HOME picture of migrant worker

Migrant workers who approach HOME for assistance often live in conditions which are crowded, dirty and full of pests such as cockroaches, bed bugs and rats. It is ironic that migrant workers are housed in such appalling conditions while building luxury apartments and bungalows for Singapore

By Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics (H.O.M.E.)

The Foreign Employee Dormitories Act has been lauded for ensuring a higher quality of living in large foreign workers’ dormitories (i.e. with 1,000 residents and above.) While it is commendable and necessary to improve conditions, the Bill in its current state falls short of ensuring adequate standards for all migrant workers in Singapore.

Missed Opportunity to address Inadequate Housing for all

The Act was a good opportunity to set the standards for adequate accommodation across all the different housing types – factory converted dormitories, shophouses and worksite temporary housing . However, it only applies to dormitories with 1000 residents and above.

Currently, standards vary across different housing types. For instance, those living in buildings under construction, and temporarily built sheds at construction sites , do not have proper bedroom, kitchen, recreational and shower facilities, Buildings under construction are often dusty, noisy and pest infested, Dengue outbreaks have been reported in these areas due to inadequate sanitation. The regulations for such housing is minimal and far lower than that of purpose built dormitories and temporary housing structures.

A comprehensive Act for all foreign workers’ dormitories would ensure consistent standards in terms of structure of the housing, proper bedding, adequate ventilation, sanitation, number of persons per room, security of belongings, sufficient privacy, laundry and cooking facilities, waste management and access to health care. The new Act fails to address this.

Act fails to address Insufficient Adequate Housing

A Straits Times report, Dorm Operators form association to raise standards, revealed that there are approximately 150,000 bed spaces in purpose built dormitories. With approximately 770,000 foreign workers in Singapore (MOM Statistics), this means 570,000 are living in sub-standard housing in factory converted quarters, shop houses, private apartments, and construction sites where employers openly flout housing regulations. URA regulations stipulate that walk up apartments and shop houses should not accommodate more than 8 persons in one unit but employers often accommodate, 10 to 15 workers in a small room to save costs. Many of these places are also often poorly managed. .

Excessive Powers of Dormitory Inspectors

We should also be concerned about the excessive powers given to dormitory inspectors in this Act. It mentions that if the dormitory officer or inspector believes that any offence under this new Act has been committed, he or she may break open any door or window of the premises for inspections. He or she also has the powers to arrest and detain someone for up to 48 hours. Why does the Act give such broad powers to inspectors when existing legislation such as the Criminal Procedures Code (CPC), and the Police Force Act already exist? According to Section 25 and Section 7 of the Act, not having a licence to run a dormitory is an arrestable and detainable offence. What kinds of offences under this proposed Act could be so serious that it is necessary for such actions? More clarity is needed.

Dormitories as de-facto internment camp

We are concerned that the Act has designated these dormitories as public spaces subject to regulations that include restricting the entry to and exit of the dormitories’ residents where the Commissioner overseeing these dormitories “has reasonable grounds to believe” that the residents will be affected by public health outbreaks or public disorder. This provision captured in Section 13 Clause 4d reinforces the stereotype that foreign workers are more inclined to riotous behavior. Designating their living quarters as public spaces also infringes on their personal space.

Dormitories are the homes of foreign workers. Their personal space and movement should be respected. Reinforcing negative perceptions of migrant workers does nothing to improve relations between them and the Singapore public. The Manpower Minister, Tan Chuan Jin himself has said “there is no place for racists and xenophobes in our society” Are politicians in Singapore following their own advice?

This was first published at HOME’s official website.

Subscribe
Notify of
2 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

就业机会:保安、理发师、服务员 欧斯曼质疑“新心相连”计划欠诚意

早前,人力部长人力部长杨莉明声称,在三月至7月底,多达2万4千名求职者,在“新心相连”就业计划(SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package)下寻得正职、短期或实习机会。 不过,人民党成员欧斯曼,在昨日(12日)于脸书上晒出一张照片,那是一封来自三巴旺民众俱乐部的电邮,告知他依据政府上述计划下,可以选择哪一些工作。 其中包括理发师、路演推广人员、餐饮服务人员、厨房工作人员以及保安工作等。 政府声称在该计划下提供近10万的就业机会,协助受疫情和经济不景影响的雇员。但欧斯曼遗憾,从这些工作来看,似乎近九成都是蓝领工作。 他更讽刺说道,“难道白领工作都由CECA成员、SPass或就业准证持有者从事?” 根据杨莉明早前的公布,2万4千名求职者中,有4600人找到长期PMET工作,5千200人找到短期PMET工作,占总数的四成。 今年6月,我国实施就业与技能配套(SGUnited Jobs…

Gan Kim Yong’s new committee

MOM yet to say how it intends to reform system which is being violated.

SDP manifesto tackles major issues

Jewel Philemon, additional reporting by Elliot A. Pictures by Jeremy Philemon The…