absconded from the employers still lurking in Singapore who may be committing crimes against Singaporeans? There are many illegal foreigners still working in Singapore on the cheap, can Jolovan Wham help so that Singaporeans be fully employed?
The education system here is aimed towards getting qualifications ultimately to multiply material wealth and to get fat paying jobs. No respect nor regard given to those who excel in the humanities. More honor and respect accorded to bankers and property developers. We grow up in this greedy money making country where the dollar is God. Nobody bothers about inhuman acts such as this. We just don’t have the time.
Strange, lately i don’t feel sorry for them, the foreigners , PRs and the new citizen. They have harden my heart and teach me well!!!
Really dont uunderstand what this writer is trying to say.looks like he is commenting only from his point of view, as a social worker and disregards other points of view.
This is superficial.
BRING TO HUMAN RIGHTS INTERNATIONAL,
ALL EMPLOYERS INCLUDING AMERICAN, ARE GUILTY.
LET THE OBAMA ADMIN KNOW ABOUT THIS,
SLAVERY OF THE BIGGEST, INHUMAN KIND IS PLAYING DAILY HERE………
THE SHOW MUST GO ON, SLAVES, SLAVES AND MORE SLAVES ARE ACOMING…………..
YOU ARE WRONG, THEY ARE FOREIGN TALENT, NEEDED BY LKY AND LACKEYS, TO BOOST THEIR SWISS ACCT…………
OTHERWISE WHEN KANNA KICK, WHERE GOT $$$
THE orderly way the Singapore government finds, inducts and grooms its political talent is under strain on three fronts.
One, an electorate that wants a new generation of leaders who are not just technocrats, but can empathise and connect with them.
Two, the growing reluctance of talented Singaporeans to join the ruling party to contest in elections. This is made worse by the ruling party’s poor showing in the May 7 election.
Three, the lure of high salaries is likely to disappear when the results of a government-ordered review are announced soon.
This has put a big question mark on who the fourth prime minister is likely to be.
That kind of uncertainty was not present when Lee Kuan Yew passed the baton to Goh Chok Tong in 1990 and Goh to Lee Hsien Loong in 2004.
Goh entered politics in 1976 and became PM 14 years later.
His successor had a much longer gestation period in politics before becoming PM 20 years after his political entry, although many would say that, if not for being stricken by cancer, Hsien Loong would have made it to the top much earlier.
This long route to the pinnacle is now under strain.
Seven years after the second systematic hand-over to Hsien Loong and with the political clock ticking fast to a 2020 succession deadline, there is still no clear successor in sight.
The two deputy prime ministers, Teo Chee Hean, 57, and Tharman Shanmugaratnam, 54, are too old, said the country’s age-old standards.
Both the second and third PMs took over when they were 49 and 52 respectively.
And Shanmugaratnam is out of the running because of another old-fashioned criterion: he is not Chinese.
The next group to look at are political newcomers who were parachuted into posts soon after the election.
Leading the pack is Heng Swee Keat. He has an impressive track record: starting as a front-line police officer, he spent three years as Kuan Yew’s principal private secretary, moved up to become permanent secretary of the Trade and Industry Ministry and went on to become managing director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore.
As education minister, he is making a name for himself by pushing through subjects like character-building and values-immersion.
A source who attended one of his closed-door sessions said: “He seems to be someone who doesn’t want to be bogged down by his predecessor’s policies. He is in a hurry to get things done.”
But, at 50, he might be too old to be groomed for the top job.
Next are two top army men: Chan Chun Sing and Tan Chuan Jin, both 42.
Major-Gen Chan has been made acting minister of community development, youth and sports, a hot potato because it deals with the growing gap between the haves and have-nots.
He has started a series of informal dialogues with Singaporeans, including bloggers.
Brig-General Tan is minister of state for manpower and is positioning himself to younger voters as their voice with his Facebook musings.
With nine years left to get the fourth generation of leaders to lead the country, the trio, especially Heng, don’t have the luxury of time to prove themselves as they are circulated to different ministries.
Unless the rules of the game are changed to wait it out and let one of the new political heavyweights become prime minister well past the 2020 deadline.
If that route is taken, then don’t be surprised if an older minister is appointed an interim PM, maybe for five years, to give the newcomers a little more time to prove themselves.
SCN
What did the “biggest Mania Leader” here once said to you ?
” If i hve to use the kuncle Buster , I will use it ” !
So, cannot blame… top also a “crook,”..so ?
Top “crooked”, “Bottom” also “crooked”.
Its all about ” submissive & obedience”
Look here ! “God” is talking to you !
while the gahmen keeps singing the praises of FTs,the gshmen simply ignores the plight of thse much needed foreign workers who have built our HDBs,condos and much more.
these foreigner workers are doing the work singaporeans do not wnat to do or cannot do as well and we should value their contributions unlike their counterparts,the FTs,who only bring down our productivity at our workplaces.
what is the gshmen thinking if they are thinking at all.
What a mess. Human rights violations. The need to have high GDP. Low wages to be competitive. It is a ticking time bomb!
the right thing to do is for the gahmen to make sure that neither the ‘foreign poor’ who sell everything they owned back home or even borrow to come here to ‘do the jobs that singaporeans don’t want to do’ and our own poor sgporeans are more fairly treated either by the gahmen themselves or by the public.
imagine PM LEE or LSS have to take care of their kids and aged sick parents with only $1000 SALARY per montb in a place like SG where even a polyclinic visit would set a poor man off by a not smallish margin of bis $1000 PAYCHECK.
there are many sgporeans and FTs who are grassroot people but actually bullying the poor – both foreign workers and sgporeans.
the LAW must be seen to be fair and just and even if the victims are just incognito personalities,the gahmen must give them due respect and consideration.
too many rich are behaving like they own the poor just as feudal lords owned their ‘slaves’.
If you are concerned about Gangster-like kidnapping by Repatriation Companies, email Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Teo Chee Hean, ask for an explanation and that they do something about these crimes.
tharman_s@mom.gov.sg
teo_chee_hean@mha.gov.sg
Don’t just whinge on the internet. Make a difference. They must acknowledge within a short time and respond properly within 1 month.
“Repatriation companies and security bonds exist because we want cheap labour but refuse to deal with the problems which are a result of treating human beings as exchangeable commodities, other than taking short cuts and punitive measures to resolve them. The political will to close them down is weak because the authorities are convinced that repatriation companies play a useful social control function.”
How true this is. An excellent article that highlights the core problems and offers solutions to solve the problems. Will employers take this to heart and make changes in their own practices? MOM and the Police should not be paying lip service to this issue as they lose credibility when they don’t enforce rules that should apply to everyone in society, not excluding vulnerable low-paid foreign workers.
Ricardo, Jolovan is the executive director of HOME. Do you think all he does all day is write essays and articles on the treatment of migrants, which to you apparently is ‘whinging’?
where does your salary come from Jolovan??? You are making money and talking cock because you cant find a job.By the way why your name so funny like ang moh…
You must be free volunteer than I respect you, not going around begging for money and put in your pocket.