Debated in Parliament on 15 Feb 2022.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn."
Question proposed.
Sir, let me start by thanking members of the public, students from Cape Yale-NUS and NGOs like ItsRainingRaincoats, Sama Sama and COVID-19 Migrant Support Coalition (CMSC), who are here in the gallery in Parliament to support this Motion, for their unwavering efforts in helping our migrant friends and giving a voice to the voiceless.
Sir, every parent wishes for the opportunity to watch their child grow up. Witnessing your child's first words and first steps are magical moments for any parent. I feel lucky to have been there for my three daughters through their years of laughter, tears, tantrums and, of course, joy over unboxing LOL dolls. Children do grow up so quickly and these precious, fleeting moments will never happen again. It is time we will never get back.
Unfortunately, for most of our low-wage migrant workers, these are milestones they will experience only through phone screens, from thousands of miles away.
Sir, three years ago, I accompanied Hanif, a cleaner at Nee Soon Town Council, as he visited his family back home in Bangladesh and to also welcome his first child into the world. During that trip, I met the wives, parents, siblings and children of Nee Soon Town Council cleaners who had not had the opportunity to visit home. I watched these family members video-call our Nee Soon cleaners in Singapore. I could hardly bear the sight as they wept with heartache and longing for one another.
I met so many of our cleaners' families who have never met their fathers. It is the same for Hanif's son, Al Ameen, who is now three years old. Hanif has not been there to watch his son grow up. He proudly shows me all the photos of his son on his phone, including this morning when we met. But deep inside, I know how painful it must be for him to not be there with his family.
I am sure our migrant workers all wish to be home with their loved ones. Who does not wish to be? But they know that working here gives their family a chance at a better life.
Hanif's wife, Tania, shared quite painfully: "Sometimes, I think, if he can come back to Bangladesh, how amazing that would be. I feel sad and I miss his presence. However, reality is very tough, so he has to work hard abroad for us. Obviously, I feel sad for my son that he will be deprived of his dad's love and affection". As Hanif sums it up, "We are poor people. To survive, we have to make these kinds of sacrifices."
Sir, our migrant workers make extraordinary sacrifices to be here in Singapore. They deserve to be treated with fairness and dignity like anyone else.
Unfortunately, this has not been the case for many migrant workers. Today, I will outline three major problems they face: kickbacks, confinement and exhaustion. I will also propose feasible and impactful solutions to solve these problems.
The first problem is forced kickbacks. Today, many workers are forced to pay kickbacks to their employers. MOM has said that it receives about 960 reports of kickback offences a year, with an average of 102 employers taken to task each year. Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon might not feel this is a widespread problem, but if you break it down, that is one employer every three days in Singapore being taken to task for collecting kickbacks from their migrant workers. One every three days.
Sir, let us also start by being clear: 960 cases is 960 too many. This does not even include the unreported cases and could just be the tip of the iceberg. These are workers earning the lowest salaries in Singapore, forced to return their pay cheques to their bosses just so they would not be fired. If any Singaporean were in their shoes, they would be outraged.
I recently met some migrant workers who had been asked to pay about $3,000 to be allowed to continue their employment. For some, this is more than four times their salary. For these men, being sent home is to be sentenced to financial ruin. They would have no way to repay the loans each of them took to make their way here in the first place. These workers were terrified when they spoke to me. They feared the repercussions of reporting their bosses. What would happen to their job, family and debts? What would happen to them? I could see their hands trembling as they spoke.
A crime had been committed against them, yet their first emotion was not anger but fear. One of the workers told me, "When I came to Singapore in 2016, I paid $14,000, then in 2018, I paid $1,500 for my Work Permit. Now they said that if I don’t give them $3,000 they will fire me. I am a really poor man, I have no money to give them. In this situation, I am really helpless and feeling depressed. I am an honest and hardworking man."
Sir, hearing these stories first-hand reminded me that these 960 cases are not just a statistic. They are humans with mothers, fathers and families, suffering a grave injustice. But let us, for a moment, talk about numbers. MOM says that these cases form "only about 10% of all complaints that MOM receives." This is the wrong comparison. We should be clear about what a forced kickback is. It is a criminal act. It is employers forcing migrant workers, who have no choice but to pay money.
Forced kickbacks are just as damaging to Singapore's rule of law as corruption cases punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act. To put things in context, CPIB received 239 reports of corruption in 2020. This means MOM's 960 kickback reports are more than four times of all corruption cases in Singapore.
It is a massive number. For a nation founded and built on the principle of zero tolerance for corruption, forced kickbacks are an equally severe problem that we have not adequately tackled.
I propose two solutions to this problem.
First, we need to treat kickbacks as seriously as corruption by sharply increasing penalties against employers and individuals caught collecting kickbacks.
I agree with Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon when he said that strict penalties and a strong stance against employers who collect kickbacks are key and that deterrence should be on the side of the employers. But the current maximum sentence of two years of imprisonment and a $30,000 fine under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act is far too low to be a deterrent. Kickbacks are just as damaging as bribes to the integrity of Singapore's systems. They should be treated as severely as bribes.
I propose that the maximum sentence be raised to five years of imprisonment and a $100,000 fine, matching the maximum penalty for bribery cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
My second proposal is to create a permanent scheme that allows migrant workers to change employers.
Currently, we have a temporary programme called the Retention Scheme. This was introduced last year by MOM and the Singapore Contractors Association Limited, or SCAL. Under this scheme, migrant workers who leave their employers get a 30-day window in which SCAL will try to match them to a new employer. This scheme reduces COVID-19-related labour shortages, but also can allow workers to leave abusive employers.
It is an age-old solution that all of us already benefit from. If your boss abuses you and steals from your pay cheque, your first step is surely not to stick around. It is to say I quit and find a new job. Why should migrant workers not get this same opportunity?
My proposal here is not only to make the Retention Scheme a permanent one, but to make it better. MOM said last October that there are plans to cover the manufacturing and marine sector. I hope we can do more and cover all sectors that employ Work Permit holders. The scheme also needs salary controls. Workers should not face a decreased salary, employers should not see bidding wars and Singaporeans should not expect price inflation.
Sir, forced kickbacks trap workers in abusive workplaces. But there is a second problem that traps workers, literally: physical confinement. In a few weeks' time, we will reach a two-year anniversary. This anniversary is not a happy one. It marks two years since our migrant workers have been free to leave their dormitories.
For two years, most of the 300,000 workers living in dormitories have not been able to walk free. They leave their dormitories almost exclusively for work. They do get to use recreation centres (RCs), but these are hardly any substitute for the community, with their limited physical amenities and, most importantly, the absence of the workers' social network.
In the words of Bangladeshi worker Zakir: "It's like we are inside a cage." He described the mental torture of being allowed out of the dormitory only to go to work. Dormitory and work. That is it. He shared how the continued confinement will lead to mental health issues amongst our migrant workers. Another worker, Sharif, said, "This is prison life. This is a captive's life."
Sir, some feel that RCs are a solution. But as Zakir shares, going to the RC only helps a little. Like all of us, migrant workers want to meet friends who are living in other areas in Singapore. They miss one another, a feeling we all understand.
MOM has said that the movement restrictions are "to protect the health of our migrant workers and to mitigate the risk of further transmission". But, for Sharif, he feels more like he is being punished than being protected.
Sir, socialisation, entertainment and physical freedom are basic needs. But these are needs that migrant workers living in dormitories have been denied for far too long now. Our lockdown of migrant workers is also not grounded in risk management principles. Migrant workers, by and large, are at very low risk of putting our healthcare system under a strain. This is based on four factors.
First, they are exceedingly healthy. Last year, 99.9% of COVID-19-infected migrant workers had either no or mild symptoms.
Second, they are tested very frequently. Dormitory residents today have to undergo the Fast and Easy Testing-Rostered Routine. This means they are tested once every seven days. By contrast, the vast majority of Singaporeans do not undergo routine testing.
Third, their place of residence is audited and enforced with health controls. All dormitories are configured to implement Safe Living Measures. Large dormitories face Infection Prevention and Control audits at least once a week. Residents must also complete mandatory COVID-19 education programmes.
Fourth, nearly all of them are fully vaccinated: 98% of dormitory residents are fully vaccinated. By contrast, only about 87% of Singapore's overall population is fully vaccinated.
Healthy, tested, audited and vaccinated. What more could we ask from our migrant workers?
I do understand that dormitories are communal places that carry a heightened level of risk. But we do not place residents of military dormitories under nearly the same kind of restrictions. Would it be acceptable to bar NSFs from booking out for their entire two years of National Service, in the spirit of protecting them? Why do we treat migrant workers living in dormitories differently?
Sir, my recommendation is straightforward: we should allow all vaccinated and boosted migrant workers to enter the general community as long as they comply with their intensive regimes of safe practice and frequent testing. When in the community, dormitory residents will have to comply with all existing safety measures that the general public already have to comply with, such as mask wearing and dining group sizes. Workers should be required to demonstrate understanding of these measures prior to leaving their dormitories by completing quizzes on the FWMOMCare app. Those found in breach of these measures should face a graduated scale of penalties, including restricted access to the community.
I know that Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will share that MOM already has some limited programmes for allowing dormitory residents into the community. Up to 3,000 vaccinated migrant workers may visit the community on weekdays and up to 6,000 on weekends and public holidays. In addition, they are working with community partners to plan and organise events and activities for workers.
Three thousand workers on weekdays and 6,000 on weekends. This means on any given day, only about 2% of dorm residents are free to enter the community. Surely, we will all agree that this is not nearly enough. Would we all sitting here accept letting only 2% of our NSFs into the community?
This drip-drip offering of tiny community visits does not help the vast majority of workers. A broad-based relaxation of movement controls is needed and small-scale community visits are not an adequate substitute.
Sir, our NSFs live, work, shower and eat in a communal setting and are allowed into the community with appropriate safe management measures, such as taking regular tests and being cohorted into smaller groups. These measures allow NSFs to remain part of our community. If there are any additional assurances required before our migrant workers can be allowed into the community, can we apply the same measures for NSFs to our migrant workers?
The third and final problem I will highlight today is exhaustion.
Workers need rest, whether they think they need it or not. We already accept this by mandating holidays and leave entitlements to workers covered under the Employment Act, and by soon requiring foreign domestic workers to take at least one rest day a month.
But this benefit has not been extended to other migrant workers. It is not just a matter of consistency; it is a matter of safety. The year 2021 has been an awful year for workplace safety. The latest statistics from the first half of 2021 showed a higher level of major injuries and fatalities, compared to 2019 and 2020.
It should be no wonder to us that burned-out, overworked workers, pushed to their limits, break the rules and get sloppy.
To some extent, we can blame errant individuals, but we also have to accept the biological fact that a worker’s body, eventually, hits a limit.
Workplace fatigue has been known as a contributing factor of workplace injuries. Our office workers need rest. Our frontline workers need rest. Our foreign domestic workers need rest. Our low-wage migrant workers need it, too.
My proposed solution to this problem is to provide one mandatory rest day a month to all migrant workers. Workers should not be allowed to sell these rest days back to their employers; they should be required to rest. This aligns with what we will apply to foreign domestic workers.
If we all agree that foreign domestic workers need one mandatory rest day a month, then how can we not agree that migrant workers also need one mandatory rest day a month?
Sir, in conclusion, let me summarise the three problems I have highlighted today and the solutions.
First, many migrant workers face forced kickbacks. There need to be much harsher penalties against such law-breaking employers and individuals. Workers also need a universal and permanent programme that allows them to switch employers, with salary limits, to ensure labour costs do not spike.
Second, the vast majority of migrant workers living in dormitories remain without access to the community. Vaccinated and boosted dormitory residents should be allowed to enter the community, subject to all of the intense safe practices and frequent testing that they already face. Small-scale releases should not be seen as the solution.
Third, migrant workers should be given at least one rest day every month that they cannot sell back to their employer. They should be required not to work for that day, similar to foreign domestic workers, so they have some minimum level of rest. This keeps them healthy and would also improve workplace safety.
Kickbacks, confinement and exhaustion. These are core problems facing too many migrant workers in Singapore, and there are feasible, workable, research-based solutions for each of them.
I am not asking for any special treatment for our migrant workers. I am only asking that they be treated fairly and equally, like the rest of us.
I am also not proposing anything new. My proposals merely extend to migrant workers protocols we already have in place for dealing with corruption in the corporate sector, with health risks in military dormitories and with exhaustion among foreign domestic workers.
Sir, at the start of the pandemic, Ministers and Members of Parliament stood in this House, broadcasting our support for the sacrifices of our migrant workers. Our words matter, but so do our deeds.
Migrant workers are members of our society and builders of our nation.
Sir, I started this speech stressing about how difficult it must be for them to live so far from their home and their loved ones. Today is, actually, my daughter Ella’s birthday. Honestly, I feel bad and it does break my heart that I am not able to be there with her today and to spend time with her on this special day. By the time I get home, probably, she will be asleep. I will do my best to make it up to Ella tomorrow and spend some precious time with her.
It is a painful feeling to not be there for your children, a feeling that migrant workers who are fathers must feel each and every day.
Sir, it is a long speech but I do not think any amount of words can adequately describe the difficult lives migrant workers lead – being in debt, being exhausted from the backbreaking work they do, the confinement, earning so little and yet having to pay kickbacks, never being able to hug their own children, some of whom they have never even met. I do not think any of us can truly understand what they go through.
Sir, they miss their families and the least we can do is make them feel like they are a part of the Singapore family. The very least that we can do is to ensure that we treat them with the fairness and dignity that everyone in Singapore deserves.
Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.
Thank you, Sir. Sir, I thank the Member for sharing his concerns and suggestions on how we can create a fairer and more inclusive Singapore for our migrant workers. Indeed, migrant workers have and will continue to contribute immensely to Singapore’s development. They are welcomed members of our society. And MOM is committed to ensure that our migrant workers are treated fairly and that their employment rights and well-being are safeguarded during their time here in Singapore.
MOM agrees with the Member that the collection of employment kickbacks is a serious offence as it shifts the burden of employment costs from employers to workers and increases the debt burden on the migrant workers. Thus, MOM undertakes a multi-pronged approach to detect and deter the collection of employment kickbacks from migrant workers.
Under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA), accused persons, upon conviction, may be sentenced to imprisonment for up to two years or a fine of up to $30,000, or both – per charge. Those who abet the collection of kickbacks will face the same penalties.
To the Member’s suggestion to increase the penalties for kickback offences to match the maximum penalty for bribery cases, I would like to highlight that accused persons can be charged on a per-worker basis. For instance, in 2018, an employer was fined a total of $120,000 for 10 charges for collecting kickbacks from migrant workers. This, in fact, is higher than the $100,000 penalty suggested by the Member.
Substantial fines of $7,000 to $12,000 per charge or short imprisonment terms have been imposed by the Courts. These sentences have not approached the maximum fine or imprisonment term set out under the EFMA currently. This indicates that the current maximum in terms of fine or imprisonment term for the collection of kickbacks has been sufficient for the Courts to impose sentences that reflect the gravity of offences in all previous cases.
On top of the fines and imprisonment terms meted out, the Courts are also obligated to order the offender to pay a sum which is equal to the amount of the sum or other benefit that the offender had deducted or received.
Besides the strict penalties, MOM also actively enforces against employers, unlicensed agents or employment agencies, who collected kickbacks from migrant workers. In recent years, MOM made use of data analytics to identify and detect unusual patterns in hiring practices more quickly and accurately. This has helped MOM to proactively detect cases of employment kickbacks, in addition to complaints that we receive directly.
Migrant workers who are pressurised into giving kickbacks should step forward and report the matter to MOM. Our FAST Team officers were deployed to dormitories or to reach out to the NGOs, many of whom are very active in the dormitories today, such as the Migrant Workers Centre.
We share the Member’s view that migrant workers who are treated unfairly should be allowed to change employers. Migrant workers with valid employment claims, including those who have been forced to pay kickbacks, are permitted to transfer to another employer and continue working here in Singapore. This is an important safeguard for migrant workers who have been unfairly treated.
In addition, measures are in place to facilitate the retention of experienced Work Permit holders in Singapore. Workers can transfer to a new employer at the end of their contract, without the need for the current employer’s consent. This is currently allowed in all business sectors.
The Retention Scheme in the construction sector is an additional effort to retain workers whose employment has been terminated and who wish to continue working in Singapore. Under the Retention Scheme, the Singapore Contractors Association Limited (SCAL) takes over the upkeep and maintenance of these workers and matches them to another employer in the construction sector.
Since its implementation in September 2021, about 430 workers have been enrolled in the scheme. We are in discussions with SCAL on extending the Retention Scheme for a few more months, to support the industry in retaining experienced workers.
At the same time, as we had announced in November last year, we are working with the respective trade associations and chambers (TACs) to implement the Retention Scheme in the Marine and Process sectors as well. The TACs have been preparing for this implementation and, hopefully, would be ready soon. We will provide an update on these in due course.
While these Retention Schemes play a part in ameliorating the manpower challenges faced by the industry today, the fundamental solution is to safely increase the inflow of new workers into Singapore. MOM has, therefore, been facilitating various industry initiatives to progressively allow more Construction, Marine and Process (CMP) sector workers into Singapore safely. Subject to the public health situation, we will continue these efforts to bring in workers safely to support the needs of the industry.
The Member also suggested salary controls for workers who transfer to a new employer. Salary is one of many factors that workers and employers may consider when negotiating a new employment. We should not introduce rigidity into this process by anchoring on an arbitrary salary point or increment rates. Employers and workers should have the flexibility to negotiate employment terms with consideration of various factors, including the worker’s skills and training, and the prevailing market conditions.
Besides ensuring employment standards, we agree with the Member that all employees, including migrant workers, should have sufficient rest to ensure their well-being and safety.
Last year, MOM announced our intention to implement, by end-2022, the requirement for migrant domestic workers to be given at least one rest day per month that cannot be compensated away. Migrant domestic workers work and live in their employers’ homes. Hence, having a mandatory rest day that cannot be compensated away, will provide migrant domestic workers with mental respite and also more opportunities to form a network of support outside of the households.
Let me correct the Member's misperception and, that is, for migrant workers, there are protections under the Employment Act on the maximum hours that employees can work per week and per day, as well as the maximum number of overtime hours per month. These protections apply to all employees, including migrant workers and local employees.
Employers are also required to grant all employees, including migrant workers, at least one rest day without pay per week, unless there is a prior written agreement between the employer and the employee to work on the rest day. The employee must also be provided monetary compensation for working on his rest day. If work is done on the rest day at the employer's request, the employee must be compensated at twice his regular rate of pay.
As a safeguard, employers cannot compel their employees to work on their rest days, unless under exceptional circumstances. Migrant workers who are forced to do so should approach MOM for assistance and we will investigate.
We share the Member’s concern on the importance of workplace safety. Fatigue and overworking can affect a worker’s safety at work. This is why the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council promotes the protection of workers to prevent fatigue through its Total WSH programme, WSH Council guidelines and platforms, such as the annual National WSH Campaign. Last year’s National WSH Campaign emphasised Care Time for workers to take care of their safety and health. Simple actions, such as regular exercise, constantly being hydrated and having adequate sleep, can improve one’s physical and mental health and allow workers to be more alert to unsafe acts or conditions at their workplaces.
Lastly, the Member has asked to allow all vaccinated and boosted migrant workers in dormitories to enter the general community as long as they comply with the current safe management measures and testing regimes. We are very mindful that social and recreation activities are important to the well-being of migrant workers. At the same time, we are also responsible for safeguarding their health and reducing disruption to their lives and work.
The good health outcomes of our workers residing in dormitories were achieved through the steadfast support and significant efforts from all our stakeholders – dormitory operators, employers and the workers themselves as well as many of the NGOs. With COVID-19 still circulating in Singapore and the recent Omicron wave, we must not lift these rules in the dormitories too quickly and risk a re-ignition of cases which will unwind all the gains that we have so painstakingly made in the last two years.
As dormitories are communal settings where transmissions can occur rapidly, MOM’s strategy is, therefore, to take a careful and calibrated approach to progressively allow more migrant workers to visit the community while actively working to make sure that their well-being is taken care of.
First, we have allowed a range of social and recreation activities within the dormitories, subject to group size restrictions and safe management measures.
Second, migrant workers can now visit any Recreation Centre daily. We are also working with Recreation Centre operators and community partners, as well as NGOs, to introduce programmes and new offerings to make the Recreation Centre visits much more engaging.
Third, from 18 December 2021, 3,000 vaccinated migrant workers per day are allowed on community visits on weekdays and 6,000 per day on weekends as well as public holidays. While the visit slots are not fully utilised even today, we are prepared to adjust the quota to allow even more migrant workers to visit the community as the COVID-19 situation improves further.
While the Member highlighted that full-time NSFs similarly stay and work in a communal setting but can remain part of the community, the key difference here is that NSFs would be able to return to their own homes, separate homes, and be quarantined when necessary. This is unlike the dormitory setting where our dormitory-dwelling migrant workers whose fixed place of residence is in a communal setting, making a potential re-ignition of the cases in the dormitories a health risk for many workers.
Having said that, I must put on record our grateful thanks to our migrant workers for their patience, cooperation and support during this pandemic. I want to assure our migrant workers that, in line with the progressive adjustment of the Safe Management Measures for our general community, MOM will calibrate measures to allow more workers to visit the community while ensuring that the risk of COVID-19 is contained.
Sir, taking good care of our migrant workers is a continual effort and MOM will continue to partner stakeholders, such as NGOs and employers, to build a better ecosystem for our migrant workers who have contributed so much to Singapore.
I thank the Member for his Motion. I want to wish his daughter a happy birthday as well.
Mr Louis Ng. One minute, so you could go back a bit earlier. [Laughter.]
May I thank Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon for the reply.
Let me just ask two clarifications then.
One, we have a piece of legislation, quite a serious one, against kickbacks that is broken once every three days. Do we not feel that there is no deterrence and that maybe it is time to review it, at least to see whether it can serve as a deterrent?
Two, I understand that the Retention Scheme expires on 28 February. I think the Senior Minister of State mentioned that they might be extending it a few months. Could I just ask whether that is confirmed just for the construction sector, or are we also going to look into expanding the Retention Scheme to all other sectors, not just the marine and manufacturing?
You have 20 seconds.
Sir, as I have replied, the kickback offences, the penalty today is significant and the Courts have enough leeway to actually mete out harsher sentences if they want to. But yet, at the same time, that has not been exercised to the maximum. So, I think we should allow the Courts to make the judicial assessment of what the maximum fine should be because there is a lot of headroom for them to use under the current law.
As for the extension of the Retention Scheme, as I have said, we are working with the trade associations because there is an implementation mechanism. If we can open it to more sectors, obviously, we can consider that. But you need a receptacle – somebody must want to take the responsibility. So far, we have been talking to trade associations within the process and the marine sectors, who were prepared to do so.
Order. The time allowed for the proceedings has expired. I adjourn the House pursuant to the Standing Order. Order.
The Question having been proposed at 7.47 pm and the Debate having continued for half an hour, Mr Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
Adjourned accordingly at 8.19 pm.
PAPERCUTS