By Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics

Lured by the promise of more pay in Singapore to support their child and ailing parents, Chinese couple Wang Chao and Li Ting Ting borrowed 50,000 RMB (approximately SGD10,000) in response to an advertisement that they would each earn approximately $1500 a month for a two year contract. The husband, Wang Chao was told he would work as a cook and his wife would be a waitress for the same restaurant.

However, Wang Chao was not aware that his employer had applied an Employment Pass for him with a declared salary of $4100 per month even though he did not qualify, and was only to be paid $1200 each month.

Upon his arrival in Singapore, Wang was told to sign 24 documents which were written in English. He later found out they were blank salary vouchers. Workers who are underpaid by their employers are typically told to sign such documents so that in the event of a salary dispute, the employer would be able to fill in any amount he or she likes on the voucher as proof that the worker was paid the correct amount.

To show further that he was in compliance with the law, Wang’s employer set up a bank account under Wang’s name where $4100 was deposited every month. But Wang was not allowed possession of his ATM card, the password or the bank passbook. This ruse allows the employer to escape detection of not paying the declared amount to MOM. In the event that an investigation is launched, the employer can show that the declared amount had been deposited into the account and the worker had been paid.

12 to 14 hour work days with 2 days off a month were the norm for the couple even though such exploitative conditions were not what they were promised. The restaurant was also often short of staff and there were days that they had to serve customers entirely on their own. When they complained of tiredness and fatigue, they were threatened with repatriation. They gritted their teeth and endured the punishing hours because the exorbitant agency fees of $10,000 had to be paid off. The couple finally threw in the towel when the company did not pay them for two months, and they filed a complaint at the Ministry of Manpower.

Bangladeshi worker Rasel Mohammad also found himself in a similar predicament. He was promised a construction job where his duties included site supervision and making estimations and measurements of materials. He was led to believe workdays would be from 8am to 5pm with one hour lunch break and paid overtime. All arrangements would cost S$12000; part of this sum was borrowed from the bank, and the rest from money lenders and relatives.  In October 2014, before he arrived in Singapore, Rasel received a letter from the Ministry of Manpower stating “assembly engineer” as his occupation and “S$ 2600” as his fixed monthly salary on an S Pass.

When he arrived in Singapore in November, he was also pressured to sign several sheets of blank salary vouchers. As he was new to the country and the job, he did not know what to do but follow his employer’s instructions. His employer also appeared well meaning and Rasel trusted him. But the job was not what Rasel expected, as he found out in the days and weeks to come; he had to check on fire extinguishers and clean them out instead of supervising on a construction site.

accommodation_3
Fire extinguishers Rasel Mohammad has to service everyday

 

His hours were from 8 am to 9 pm, without his promised one-hour lunch break. He usually only got 15 minutes for each meal to grab a quick bite, before resuming his duties. He worked for 4 months and 16 days with only three full rest days during the entire period. When he injured his thumb, his employer insisted he continue work, or be sacked. The verbal abuse and threats against him started to escalate. He was also paid less than promised: in the first month it was slightly more than $700; in the second it was S$ 650, in the third he got S$ 600, and in the fourth S$ 525. This is despite the fact that the employer was required by S Pass regulations to pay him at least $2200.

In February this year, Rasel’s employer opened a bank account for him where money in excess of $2000 was deposited and he had to withdraw more than half of it to return to the employer. As happened to Wang Chao, this allows the employer to escape detection from the authorities that he has underpaid his employee.

With HOME’s assistance, he managed to gather sufficient evidence against his employer that he was underpaid, and a complaint was filed at the Ministry of Manpower early this year.

In 2009, the Economic Review Committee recommended increasing foreign worker levies and limiting the quotas by which employers can hire foreigners to reduce reliance on migrant labour and increase productivity. Since then, the government has incrementally imposed stricter quota restrictions and higher levies.

However, this policy has resulted in other forms of abuse as the cases of Rasel Mohammad and Wang Chao have shown. The tightening of restrictions on foreign labour without a corresponding increase in protection has resulted in many migrant workers being unwitting victims of unscrupulous employers who, unable to attract locals to perform these jobs, have resorted to circumventing quota and work pass restrictions by making false work pass declarations, submitting fake education certificates, in addition to pressurising and deceiving workers to be complicit in such arrangements. HOME has seen cases where workers themselves were prosecuted for such ‘complicity’ even though they were not aware that such arrangements were made, or were only aware after they arrived in Singapore and had incurred huge recruitment debts.

Many had to sign vouchers indicating that they had received the declared sum even though they did not. Most had to work punishing hours, lived in decrepit conditions, and were threatened with repatriation or denunciation to the authorities for being complicit in the employer’s false declarations. Some, like Rasel Mohammad are possible victims of human trafficking.

Both Rasel Mohammad and Wang Chao have been waiting for a resolution to their cases. It is still not certain if their employers will be prosecuted as such information is not revealed to the workers or to HOME. In the meantime, HOME is providing financial assistance and social support to the workers.

 

Worker’s names have been changed to protect their identities

Research for the story contributed by Wong Kwang Lin and Gavin Ezra Teo. This article was first published at HOME’s website.

accommodation_1
Rasel Mohammad’s storage and cooking area

 

accommodation_2
Rasel Mohammad’s bed over a counter

 

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

烟霾来袭 环境局:做好准备因应

近日印尼森林大火,烟霾袭击印尼周遭国家,环境局表示已做好准备因应烟霾来袭。 环境局联合28不同政府部门,成立烟霾特别工作小组(Haze Task Force ,简称HTF),于今日(17日)发表声明,已准备好将烟霾的对公众的负面影响降至最低。 声明亦表示,自上周六(14日),我国空气污染指数曾一度进入“不健康水平”,这将或威胁到弱势群体如老人、孕妇、小孩、患有心肺疾病之患者。对此,环境局也制定了相关因应计划,以保护公众的健康。 烟霾特别工作小组于干旱时期为因应烟霾和干旱的天气,以及商榷其他相关计划而联合合作,于每年的五月成立相关小组实施工作。 此外,烟霾特别工作小组也特别呼吁民众应在烟霾来袭之际注意健康,减少户外活动、多喝水补充水分,若有任何身体不适之处,请尽速就医。 环境局与卫生部自今年4月起,已于各个经销商合作,准备更多N95口罩以备不时之需。一旦空气污染指数达不健康水平以上,建议长时间在外的民众或弱势群体带着口罩出门。 据《联合早报》指出,我国年度体育盛事世界一级方程式(F1)赛车新加坡大奖赛将如期在本星期五(20日)举行,而新加坡旅游局和主办方表示会密切关注烟霾情况,必要时会为观众提供口罩。 若24小时空气污染指数突破200点,进入非常不健康水平,或一小时PM2.5指数高出151点达“高等水平”,主办方会在现场售卖N95口罩。弱势群体如年长人士、儿童、孕妇和心肺疾病患者,则可免费领取口罩。

有意大利籍乘客 遭马、泰拒绝靠岸游轮提早返新

一艘被泰国和马来西亚政府拒绝靠岸的意大利游轮,目前已提早返航,预计明日(10日)抵达新加坡。 根据新加坡海事及港务管理局(MPA)今日(9日)发布的文告,有关游轮歌诗达幸运号(Costa Fortuna)刚在本月3日从新加坡离开,且乘客再登船前,都已根据游轮管理层要求,进行离境前检查旅行记录和体温检测。 文告也指该游轮已在海事健康声明(Maritime Declaration of Health)申报,其乘客目前均未出现发热或其他呼吸道疾病症状。 “在登船前,船上医生会检查乘客和船员的健康。至于所有进入新加坡的乘客需进行体温检测。” 至于出现发烧或其他呼吸道症状的乘客,将需要进行COVID-19拭子测试(swab test),若拒绝测试则不得进入我国。 据了解该游轮上有64名意大利籍乘客。由于马国和泰国不准该游轮靠岸,致使游轮无法前往泰国普吉岛和槟城停留,只得提前返航。 至于歌诗达幸运号的公司歌诗达(Costa…

HK media tycoon Jimmy Lai returns to office following arrest, tells staff to “fight on”

Hong Kong pro-democracy media mogul Jimmy Lai reported back to work at…

Maggots found inside mini chicken sausage bun from Four Leaves

A Facebook post of a bun sold by Four Leaves which was…