Even as the case of the six workers from Xuyi was being resolved, whole new hordes of Chinese workers, some from Xuyi, others from Woh Hup, and yet group another building Sentosa Cove, were descending on the Ministry of Manpower and appealing to the TWC2, a non-government organisation (NGO) involved in foreign worker issues, for help.

I could hardly keep track of all the emerging stories. In any case, I thought my job was done, as the mainstream media was finally beginning to report on such issues.

On 22 and 23 December, the case of 179 Bangladeshis thrown out of their living quarters came to light. Both the Straits Times and 'Today' newspaper reported it, though, as you would no doubt notice, with a positive spin:.

The 180 Bangladeshi workers who were abandoned at their Tagore Lane living quarters may soon be paid.

Employer Tipper Corp told The Straits Times it has received instructions from the Manpower Ministry to pay the workers within the next two weeks.

A spokesman for the company said it 'is bound to pay the salaries' and it will pay the full outstanding amount.

The saga of the 180 Bangladeshi workers started 12 days ago, when they were told by one of the two subcontractors who hired them that there was no more work and they would not be paid their salaries. The subcontractors then abandoned the workers.

Last Wednesday, meal deliveries stopped and the electricity and water was cut off. Since then, their employer Tipper Corp has provided the workers with food and moved them to a workers' dormitory in Kranji.

-- Straits Times online breaking news, 22 Dec 2008,
Firm told to pay up in 2 weeks

Bangladeshi workers abandoned by their employer, Tipper. Photo from the Straits Times, 22 Dec 2008.

 
Actually, some of the workers had to sleep on the streets. As 'Today' newspaper reported,

18 workers stranded outdoors over the weekend at Jalan Kayu have been provided accommodation by the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics. Claims for salaries allegedly owed to them have been submitted to MOM. . The workers were allegedly kicked out of their Tuas dormitory as the rent had not been paid.

-- 'Today' newspaper, 23 December 2008,
Wages assured, but 179 workers may be sent home

According to MOM, the company unilaterally cancelled the work permits of six claimants, without applying for Special Passes to allow them to remain here pending the settlement of their claims. The six would have thus flouted immigration laws, and could be jailed and fined.

"MOM takes a serious view of such conduct by the employer, which jeopardizes the conciliation process," said a spokesman. The employer was warned for failing to pay its workers on time, and "its irresponsible conduct" of cancelling the permits.

-- 'Today' newspaper, 31 December 2008, 
Are these workers just the tip of the iceberg?

Isn't it interesting, the change of tune by the Ministry of Manpower? Their reply to the media is starkly different from their own behaviour that I documented in my earlier articles.

The case of these 200 (actually 226) was resolved relatively quickly (or so it seemed), but not before the employer tried to solve it unilaterally. See box at right.

China workers unhappy with their employer Huaxing, outside the Ministry of Manpower. Photo from the Straits Times, 3 Jan 2009.

 
A few days later, the Straits Times reported that

Most of the 226 construction workers from China, who showed up at the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) office last week over salary disputes with their employers, have accepted a settlement and are staying on here.

Following the ministry's intervention, 171 of them have decided to continue working here. Another 53 have decided to go home and the remaining two will take their claims to the Labour Court.

The unhappiness of these work permit holders came to light last Tuesday, when some 200 of them gathered at the ministry's building.

-- Straits Times, 5 Jan 2009, Most workers
agree to settlement; 2 decline

And finally, over the case of the Bangladeshis,

In a statement yesterday, the Ministry of Manpower said it will be hauling to court Tipper Corporation and that "similar action will be considered for Gates Offshore and Goldrich Venture once investigation is completed".

MOM will also be charging Tipper and its two sub-contractors, S1 Engineering and UPNB, for illegally deploying foreign workers hired by Tipper to other companies, as this is an offence under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act. 

The Ministry added that all five companies under investigation have been barred from hiring new foreign workers. 

Matters came to a head last year when it was reported that almost 700 hundred foreign workers had not been paid their salaries, with some of them living in unhygienic conditions.

[snip]

The Ministry said it "will not hesitate to take action under the Employment Act or the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act against employers who fail to pay salaries on time, or fail to upkeep and maintain the foreign workers they have brought in".

Errant employers can be charged and fined up to a maximum of $5,000 with respect to inadequate upkeep and maintenance of each foreign worker.

Employers who fail to pay their employees could be fined up to $5,000 or jailed for up to six months, or both.

-- 'Today' newspaper, 12 Jan 2009, At least one firm
to be charged. Five companies under
investigation barred from hiring foreign help

 
Wasn't that what I had earlier said the Manpower Ministry should do but wasn't doing? That they should be threatening these companies with prosecution if they treat their workers in this way, otherwise the employers would have no motivation to be fair? These are clear violations of the law. By only hosting round after fruitless round of "mediation", and ignoring the forcible seizing of workers for deportation, the ministry was abetting such crimes.

* * * * *

 
And yet, it still won't be enough, because the problem is a complex one, and dealing with it only after complaints surface is no cure.

If I have to put a finger to one thing that lies at the heart of the problem, it is this: Singapore's economic model is based on cheap labour from around the region. The cheaper the better. If abuses have to accompany cheapness, we'll take the cheap and turn a blind eye to human rights abuses.

Nothing will much improve until we have a change of heart.

Compounding the problem is another attitude of our government: Employers create wealth and therefore must be supported. Foreign workers are potential troublemakers, miscreants and overstayers and must be managed like animals. As soon as their usefulness is spent, kick them out. What has human rights and justice got to do with anything?

But let's come back to cheapness. I am not at all suggesting that we should pay top dollars for third world labour. Neither are the workers asking for that. However, through neglect, we have allowed a system to arise that guarantees trouble even before the workers land here. This, even as some simple solutions won't cost anything significant.

So why do we still have a habit of looking away when abuses occur? You can call it what you want -– elitist cold-heartedness perhaps -– but there is simply no political will to improve the system.

The seed of trouble is sown when poor villagers in India, China, Bangladesh or anywhere else imagine Singapore to be some kind of El Dorado. Big money to be earned, month after month, year after year.

We know this is not true. Our economy, particularly our construction sector, is an unusually cyclical one. Three times in the last decade, our economy has nosedived. But the villagers do not know that.

They rely on unscrupulous local labour agents (Indians, Bangladeshi, Chinese, etc) for information about prospects in Singapore, and of course they are given all sorts of wild promises. These labour agents also want to be paid upfront, and so the poor villages borrow what may be five years' earnings to pay the labour agent for a chance at a job.

No construction boom in Singapore has lasted five years, which means that many of these men will not see out the five years in a steady job here, and will be stuck with loans they cannot repay. But what do the labour agents care?

I have often said that we, as a country, have a responsibility to mount an information campaign to educate the villagers as to what might be realistic expectations. We are no El Dorado. A job here might last one year, or three. There is no guaranteed employment in Singapore. So, for goodness sakes, don't borrow money, don't pay upfront to land a job. Once in debt, you are trapped.

Why should we spend money on an information campaign? You may ask. It's for our own self-interest. If we don't, eventually the Singapore brand will be tarnished as tales of abuse and despair circulate. Eventually, workers stop seeing this city as a desirable work destination and the price of foreign labour will rise to reflect the risk.

Sooner or later too, we will find ourselves in diplomatic hot soup with New Delhi, Jakarta or Beijing when, out of the blue, one such scandal becomes news in their own country and the governments there are forced by voluble public opinion to defend their national pride.

Below, for example, is an Al Jazeera report -- credit to The Online Citizen where I first saw it -- about Bangladeshi workers in Singapore. 

No such story, as far as I can recall, appeared in our mainstream press around the time (20 September 2008) it was aired. But does that mean no one in Bangladesh watches Al Jazeera? Does that mean the problem does not exist and the risk to diplomatic fall-out is nil, if we keep Singaporeans uninformed about it?

We are being very short-sighted to ignore the problem now.

 
Another solution has been proposed by Nilesh Sahita in a letter published in the Straits Times Forum (17 January 2009). Cut out the foreign labour agent, he/she said.

... the Ministry of Manpower should allow only authorised Singapore recruitment companies to recruit labour from abroad on behalf of local companies.

These companies must be Singapore-registered and should be allowed to operate on condition that they deal with foreign labour directly. They must not charge any fees or commission from foreign labour and they must undertake not to deal via any foreign middleman.

It is not difficult. After all, how did the British recruit Gurkha soldiers? They sent officers directly to the Nepali villages that had a tradition of soldering, spent a few weeks there and recruited a periodic quota.

And look how loyal the Gurkhas have been.

The solutions are there. The political will, alas, is nowhere to be found.

© Yawning Bread