Location, location, location. Is that the only problem we have when it comes to housing for foreign workers? In Part One of this Special Feature, Stephanie Chok argues that the real ‘housing problem’ is the substandard living conditions thousands of men and women are made to endure daily in this prosperous, globally admired city.

Watch the video before you read the following article.

Stephanie Chok / Pictures by Damien Chng

Liu, 23, from Hebei, China, stayed in the basement of this condominium worksite at Cairnhill Rise for three to four months (see video above). He was sent to another worksite by his employer, Tiong Seng Contractors, around April 2009. (Why was he moved out? Liu was sent from worksite to worksite throughout his time working here, after this he was sent back to a Tuas worksite for a short period, and later to work at the Resorts World Sentosa site.)

In mid-September, his former co-workers were still living in that decrepit basement, surrounded by pools of “smelly water” [臭水]. Meal times, they gather to eat in makeshift areas, balancing styrofoam boxes on upturned buckets or sitting by their bug-infested beds. Drinking water is drawn from sinks which are lined with scum, sinks close to clogged toilets that remain un-repaired. One can only imagine the stench in this humid, damp basement where up to 200 men eat, live and rest, seven days a week.

Before this, Liu previously lived in a dormitory in Toa Payoh and an on-site container [集装箱] somewhere in Tuas. “These places must be much better than the condo basement, right?” I asked Liu. “They were even worse!” he retorts. Worse? I’m trying to imagine ‘worse’ than a toilet swilling with faeces and sleeping on a damp wooden board crawling with insects.

At the Toa Payoh dormitory,100 men were crammed into one big open hall. Bunk beds were lined side by side, with only a narrow path in between for people to walk, single-file. Personal belongings like suitcases were strewn on the bed (the only space available), or sometimes underneath them. “What if there is a fire? There will be casualties,” I said to Liu. He nods in agreement. It will be mayhem as hordes of people try to escape through tight, overloaded spaces. “We were not even told where the fire extinguisher is!”says Liu.

At Tuas, Liu lived in a container. There were 18 men squeezed into each container and cooking is not allowed. If you attempted to do so, you would be fined; if you had cooking utensils, they would be confiscated. How much is the fine? “I don’t know, I didn’t dare to risk it,” Liu smiles ruefully. Instead, $100-$120 is deducted from the workers’ salaries every month for meals that are delivered to the site – workers have no choice in the matter. This is a common practice. Workers complain that the meals delivered are inadequate, poor in quality and sometimes rancid as they are eaten only hours after delivery, causing food poisoning. (Liu has previously found worms in his food.) On-site, there were about 10 toilet stalls  shared among 200-300 men from different companies, all living in containers.

The ‘housing problem’

Housing for foreign workers in Singapore is recognized as ‘problematic’. Yet what is often articulated as ‘the problem’ falls into the following categories: shortage of housing, legal versus illegal housing and, of course, where such housing is located. (Basically, the further away from Singaporean residents the better, as demonstrated by the Serangoon Gardens saga). The ‘problem’, however, if you asked the workers forced to live in cramped, ill-ventilated and unsanitary housing, may yield quite a different answer.

There are situations where bathing means scooping water from a giant communal tank – rain or shine, whether you’re well or running a fever, you are made to stand in the open with everyone else and douse yourself with cold water. Other novel shower routines include collecting water in a bucket so as to soap and rinse yourself while standing about in your underwear. After a 10 to 12 hour work shift, one can wait up to 11pm or midnight (if there is overtime work) just for the opportunity to bathe. This is what happens when you have up to a hundred men and only a few taps.

The buckets also serve another purpose – workers hand-wash their clothes in these buckets and put them up to dry wherever they can, stringing up makeshift clothes-lines or hanging damp clothing by their bed-frames. (To add to the indignity, workers’ salaries are deducted for such housing.)

Food storage is another issue. I once gave Guang, a construction worker living in a shophouse dormitory in Lavender, some Chinese New Year goodies. The entire horde was finished that same night! He later explained it was either him finishing it or the rats – there is no fridge nor pantry area to keep perishables and the dorm is rat-infested. “Why not complain to the authorities,” I asked. “They’ve already come before!” he says. According to Guang, conditions improved slightly just before the raid, but reverted to ‘normal’ soon after. “What to do?” he shrugged. No wonder he and his colleagues were dying to return home as soon as possible.

A phrase I’ve heard several times when I asked foreign workers from China about their living conditions is “恶劣” – disgusting. And not just disgusting, mind you, but “非常 恶劣” – exceptionally so. Jiang, 38, a construction worker, stayed in a room with 100 others. Ventilation was poor so it was unbearably hot. (Ever walked into a dormitory without windows? It feels like you’ve just been shoved into an oven and someone slammed the door shut.) The bed bugs, says Jiang, were intolerable, “I couldn’t sleep the whole night”. Jokes Xu, 39, also a construction worker, “Bed bugs, cockroaches and mosquitoes are our ‘close companions’ here in Singapore, they whisper sweet nothings [悄悄话] to us all night.”

The word ‘home’ connotes images of a warm and comfortable dwelling place, a haven in which we unwind, enjoy privacy, leisurely pursuits, and the company of loved ones. The fortunate among us experience this daily, but not enough do (and it’s not just foreign workers). Yet even at its most basic, a home is expected to be functional – a place to cook, eat, sleep, shower. In too many dormitories, even these needs are ill-considered.

There have been comments from some people that since these workers come from ‘Third World’ countries, they should be used to such poor living conditions. On the contrary, ‘it was never this bad back home’, is a sentiment I frequently hear from migrant workers themselves. Liu, for example, has experience as an internal migrant worker, having worked in Beijing doing construction work. While he has stayed on-site in buildings under-going construction, he insists that workers are never placed in the basement because it will be too damp and unsanitary.

There is often also disbelief – many foreign workers have expressed shock that such conditions exist in Singapore, a country they perceived, prior to arriving here, as ‘developed’ and wealthy. But soon comes the realization that such conditions exist here, for those on the margins. Liu is cognizant of the fact that while he and his fellow workers languor in filth at the bottom of this building, when completed, each apartment may be worth a few million dollars.

Cairnhill Rise “dormitory”

So here is what remains “恶劣” about this situation. The on-site basement that you see in the video is part of a development described as “luxury hilltop living with the privacy and seclusion of an exclusive resort”. The developer has boasted, on its website, of a net profit increase of 57% to $44.5 million for its 2008 financial year. Meanwhile, Liu’s employer, Tiong Seng Contractors, has won an award from the Building and Construction Authority for Construction Excellence. Its website lists a hosts of other awards and accreditations.

If these are profitable companies with business clout, why are they not even fulfilling a basic requirement of housing the workers building its prized projects decently? Workers who toil up to 12 hours a day, sometimes 7 days a week, to complete the projects that keep our economy humming.

——

Here are some more examples of the living conditions foreign workers endure:

The men sleep on the concrete floor in this “dormitory”. There are no lockers or cupboards
for their belongings.
The “shower room” for workers.
Where the men sleep.
A clogged toilet overflowing with faeces. (Screenshot from video.)
700 men were crammed into this former factory converted to a dormitory.
Inside a cargo container which was used to house workers.
The narrow passageway of a dormitory.
The windows of this house in Geylang are covered-up with newspapers. More than 40 workers lived there.
(Picture by Andrew Loh.)
The toilet in another dormitory.
Barely-working toilets
Workers are stuffed into any space available.
Where workers hang out the laundry to dry.
There is no storage space for the workers’ belongings.
Even workers who were ill with chicken pox were not adequately segregated from the rest..
In March 2009, TOC reported how foreign workers were housed in containers. (Report here)
A mosquito breeding stagnant pool of water just beside one of the containers where
workers lived. Just a few steps away, a clogged stream which was breeding mosquitoes.

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

改委杨耀辉为主席引内讧? 朱来成抨击肯尼斯“不民主”

新加坡革新党秘书长肯尼斯今日(5日)在脸书发文,宣布该党改委杨耀辉律师为党主席,以及巴塔沙(Mahaboob Batasha)为财政。 不过这项宣布似乎引起原党主席朱来成的不满,后者也在脸书发表措辞强烈的贴文,指出肯尼斯作出上述委任,是“不民主的”,这是因为有关针对他本身和前财政诺莱尼的指控调查还没结束。 “就我所知,中委仍在审议这项问题。为此在作出任何裁决之前,不应作出上述委任,再者党章程也允许14天的上诉权益。” 根据革新党文告,所有中委任命仍在试用期,而他们也必须在党代表大会参加改选。 该党称仍在检讨2020年选举,找出不足之处和该党在未来的给予,协助加强该党在网络的曝光率。 与此同时,革新党也在草拟新的政策宣言,包括将专注绿化、妇女和教育,并欢迎民众献策。 革新党在2020年选举,由肯尼斯领军,率领朱来成、诺莱尼、苏源顺和杨耀辉,到宏茂桥挑战总理李显龙的行动党团队。惟行动党以71.91巴仙得票率高票当选。革新党仅得票28.09巴仙。 杨耀辉在上届选举既已担任革新党宏茂桥志工,自2019年担任中委。他也承诺将竭尽所能,并支持秘书长肯尼斯和鼓励更多年轻人入党。杨耀辉在此次选举,也因在电视演说的华语致词而引起网民注意,特别是“成何体统”还因此一炮而红。 至于财政巴塔沙是一名企业家,2017年12月加入该党中委。文告称有信心他能依据合法和符合该党的条规,管理该党财务。

不知自己运毒 上诉庭推翻前期判决尼日利亚男子逃死刑

带行李箱入境新加坡被搜出冰毒,一名36岁的尼日利亚男子在两年前被判死刑。不过上诉庭三司在昨日推翻判决,使得男子逃过死刑。 2011年11月,该名尼日利亚男子阿迪里(Adili Chibuike Ejike),受人所托携带行李箱入境新加坡,但从行李箱内衬,搜出不少于1961克的甲基安非他命(Methamphetamine,俗称冰毒)。 不过在审讯时,失业的阿迪里辩称,有人给他酬金,请他帮忙带行李箱入境交给他人,他不清楚行李箱内有什么。尽管只是协助运毒,不过当时法官仍裁定他有罪和判处死刑。 对此,阿迪里提出上诉,在去年10月于上诉庭聆讯并保留判决。 法庭考量的关键乃是阿迪里是否自己可能在协助运毒的情况,刻意无视(wilful blindness)。 而在昨日的书面判决中,大法官梅达顺指出,除了被搜出拥毒,与此同时也要证明被告确实清楚知道有毒品的存在。 法庭指需证明被告是否有理由怀疑、并且可以进行检查,却假装不知道。 但即便被告有打开行李箱查看,也可能无法发现内衬还藏有毒品。 既然不知道箱内有毒品,故此被告运毒入境的罪名也就不成立。…

Increase in HDB resale flat volumes while resale prices drop

While the number of Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats resold has…

No family will be left behind: Really? (updated)

by Leong Sze Hian I refer to the article “No family will…