ABUSE OF FOREIGN MAIDS (Standards of employment and welfare)

Mdm Halimah Yacob asked the Minister for Manpower whether he will consider (i) stipulating minimum standards of employment for employers who hire foreign maids and (ii) appointing inspectors to ensure the observance of these standards and monitor the welfare of foreign maids.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong asked the Minister for Manpower in light of the maid abuse cases in Singapore whether he will consider (i) holding the maid agencies responsible for the welfare of foreign maids; and (ii) making it mandatory for doctors and nurses who conduct regular medical check-ups on these maids to ask if they have been physically abused by their employers.

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Manpower what measures will his Ministry take to prevent maid abuse, especially after the last reported case when a maid suffered about 200 personal injuries.

The Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Ng Eng Hen) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, can I take the three Questions from Ms Irene Ng, Mr Chiam See Tong and Mdm Halimah on maid abuse collectively?

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Let me first declare unequivocally to this House that the Government deplores ill-treatment of foreign domestic workers. We have and will continue to deal with abusive employers firmly. My Ministry reiterates its call for employers to treat foreign workers with dignity and respect. Indeed, the vast majority of foreign domestic workers in Singapore are well treated and have found work in Singapore to be rewarding. Regrettably, there remains a very small group of employers who treat their foreign workers shamefully. To this group, let me remind them that we are resolute in punishing errant employers who abuse their foreign domestic workers. As a strong deterrent against abuse, the Penal Code was amended in 1998 to enhance penalties committed against a domestic worker by one and a half times. Since then, the number of abuse cases has declined significantly. According to the Police, the number of substantiated abuse cases has dropped from 157 cases in 1997 to 41 cases in 2001 and 8 cases up till June this year. This shows that firm action and deterrent penalties are effective measures against such abuses.

Let me now respond to Ms Irene Ng and Mr Chiam See Tong's queries more specifically. My Ministry had, in May, this year announced a mandatory accreditation scheme for employment agencies dealing with foreign domestic workers to help upgrade their professional standards.

Accredited employment agents who put in greater effort to recruit, train and prepare foreign domestic workers for work in Singapore households will ensure a better match between the employer and foreign domestic worker. This will foster a more healthy employer-foreign domestic worker relationship and reduce the potential for conflict, complaints and abuses.

On the suggestion to make it compulsory for doctors to ascertain if a foreign domestic worker has been physically abused, the Member of Parliament may wish to know that under the Criminal Procedure Code, anyone, including the doctor who is aware of physical abuse, has a legal obligation to report the matter to the Police. The Ministry of Health and my Ministry are currently working on a set of guidelines to help doctors better identify cases of physical abuse. Doctors will also be reminded to report cases of abuse.

However, it would be prudent to focus more on preventing abuse of foreign domestic workers. Accordingly, we will require first-time employers of foreign domestic workers to undergo a mandatory orientation programme. This measure will enhance the Ministry's ongoing educational efforts to promote good employment practices, harmonious working relationships and mutual respect. The orientation programme will also highlight to employers the severe consequences they face if they abuse their foreign domestic workers. Details of the orientation programme will be announced in due course.

The present debate on maid abuse has also led to calls for the Government to impose minimum standards of employment, as suggested by Mdm Halimah, to protect foreign domestic workers. Unlike other workers, foreign domestic workers work and stay in their employer's house throughout the day. The nature of work, the duties performed and the standard of performance also vary from household to household. It is, therefore, not practical to lay down in law standard rules regarding the specific employment conditions for foreign domestic workers. For example, it is difficult to determine the actual hours of work for foreign domestic workers since they perform active work interspersed with some free time.

Having prescribed rules would make it difficult for employers and foreign domestic workers to comply, and also for the authorities to enforce them.

Notwithstanding the difficulty of defining standard conditions of employment, my Ministry has always encouraged employers and their domestic workers to work out defined terms, based on mutual agreement and on the specific needs of the two parties, to avoid any misunderstanding. Many foreign domestic workers have signed written contracts with their employers with the help of their employment agents and, in some instances, with the help of their Embassies. I agree with Mdm Halimah that this practice should be further encouraged.

To safeguard the welfare of foreign workers, my Ministry has set up a Foreign Workers Unit to provide free conciliation services for those who encounter work-related problems with their employers. The Unit works closely with the Embassies of the foreign workers concerned, and has been able to resolve practically all disputes amicably.

We would like to remind employers of foreign domestic workers that they are ultimately responsible for the welfare of the foreign domestic worker. It is an employer's duty to take good care of the workers under their employ. The penalties for abusing these workers are severe.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman (Sembawang): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of State talked generally about physical abuse of domestic maids. My work with victims of domestic violence suggests that, often times, other forms of abuse are precursors to physical violence or abuse. In order to prevent physical abuse of domestic maids, what are the measures that have been taken to detect other forms of abuse that may happen in a household, rather than wait until physical abuse actually takes place?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: The Ministry's approach is two-pronged. One is specific, the other general.

Specifically, we would like to allow the maids to have avenues for complaint. That is why we issue advisories. They are written in about 17 languages, because our foreign domestic workers come from 17 language-based regions. We also give hotline numbers so that they have avenues or recourse to reporting such abuses.

The second, and more general approach, is to raise the threshold of reasonableness for employers. This is more difficult, because we have more than 140,000 foreign domestic workers and, therefore, more than 140,000 employers and their household members. The threshold for reasonableness and, therefore, the potential for other forms of abuse can vary from household to household. A household may declare it does not quite consider it abuse, but it may indeed be abuse. How do we raise this threshold of reasonableness? One, as we said, is that we encourage written contracts to stipulate mutual terms of employment. The other, which I have already mentioned, is the maid accreditation scheme. There are currently about 800 employment agencies that deal with placement of foreign domestic workers. We would like to raise this level so that the employment agencies can help better train and orientate these foreign domestic workers before they join the households. The other aspect is the mandatory orientation programmes which I have also mentioned, where both the employer and employee come for a course and we can explain the terms and conditions, and what to expect from one another. This will raise the general level of threshold to what would be a healthy relationship.

Having said that, the majority of foreign domestic workers who work in Singapore, do find it rewarding. The number of abuses has come down, but we will continue to add on to the efforts that have been successful.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is my understanding that maid agencies themselves are sometimes guilty of abuse of maids. I wonder how the accreditation system will be able to weed out such maid agencies.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the hon. Member knows of any specific instances where an employment agency has abused a maid, please let us know and we will take the employment agency to task.

How do we ensure that the maid accreditation system weeds out employment agencies which are not performing up to par? As I said, accreditation is not a specific programme but more a general one. We think that if we raise the level of performance of the maid employment agencies and have minimum standards and programmes which will raise their level of professionalism, a number of leaders will emerge who will give value-add to those employers who want foreign domestic workers and who will also be more responsible for the foreign domestic workers.

So the answer is that it does not quite prevent specific abuses. If there are specific abuses, we will deal with them legally. If we wait until they happen, then it is really too late.

Mdm Halimah Yacob: Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand, from what the Minister of State says, that it is not possible to describe all the terms and conditions, one example being working hours. But I still think it is possible to consider prescribing some minimum terms, eg, number of rest hours a day, rest days a week, annual leave, sick leave, etc. Will the Minister consider that?

Secondly, on the question of inspectors, is it possible for the Ministry to consider appointing inspectors to do random checks? I understand it is not possible. If there are 140,000 maids, there are probably 140,000 households but, at least, the random checks done on such households will act as a deterrent to employers who employ maids to behave in a humane and fair manner towards their maids.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mdm Halimah has touched on a number of points. We need to deal with them separately.

One, encouraging employers and their maids to have prescribed working conditions, and I have said we do encourage it. Two, trying to craft it in legislation. This is an issue of enforcement. Even if we had these minimum conditions, can we enforce them? She therefore suggests that we employ inspectors. There is a balance to this. How much do we want to intrude into households versus protecting the maids? We have moved somewhat along those lines, in terms of the accreditation scheme for employment agencies, where we require them to check on the maids who are placed with the employers twice within six months from commencement of work. So, that is moving somewhere. To have a full force of inspectors going from house to house periodically asking how the maids have been treated, how they are, and seeing whether the terms of the employment conditions have been met, is a radical jump. I am not sure whether that is the way to move. It is an intrusion. We do not think that the situation of maid abuse quite warrants that drastic measure because, as I have mentioned, eight cases were reported and there has been a drop. So, our measures seem to have worked. We will move on the more encouraging measures before we move more into enforcement.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, I am glad to hear that the Government is introducing this orientation programme for maids. I am certain that this will be a very useful programme.

I also note that some of the maids employed in our households are rather young. Will the Government consider a minimum age below which they cannot be employed? As regards training, I understand that the training given by the agencies to the maids comprises only one day. I am certain that it is not enough. Will the Minister consider asking the agencies to probably double the period of training?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: I need to check on Mr Chiam's point on minimum age. I think it exists, but I am not sure at what point it is prescribed.

In terms of training, the hon. Member is quite right that we need a holistic solution. I do not want to be prescriptive and say it has to be 'x' number of hours. What we do want is a minimum standard to be achieved. The only way we can do that is, one, to have an accreditation system first; two, a training facility; three, a prescribed programme; and, four, a carrot-and-stick approach. Case Trust has come forward to offer to implement this accreditation system for us and we have accepted, but my Ministry has also said that we are open to any employment agency or association that can put forth a programme that satisfies our requirements. But the overall aim and the final goal are that we want to raise the level, to make sure that employment agencies, as the hon. Member said, train and also put some care into the placement, ie, match the employer and his worker.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Clarification, Sir. While the number of reports of physical abuse of maids has come down - and the Minister of State earlier mentioned about the different options and avenues that maids can actually lodge complaints should there be any forms of other abuse - I wonder what is the extent of such complaints of other forms of abuse of domestic helpers at this time, or even within the last few months, in relation to ascertaining the extent of problems with regard to maid abuse.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: The hon. Member is an expert on social matters, and I am sure he is aware that mental abuse or non-physical abuse varies from one person to another. I am sure if we took a poll on the Members sitting in this House, some or even many of us may be mentally abused today! The percentage will vary from day to day. So, it is difficult to quantify. More importantly, we want to create access and avenues for any foreign domestic worker who thinks that she has been abused, to be able to contact a particular agency, whether it is MOM or the police, for us to be able to investigate that. And that has been made available. I do not have the specific numbers. I am not quite sure whether we capture it in terms of mental or physical abuse, but we have captured all cases of abuse generically, and the numbers I have mentioned stand.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen (Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, based on the number the Minister of State has mentioned, would he not say that the percentage of households having maids in Singapore is rather high and, in my view, maybe among the highest in all communities in the world? Has the Ministry studied what is the propensity of Singaporean households having maids, and what measures have been considered to reduce this dependency?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the hon. Member's point. He is quite right. The number of foreign domestic workers has increased despite the recession. There are really two ways, or a combination of the two, to reduce the number. One, the levy; two, the quota. The quota is difficult because it means that the Ministry has to decide a priori who is fit or whose need is greater for a foreign domestic worker, which leads us to the second recourse, and the Ministry is studying ways to implement that.

Assoc. Prof. Ngiam Tee Liang (Nominated Member): It is heartening to note that the mandatory orientation programme for first-time employers is being considered. Maybe, just to get an idea of the shape of things to come, would the Minister just give some idea as to who will be organising it and what would it cover, so that we can see the usefulness and value for those who have to go through it, because the usual psychological block again is: why another enforced mandatory scheme for first-time employers?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, we will announce the details in due course, but let me just give Members the schematics. The reason for this scheme which we thought would help is that - Mr Chiam said for the maid, but it is not quite for the maid - it is really for the employer and the employee both to be put in the same room before she starts work, and for a third party to explain the conditions and what it means to work in a household. Whether we do it through a third party or MOM engages professional bodies for it to be done, we have to work out the details. But that very act sends a number of signals to both the employer and employee. It sends a signal to the employer that, yes, the foreign domestic worker is under his employ but he has to be responsible because there are bodies within the Government and professional organisations who are also looking after the welfare of this lady, and this worker can have recourse to MOM or other agencies. It also sends a signal to the maid that there are rights and that she can be protected and this is where she can turn to.

I think over and above that, it also helps set out a tone before a foreign domestic worker works in the household that this is an employer-employee relationship. I think that will be the more useful signal that we are going to send.

Mr Speaker: I will allow another two more questions and then move on to the next Question.

Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines): I would just like to ask the Minister of State why he is confining these orientation courses to just first-time employers. Certainly those who have employed maids before ought to be reminded from time to time of their obligations to and of the maid's rights as an employee in their household. Therefore, I would like to know whether or not the Ministry would consider encouraging subsequent employers to refresh themselves on the obligations and the treatment of maids in the future.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the majority of households who employ maids treat their maids well. The numbers reflect that. We do not want to make it onerous so that every time you change a maid - and there are many reasons why a maid who joins one particular household needs to go back or she finds it not suitable - you have to attend an orientation programme. I think that would be creating difficulties where it is not necessary. But we will monitor. If this particular programme for first-time employers does not seem to do the trick, we will decide on whether we should extend it.

Mr Charles Chong (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of State, in an earlier response, mentioned that the threshold of reasonableness in households varies tremendously. In fact, there are 140,000 households with maids in Singapore. He also mentioned that his Ministry intends to raise this minimum threshold of reasonableness. Would it then not be timely that his Ministry publish what it thinks is the minimum level of threshold of reasonableness?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, if you had to publish, for example, that you should not abuse a maid, that is not something that we need to publish, that is something we already know and something you can act against. You do not need a contract to say that you will not abuse her physically. That is understood. Whether we should move the other way and say she should work X number of hours a day, she should only do prescribed activities within the house, I think it will be difficult. It varies from household to household and we need to be realistic. I think the acid test at the end of the day is for the employer to ask if perchance a relative of his goes to a different country and works as a foreign domestic maid, would he have that employer in another country treat his relative the way he treats his maid?

Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong (Non-Constituency Member): Point of clarification, Mr Speaker, Sir. The Minister of State said just now that they are looking into the second option of reducing the number of maids in Singapore, which is fees. I hope the Minister of State would clarify that he is not thinking of increasing the maid levy in this aspect.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, let me congratulate Mr Chia on his quickness.

Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung (Sembawang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not wanting to put too much mental abuse on anybody, particularly on the Minister of State. Obviously, younger maids will be more vulnerable and may be more vulnerable to abuse and so on. The Minister of State did not know what the minimum age is. May I ask him to undertake, if the age is below 21 years, to consider seriously that the minimum age should be set at 21 years which is, after all, the age of adulthood and the age where a contract can probably be made.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Yes, we will undertake that but as I understand it, our minimum age prescribed is consistent with international standards. But I take his point.

Mr Sin Boon Ann: Mr Speaker, Sir, while I can understand the difficulties of legislating standards as regards the treatment of maids, surely, it will not be asking too much of the Government to set standards which are not necessarily enforceable but are guidelines by which we expect maids to be treated. These guidelines can then set the benchmark as to what is reasonable conduct on the part of the employer and employee.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, we do have a peculiar characteristic, that is, we do like to enforce what we set out as guidelines, and that is not a bad thing. We do have guidelines that encourage the employers and employees to go into a written contract. But whether you want to enforce it in law or whether you can do it, I think it is a different matter. But let us have a bit of perspective. The number of cases of reported abuse is 8 for the first half of this year. It has come down. It shows that our enhancement of penalties has worked. Whether we should craft legislation to be more restrictive and more onerous, I think the numbers will help us to move towards any particular direction.

Ms Braema Mathiaparanam (Nominated Member): Sir, during the two checks that are made to the employer's home in the six months, if the employer does not adhere to the contract, how would the Ministry then know what to do with this agency and what happens to their accreditation? My second question is: is there an "1800" number available to all maids who come in? Sorry for my ignorance. If not, can we see that something be done, if possible, about it?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Yes, there is a "1800" number. With regard to her first question that during the two checks carried out by the employment agency and they find that there is unhappiness on either party, I think they would usually see whether they can make a second placement. I am not sure whether that was her question.

Ms Braema Mathiaparanam: What I was saying is what happens to their status if the contract is made between the employer and employee, the agency comes in to do their checks and the employer is flouting the contract. How would the Ministry know that the agency is not reporting or mediating in this case? What happens to their status after that?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: As I have said, under the Criminal Procedure Code, anyone who knows of abuse is bound to report it legally. So if we find that a particular employment agency was aware of the abuse and did not report it, we have a recourse to prosecution.

Mdm Halimah Yacob: A point of clarification, Sir. The Minister of State said that there are guidelines. I would like to find out from the Minister of State whether these guidelines are effective and if there is any employer that flouts the guidelines, what are the powers available to the Ministry to enforce these guidelines.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, can I clarify from Mdm Halimah what guidelines she is referring to?

Mdm Halimah Yacob: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of State mentioned about the presence of guidelines in response to a question raised by Mr Sin Boon Ann when he was asking whether, short of legislating those standards, there are guidelines. The Minister of State responded by saying yes, there are guidelines. My question is: are those guidelines effective? And if those guidelines are not complied with, what are the powers available to the Ministry to enforce them?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I was under the impression that the guidelines refer to employment conditions. This would be a similar response to what Mdm Halimah previously asked, that is, it is quite one thing to say that there should be suggested guidelines which the employer expects of the working conditions for the employee in order to craft it in law. I said that the situation suggests that we do not quite need to move towards that because the number of abuses has not been that great. We are not satisfied, but it tells us that we do not have to make it that onerous for employers. But as I have mentioned, there are also other aspects that need not be written in any guidelines which we will prosecute, for example, maid abuse, which is what we are discussing.

On one hand, it is the general aspect of raising the threshold of how you treat your foreign domestic worker. I think that would take time, that would evolve. It is not something that you can prescribe at this point of time because it would change. What is normal or what is expected for one household is not quite the same for another. How do you raise the overall standards? I think our measures have worked in most instances and we will continue to see how this mandatory orientation programme works, what improvements it brings and what improvements it needs before we decide on further avenues.

Mr Speaker: Mr Sin, this is the last question.

Mr Sin Boon Ann: Mr Speaker, I do not understand because, on the one hand, the Government is saying that we want to raise the general standards by way of determining what is a reasonable threshold for the public. On the other hand, I sense that the Government is fighting shy of setting standards and guidelines which need not necessarily be founded in contracts. The Government can unilaterally set certain standards that the Government expects employers to follow and whether or not these employers follow these guidelines is really up to the employers and for the general public to take a different view of it if they fail to follow these standards. But it need not necessarily be enforced as suggested by the Government.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it would be wrong to say that the Government fights shy of setting guidelines. I think the Government wants to make sure that we can effect the change, rather than grandstanding and posture. It is the exact reason for the maid accreditation system because you can come up with a sheet and say that is what you do. But would people follow you? Which is why we have the employment agency accreditation scheme so that we can make sure that there is an intermediary. We have 140,000 employers. We have these maid agencies which are in closest contact with these employers placing these maids. How do you effect the change that you want? It is quite one thing to say what you want and it is quite another thing to effect that change. This is the direction that we are moving. We are not only stating how we want these guidelines prescribed but we are also trying to see that they are regulated and implemented.