Join Us on Facebook
Follow Us on Twitter
Response to the Straits Times Forum Page
Straits Times Forum, January 20th 2009
Help with foreign workers' wage claims
I REFER to last Wednesday's report, '55 foreign workers get the boot', in which Jolovan Wham, a migrant worker activist, was quoted as saying that Singapore's labour laws offer little real protection to foreign workers. He implied that they are unable to seek redress once the workers' work permits are cancelled.
This is inaccurate. Wage claims of foreign workers are usually resolved before they return to their home countries, except in certain situations such as when the company is being placed under liquidation. In those circumstances, it would take longer to pursue the workers' wage claims. Nevertheless, as long as foreign workers have lodged their claims with the Ministry of Manpower, their cases will be investigated and pursued, even if they have returned to their home countries. Any money recovered will be remitted to them.
Mr Wham also called for foreign workers to be compensated for the remaining period of their work permits when their employment is terminated. This is impractical as we cannot ignore the reality that in an economic downturn, the demand for workers will fall. This will impact both local and foreign workers.
When employers and workers are unable to settle employment disputes on their own, they should approach the ministry for advice and assistance in seeking a resolution. If workers have wage claims or other complaints, they should report to the ministry early for help to recover their entitlements. Separately, the ministry has stepped up its enforcement action to ensure that employers pay their workers in accordance with their employment contracts and the Employment Act. Employers who have violated the law may face prosecution and debarment from employing foreign workers.
Julia Ng (Ms)
Deputy Director, Corporate Communications
for Permanent Secretary
Ministry of Manpower
A response to 'Help with foreign workers' wage claims' (published 20 Jan 2009), by Ms Julia Ng, Ministry of Manpower
Dear ST,
Ms Julia Ng makes some fair points in her defence of MOM's record against critical remarks by Mr Jolovan Wham. We appreciate that there are protections for migrant workers in Singapore's laws and that workers whose permits have been cancelled do have certain recourses for seeking a resolution of their grievances. That said, it would surprise no-one to be told that we wish for protective measures to be more far-reaching and comprehensive.
We do still think that there are problem areas in the handling of cases of workers whose permits have been cancelled, and it was perhaps these that provoked Mr Wham's comments. For example, those workers who need to stay in Singapore while a case is resolved have few means by which to survive, and might therefore feel undue pressure to accept a resolution of their cases that leaves them well short of full compensation. The MOM seeks to mediate honestly in resolving employer-employee disputes over salary questions, but in conditions where the employer lives in comfort and security and the worker may be shelterless and hungry, the outcome may be prejudiced by circumstances outside the mediation process. This can mean workers getting half of what they are due according to law.
Ms Ng raises serious practical considerations about Mr Wham's proposal for workers to be compensated for their remaining contract period when their employment is terminated early. If it seems unrealistic to compensate workers for the whole of this period, though, two points may be considered. One is that it is all the more important that workers should be paid in full for the time they have already been employed. The other is that most workers have gone into debt to come to work in Singapore, and, just as a citizen might expect to be fully reimbursed by a shop when an item it has sold does not work, so these workers have a legitimate claim to recover their outlay. It is not just a job for Singapore: it needs attention in the workers' home countries too, where a large portion of the debt was originally accrued. But Singapore should surely expect to play some role in ensuring that such workers do not end up returning home poorer than when they decided to come here.
Yours sincerely,
John Gee
President
Transient Workers Count Too
Dear ST Forum,
Ms Ng's letter aims to counter a remark in an earlier Straits Times article in which Jolovan Wham, Executive Director of H.O.M.E., was quoted as saying 'foreign workers here are given little real protection'.
Ms Ng stated that foreign workers wage claims are usually resolved before they return home except in exceptional circumstances. The veracity of this statement depends on what Ms Ng means by 'resolved'. Workers may have accepted settlement terms and agreed to return home, but whether or not the settlement terms equal a fair and just outcome is a different matter. In the past few months, many foreign workers from Bangladesh and China have been repatriated and statements from MOM often claim their cases have been 'resolved'. Yet it is not always the case that these workers are paid fully what they are owed nor are mediation processes necessarily fair.
While a salary case is pending, workers are generally unable to work and cannot afford to stay in Singapore for too long. When cases drag on, workers tend to grow desperate and, under pressure, agree to 'settle' for whatever is given. The alternative, of prolonging their stay with no guarantee of a higher settlement, weighs mediation outcomes heavily towards employers' interests.
Furthermore, it is not unreasonable to expect workers to be compensated for breach of contracts. Citing 'impracticality' and an economic downturn is questionable. A bad economy does not excuse unethical business practices nor flexibility in upholding the law. It must also be pointed out that there have been many cases in which construction workers from China have been fined hefty 'breach of contract' fees despite the fact that their contracts have terms less favorable than the Employment Act and should be void. Companies then deduct large sums of money from the workers' unpaid salaries, citing 'breach of contract fees', before repatriating them. In the past few months, MOM has allowed these 'breach of contract fees' to be deducted from workers salaries during mediation meetings. How is it that this is not considered 'impractical' in an economic downturn?
It is encouraging to know that the MOM is taking the recent media coverage seriously and is acting to ensure employers uphold the Employment Act. We look forward to greater enforcement of existing laws and prosecution of errant employers so that all workers will be protected. After all, it is not the mere existence of laws that provide protection but its active and consistent enforcement.
*The letter was not published.
Dear ST Forum,
I REFER to Tuesday's letter written by Ms. Julia Ng, Deputy Director, Corporate Communications for Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Manpower.
Ms. Ng said that the wage claims of workers in sticky situations such as when their companies are placed under liquidation would take longer to pursue. From recent press reports, this seems to be the case for the Bangladeshi workers who have been affected by the actions of Tipper Corp and other marine companies. There seems to be limited options for them not only do they who have to contend with poor accommodation, insufficient food and lack of jobs, they may have to return home to their countries with a huge debt burden.
In the letter, the issue of compensating foreign workers during the remaining period of their work permits upon termination was also brought up. It is my view that employers should be held responsible for adequately compensating workers who have been laid off. MOM should not just look at settling wage claims of workers who are hit by the recession. This is because these workers have barely any work to start with. How much salaries can they claim then? Moreover, many of these workers come into Singapore by borrowing large sums of money. Where can workers seek redress under such circumstances?
MOM should step up on its public education and remind employers of their obligations. Similarly, workers should be aware of their rights and be able to seek redress without fear of reprisals. There is a need for effective measures to address the problem of workers paying huge sums of money to come to Singapore to work. All these can be achieved through public education and by working proactively with the governments of sending countries, NGOs and unions to ensure exploited migrant workers are treated fairly.
Alvin Tan Cheong Kheng
*The letter was not published.