Justin Tan

Maids are a large group of employees who play a vital role in supporting the modern Singaporean. Yet, there is little dignity given to them. Maids are not treated with much respect and often, the relationship between these maids and their employers resemble that of a master-servant. While there are many reasons for the lack of dignity, one of them comes from the lack of legal protection for these maids. In addition, in cases where legal help is available, it is often inadequate. The link between provision of legal rights and dignity is clear, and it is time to give dignity to this group of people in Singapore.

Maids have often made headlines, mostly for the wrong reasons. A recent example being that of a maid who was forced to tie the shoelaces of an able bodied woman.[1] Other macabre examples include an employer beating a maid to death[2] and torturing a maid with assorted household appliances[3]. These examples highlight the indignity suffered by these maids. The general attitude of Singaporeans towards their domestic employees seems more like that of a master-servant, treating their maids as sub-human. Taking into consideration the backgrounds of most of these Singaporeans it becomes all the more shocking.  Most of these people are for all purposes “normal” – they hold stable jobs, tend to be well-educated and seem to be well-adjusted people. It is appalling that they fail to understand that all human beings, including their domestic help, should be treated with respect and dignity. The cruel irony is that such people would never contemplate doing such things to their colleagues, subordinates, spouses or children.

Whilst Singapore has enforced laws to protect the rights of many groups of individuals, ranging from the Women’s Charter, to the Employment Act , there is a lack of legislative protection for domestic helpers in Singapore. The Women’s Charter is one such example of the law bringing dignity to women in Singapore. The enactment of such a law has increased the presence of women in the workforce, shaped the spousal relationship, and in the process dignifying the role of women here. This stands in contrast to the lack of protection given to maids.

Under Section 2(B) of the Employment Act, maids are excluded from many of the protections provided under labour laws by their classification as a “domestic worker”. As a result, maids are excluded from rest days, holidays, limitations to working hours and notice before terminating a contract or even receiving a timely wage[4].  The lack of protection afforded to maids impact upon their dignity. Since maids are not given this protection, abuse of maids become more frequent. Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2), noted in their report that maids often suffer abuse, ranging from physical abuse like slaps, insults of modesty, contract violations, as well as wrongful confinement.[5] There is a lack of an overal legal framework to protect domestic helpers in Singapore.

Despite a glaring lack of recognized laws to protect foreign domestic workers, there are laws which protect them against employer abuse. Assault is covered under the Penal Code, and employers who fail to uphold their contracts can be sued. Although Section 5 of the Legal Aid and Advice Act makes legal aid available only to Singaporeans and Permanent Residents, other avenues are available for foreign maids such as the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme, which is run by the Law Society and provides legal aid on a means test basis. However, this is limited to instances where maids are charged in court by the police for an offence not punishable by death.[6] Where maids require civil litigation, they can also turn to pro bono services provided by the Law Society.

While these laws are available, the lack of awareness and legal support are still significant barriers. TWC2  noted in its report that maids who lack a command of English or do not know of their legal rights continue to live with the abuse, compounding the situation. More must be done to increase awareness of these rights and services provided.

Much like what was done with the Women’s Charter in 1961, the power of the law is a very important first step. Giving maids rights to those enjoyed by other groups and employees would send a clear signal to Singaporeans. Maids are people too, and Singaporean employers would do well to remember this.

Are we a nation that respects the dignity of these domestic employees? As a modern nation with a progressive society, surely Singaporeans can find it in themselves to treat their domestic help decently, and with the respect that should be accorded to any human being. The recent furore over the shoelaces incident suggests that not all Singaporeans are blind to the indignity of maids. This writer suggests that it is high time that they were given adequate legal protection – because they are people too.


[1] “Outrage over Woman Getting Maid to Tie Shoelaces.” AsiaOne. 22 July 2010. Web. 4 Aug. 2010. <http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20100722-228281.html>.

[2] Lee, Han Shih. “Silence on maid abuse must end.” Business Times 27 July 2002. Business Times. 4 Aug. 2010. <http://www.singapore-window.org/sw02/020727bt.htm>

[3] Xuanwei, Teo. “Flight Attendant Jailed for 2 Months.” TODAYonline. 29 July 2010. Web. 4 Aug. 2010. <http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC100730-0000070/Flight-attendant-jailed-for-2-months>.

[4] Misra, Sucheta, and Elaine Ho. Foreign Domestic Workers Invisible Under the Law. Rep. Singapore: Transient Workers Count Too, 2003. Web. 4 Aug. 2010. <http://www.twc2.org.sg/site/images/stories/downloads/library/Foreign%20Domestic%20Workers%20Invisible%20Under%20the%20Law.pdf>.

[5] Ibid.

[6] “The Law Society of Singapore: Criminal Legal Aid Scheme.” Welcome to The Law Society of Singapore. Web. 10 Aug. 2010. <http://www.lawsociety.org.sg/public/you_and_the_law/criminal_legal_aid_scheme.aspx>.

 

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

人权律师叹在狮城诉诸司法不便宜

日前,本地社运分子范国瀚因被判藐视法庭罪而申请上诉,不过他必须先缴两万元的担保金(security for costs),如果上诉失败,这笔担保金也拿不回,令他感叹“正义也不便宜啊!”(Justice is not cheap!)。不过所幸后来他得到总理弟弟李显扬襄助,为他负担这笔费用。 对此,本地人权律师拉维(M.Ravi)就在脸书发文分享,他今早告知马国律师同业阿伦卡西(Arun Kasi),范国瀚上诉需缴两万元担保金,令后者感到惊讶。 他指出,事实上目前马国上诉庭和联邦法院申请上诉,是不需要缴担保金的,过去的费用的一千令吉马币,不过有关收费已在去年取消,确保当事人有申诉正义的管道。 他说,如果没有富有赞助者的襄助,范国瀚可能也会痛失上诉的权利,除了范,还有另一同样被判藐视法庭罪的民主党要陈两裕,也在为筹募两万元上诉担保金头痛。 “这就是在新加坡诉诸司法面对的可悲情况。甚至有时需仰仗有钱有势人家的协助。” 除了抵押金,向法院提呈诉讼的费用也非常贵,增加司法费用。“若说新加坡拥有全球最高昂的诉讼和法庭相关费用,我不会感到惊讶。”…

54 new infected cases of COVID-19; Highest number of new cases till date

As of Monday (23 March 2020), 12pm, the Ministry of Health (MOH)…

遭官司拖沓四年 前女佣巴蒂终于踏上返乡路

去年9月4日,印尼籍前女佣巴蒂上诉得直,原被指控偷窃雇主樟宜机场集团主席廖文良的5万元财物,获改判无罪。 据客工组织情义之家(HOME)志工、本地学者卓君美(Stephenie Chok)在脸书分享,巴蒂今早(27日)终于搭上班机返回印尼。 “四年她无法见见自己的母亲一面,还得想尽办法保护家人不受负面新闻影响。四年必须持特别准证无法在新加坡工作,四年需要暂居庇护所,等待那可能颠覆她命运的裁决。” 46岁的印尼籍前女佣,曾在樟宜机场集团主席廖文良家中帮佣近九年,于2016年10月28日被开除后,遭前雇主父子报警指控偷走逾五万元的财物。而巴蒂在被开除当天就返回印尼,后因廖家父子的指控,于2016年12月2日回到我国时被逮捕。 为了配合调查,巴蒂自2016年12月就滞留在本地,但因无法工作,她就一直居住在由情义之家所经营的收容所内,依靠该组织的援助至今已将近四年。 目前,巴蒂仍向涉及检控其案件的两名主控官,发起纪律研讯。其中一位主控官请了知名大律师文达星辩护。 四年前,卓君美海事情义之家的个案经理。尽管在2019年离任,仍继续以志工身份关心巴蒂案件的进展。 但她也指出,巴蒂终于能与家人团聚令她感欣慰,但与此同时,推动刑事司法改革的进程仍在继续。若巴蒂案能带来更多反思和有意义的改变,她认为我们需要继续叩门提出诉求、监督、请愿和抗议等。 她认为我们需要言论自由的空间向当权者讲真话,也需要当权者需时刻警提,他们也可能滥用本身的权力。 尽管巴蒂暂时回国,不过卓君美提及,有关她本身物品的索偿诉讼,以及级律审裁庭官司仍在持续。巴蒂今早回国,是没有携带之前被警方扣押的所有品的。 她指警方声称这是因为有其他“利益相关者”也索取有关物品。当然这些物品就是巴蒂此前所面对偷窃控状中,被指从雇主那里偷窃的赃物,例如黑裙、二手茶壶、二手刀和筷子等。…