~by: Jolovan Wham~

Today is the International Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Most of the individuals sold into slavery by European and Arab slave traders between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries were Africans. During the expansion of the Americas, they were transported to the colonies of North and South America to work in the plantations and mines or other labour intensive industries, or as household servants.

More than 200 years after William Wilberforce led the movement to abolish slavery, it is still very much alive with us today. Slavery is no longer about women and men bound in chains with slave masters cracking their whips in the background. Modern day slavery is treating workers like objects, forced to work for little or no pay at the mercy of their employers. It is characterised by workers being:

  • Forced to work through mental or physical threat;
  • Owned or controlled by an 'employer', usually through mental or physical abuse or threat of abuse;
  • Dehumanised, treated as a commodity or bought and sold as 'property'; or
  • Physically constrained or being restricted in his/her freedom of movement.

(Anti-Slavery International)

Inadequate legal and social protection has made the estimated one million low-waged migrant workers in Singapore vulnerable to slavery-like practices such as these.

Debt bondage

The government has made recent efforts to limit the fees employment agencies are allowed to charge. However, migrant domestic workers still pay the first six to eight months salary to their agency less an allowance of ten to twenty dollars per month. Some may have also borrowed money to pay the local recruiter in their country of origin.

They are not allowed to terminate their contracts until the debt is repaid and they may be threatened with harassment and harm if they choose to leave their employment situation. Should the worker switch employers during her loan repayment period, she may have to pay an additional two months’ salary as a ‘transfer fee’.

Similarly, workers in construction, shipping, manufacturing, agriculture, and the services pay up to $9000 to their local recruiters for a job here. A significant portion of these fees is taken by local employers as kickbacks.

Workers who are caught in situations of abuse and exploitation may continue to work for fear of losing their jobs and not being able to repay their debts. As a useful method of compliance, historically, debt bondage has frequently been a feature of migrant employment.

‘Sponsorship’ system

Like the Middle Eastern Kafala system, all migrant workers brought into Singapore are only allowed to work for the employer which brought them in. Only those in the construction and domestic work sectors are allowed to switch employers while they are in Singapore and, even so, only if their employer consents.

Employers also have the unilateral right to cancel work permits and repatriate their employees.  This has led to extremely abusive and exploitative conditions because migrant workers may feel compelled to accept employment terms and conditions that they may not have initially agreed to.    

Low and unfair wages

Live-in domestic workers are expected to perform multiple roles in the household; often, they find themselves working up to sixteen hours a day. Their salaries are approximately $350 to $400 a month. This works out to between 70 cents and 80 cents an hour. Migrant workers in other industrial sectors may earn as little $1.30 cents per hour. These women and men may have been promised higher salaries, only to discover when they arrived that the actual salary paid is vastly different. Hourly-rated workers have to work between 12 – 16 hours a day to earn enough to repay their debts and send money home to their families. 

Exclusion of domestic workers, seafarers and fishermen from labour laws

The Employment Act spells out minimum employment standards and guarantees basic labour rights such as a weekly day off, timely payment of salary, and limits to working hours for all employees in Singapore.  Domestic workers, seafarers and fishermen are expressly excluded from the Employment Act. The absence of legal protection has made them vulnerable to forced labour. 

Security bond requirements

All employers are required to put up a $5000 security deposit which will be forfeited if they fail to repatriate their workers at the end of their contract. This requirement only applies to work permit holders. Many employers therefore feel compelled to withhold passports and restrict the movement and freedom of their migrant employees. Some employers even hire security companies to forcefully repatriate their workers.

Even though the Ministry of Manpower has modified these conditions such that employers are no longer responsible for the personal actions and behaviours of the migrant workers they employ, the existence of the security bond still has the undesirable consequence of perpetuating an unequal relationship between both parties, creating a sense of proprietorship over workers and limiting their freedom and movement.

Weak bargaining power

The formation of associations or societies for migrant workers to promote their rights is highly restricted due to regulations that stipulate that the governing bodies of such associations should have Singapore citizens as the majority.

The Trade Unions Act also forbids foreigners from forming their own unions. Due to these barriers and the lack of financial support, there are no registered associations or unions led by migrant workers in Singapore.   

Positive Developments

The recent announcement by the government to legislate a mandatory weekly day off for migrant domestic workers is one such development. Workers who wish to forgo their day off in return for work will be remunerated one day’s worth of salary. Even though concerns about the unequal bargaining power between employers and workers still means that some workers may be pressured to work on their days off, this long overdue reform is the first step towards recognising the rights of migrant domestic workers.

Singapore has also ratified the International Labour Organisation’s Maritime Labour Convention, which will provide protection to the estimated 1.2 million of the world’s seafarers. It sets out seafarers' rights to decent conditions of work, and aims to combat forced labour and human trafficking in the maritime industry. However, the Convention does not cover fishermen, whose ships dock in Singapore, and many of whom are also victims of abuse and exploitation.  

The establishment of an anti-human trafficking taskforce and the recently announced National Plan of Action to combat human trafficking is another positive development. The government is also reviewing whether it should accede to the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (referred to as the Palermo Protocol).

It has said it will reverse its long standing approach of treating trafficked migrants as immigration offenders who may be punished with jail and caning rather than as victims. Current legislation such as the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act is also under review to strengthen protections for migrant workers.

What else needs to change

In Singapore’s post independence years, its leaders were anxious to create jobs for its people and reduce unemployment figures. In their efforts to attract investors, workers’ rights were limited. Over the decades this has created the mindset that employment conditions and workers rights had to be compromised for economic development.

The ‘commodification’ of labour, whereby workers are stripped down to their bare economic value, has led to our current crisis. Weak labour protections have made it more advantageous for employers to hire and exploit migrant workers, displacing local workers in the process. Productivity levels remain low because there are few incentives for exploited workers to contribute to their companies.

Improving labour standards and mechanisms for redress is perceived as impeding economic development. Equitable relationships between workers, employers, and employment agents will accompany improvements in worker productivity and performance. Employment protections lead to increased productivity. Singapore has much to gain from upholding workers’ rights. It is no surprise that countries with the highest productivity levels are those which have travelled the furthest from slavery.


Jolovan Wham is a social worker who works on migrant labour issues

Photo courtesy of the zeitgeist media project

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

考量体弱者应对医疗开销 读者吁屋契回购计划应更弹性化

建屋发展局处长(分局运作)林丽丽,于本月17日在《海峡时报》回应一读者观点,重申符合屋契回购计划(LBS)的年龄为65岁,不过该局将检讨让年龄标准更为弹性化,特别是让那些面对健康和财务问题的群体能受惠。 事缘一名读者撰写评论,提出屋契回购计划应该对乐龄群体更为亲善些。 名为郑春斐(译音)的民众,提出老一辈许多夫妇,丈夫多年长于妻子,假设丈夫已65岁,但是妻子才53岁,夫妇俩都不能参与屋契回购计划。 “直到妻子也迈入65岁,两人才符合资格,这时丈夫都已经77岁了。”只要丈夫与妻子间年龄差距越大,其中一人能透过屋契回购,享有退休福利的时间就越短。 体弱年长者面对医疗和生活双负担 为此,他建议有关计划的合格条件应更弹性些,特别是有者也因为健康原因提早退休,是否也能够让他们善用计划来保障退休后的收入?特别是他们还要面对医疗和生活开销的双负担? 同时,郑春斐也质疑,为何透过售卖屋契的所得,非得注入公积金退休户口不可? 这让年长者的财务管理选择不多,一些年长者公积金户口本本就没有多少储蓄、且急需现钱用在医疗和退休生活开销。 “屋契回购计划的设定,应让年长者获得更实质的帮助,让他们拥有可支配收入。” 该读者也提出,建屋局并没有阐明,在出售部分屋契后,屋主是否还能出租整间房子,如此屋主可以和子女一起居住,又能从房租中获取额外收入。 对此,林丽丽强调,屋契回购计划让年长者,可回售组屋部分屋契给政府,藉此为退休生活换取稳定、持续的收入。 回售组屋的所得,…

HOME launches fundraising campaign to assist migrant worker suffering from work-related spinal and pelvic injury

An online fundraising campaign launched by the Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics…

SDP calls for independent inquiry following irregularities on Polling Day which prevented a woman from voting

In a media release earlier today (16 July), Singapore Democratic Party (SDP)…

乌节豪杰大厦谋杀案一被告弃保潜逃,法庭发出拘捕令

乌节豪杰大厦谋杀案的其中一名被告弃保潜逃,目前法庭已发出拘捕令。 该起命案发生于今年7月发生的乌节豪杰大厦里,死者疑似与人在夜店起冲突,被人一刀割喉后负伤倒地,送院抢救无效。警方于12小时内将七人逮捕归案,分别是陈云胜(26岁)、陈家兴(26岁)、洪大源(26岁)、萧玉珍(22岁)、陈显扬(27岁)、卢文聪(25岁)以及陈洪成(22岁)共6男1女在谋杀罪名下被控。 原七名被告被控纠众谋杀罪名,但陈洪成、陈家兴与卢文聪随后被改为持有武器的同谋。 而案件原定今日过堂,但陈洪成却缺席。据悉,陈洪成母亲已在三天前向警方报案,尽管予以48小时内寻回,但却一无所获。其代表律师陈俊良向法官表示,将继续担任陈洪成律师直到陈洪成被捕。 为此,陈洪成母亲需在十月出席聆讯解释来龙去脉,并向法庭设法说明1万5000元保金不应该被充公的理由。 7月3日,一名印裔男子不知何故在二楼夜店与人起冲突,离去时似乎出言挑衅,遭人亮刀割喉,重伤倒在商场的门口。 男子随后被送往陈笃生医院抢救,由于伤势过重,严重失血而导致抢救无果。 死者是31岁的沙迪斯(Satheesh Noel s/o Gobidass),根据附近商店的闭路电视拍摄画面,以及证人指出,死者在生前遭五六名男子追打,不久后沿着手扶梯跑下楼,最终倒地在商场门前。 从周围地板血迹而言,死者似乎是负伤后尝试逃跑。死者在不支倒下后,民众用大量纸巾帮他止血,不断与他对话确保他保持清醒。