FOREIGN DOMESTIC WORKERS

FOREIGN DOMESTIC WORKERS:

(Payments of medical bills): 11.

Mr Baey Yam Keng:

Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Manpower in cases where employers of foreign domestic workers are not able to afford the full payment of their maids' medical, hospitalisation and related bills (a) what are the options available to the employers; (b) whether it is possible to put a cap on the maximum liability of the employer; and (c) whether part of the foreign maid levies collected can go towards a fund to pay for the excess beyond the maximum liability.

Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how the new minimum medical insurance coverage of $15,000 for foreign domestic workers (FDWs) compares with other countries; (b) what are the percentages, numbers and medians of hospital bills in excess of $5,000 incurred by FDWs over the last three years; and (c) what is the rationale for requiring employers to face unlimited liability for their FDWs' hospital bills compared to the standard employment contract in which employers have limited liability for their employees' hospital bills.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower (Mr Hawazi Daipi) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I take Question Nos. 11 and 12 together?

Mr Speaker: Yes, please.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Employers have all along been responsible for the upkeep and

Column: 1581

maintenance of their foreign domestic workers, including their medical treatment, under the work permit conditions. When healthcare subsidies for foreigners were removed from 1st January 2008, we mandated employers to purchase and maintain medical insurance for S Pass holders, Work Permit holders, and foreign domestic workers. This was to help employers mitigate and manage their exposure to the cost of medical care for their foreign workers and foreign domestic workers.

We have received feedback on some cases of medical bills that have far exceeded the minimum coverage of $5,000 set initially. Last year, about one out of every 10 hospital bills for foreign workers and foreign domestic workers was in excess of $5,000.

To help reduce employer’s exposure to potentially large hospital bills, MOM announced last month that the Government will increase the minimum insurance coverage to $15,000 a year with effect from 1st January 2010. However, employers may choose to obtain higher coverage on their own accord if they wish to have greater protection.

For cases where the medical bills exceeded the coverage, the employers will have to pay the difference. Employers who face difficulties in paying medical bills beyond the insured amount may approach the hospital directly to discuss various options, such as instalment payments.

We should not cap the maximum medical liability on an employer. Employers, who make the decision to bring foreign workers into Singapore, should bear the cost of their care. Otherwise, hospitals will run deficits, which are ultimately paid for by the taxpayer.

Column: 1582

The purpose of the foreign worker levy is to regulate the demand for foreign manpower. As with other taxes and levies collected, revenue arising from the foreign worker levy is channelled to the Consolidated Fund and forms part of the Government’s revenue to finance Government expenditures in general. The Government does not earmark specific levies for specific expenditure purposes.

Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, medical insurance usually has a maximum coverage, so it may not help the employer to purchase additional medical insurance for the foreign domestic worker. And I would like to ask whether MOM has also considered the fact that employers of foreign domestic workers are mere individuals and are not corporations. Hence, these employers are unlikely to also have the resources, like companies, to take care of cases where there are extremely high medical bills for their foreign domestic workers and especially when the subsidies for healthcare have been removed for foreigners. Would he also not agree that the foreign domestic workers themselves would not also be able to afford the fees themselves? And could the Ministry consider again using part of the levy or charging something separate so that there is a consolidated pool to go towards helping employers paying beyond the minimum insurance coverage?

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, I thank the Member for his suggestion. We will require all employers of foreign workers, including foreign domestic workers, to take care of the medical needs and the upkeep of their foreign workers. This means that they have to buy the medical insurance beyond which coverage they will have to bear on their own.

But in case any employer has difficulties, then they can approach the hospital concerned directly to work out the payment plan or to seek assistance

Column: 1583

from the hospital. That, I think, the employers can try to work out with the hospital.

We will leave it to the employers to decide on their own whether or not to have higher coverage of insurance for their foreign domestic workers or foreign workers. We will not set the limit to any insurance coverage but we will leave it to the employers to decide.

Mr Speaker: Mr Baey, last question.

Mr Baey Yam Keng: Mr Speaker, I am afraid the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has not addressed a part of my question, ie, in Singapore, companies which employ either Singaporeans or foreigners do not have unlimited liability for the workers' medical bills. So, why is it that employers of foreign domestic workers have that liability?

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, for local workers, we require employers to purchase insurance coverage under the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA) that covers the workers in case they meets with injuries during work. We do not have that for the foreign domestic workers. That is why, as a result of the removal of the subsidy for foreign domestic workers and foreign workers, we would require employers of foreign workers to buy insurance coverage first, initially, for $5,000 and from January next year, we will require them to buy insurance coverage for a minimum of $15,000.

This is to explain to the Member that we actually require employers of local workers to buy insurance coverage under WICA for their local workers. We think that we should leave it to the employers to decide on the maximum limit of insurance coverage for medical purposes for their foreign workers.