Employers’ concerns considered in rest day review
13 March 2012
The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has received a range of responses from employers of foreign domestic workers (FDWs) and other members of the public. These sentiments are largely similar to those that the Ministry encountered during its extensive feedback and consultation exercise on the review of the FDW management framework since June 2011. Some of these suggestions and feedback have been incorporated in the announced proposal on weekly rest days for FDWs, including the flexibility of mutually agreeing when the rest day should fall on, or compensation with a day’s wage. This would address concerns of employers who have genuine difficulties in giving their FDWs a weekly rest day.
Some called for a reduction or removal of the levy. The FDW levy serves to moderate the demand for FDWs and ensures that only employers who need and have the financial means to hire an FDW are able to do so. Singapore already has one of the highest number of FDWs per 1000 households in the world, higher than Hong Kong or Taiwan. While significantly higher wages would also moderate demand and increase our attractiveness to quality FDWs, it remains unclear that the market-determined wages of all FDWs will in fact adjust proportionately to reductions in the levy. Previous levy reductions did not see a corresponding rise in wages. We also note that Taiwan imposes a monthly levy of $86-$432 Singapore dollars on employers of FDWs. This is on top of the FDW’s salaries, which average more than $700 Singapore dollars. Households in Singapore with elderly, young children or disabled members already enjoy a $95 monthly levy concession. On top of this, households who hire an FDW to look after a frail elderly or a person with disabilities (regardless of age), and with household incomes of up to $2,200 on average per person, are also eligible for the new $120 monthly grant. These concessions are more than adequate to cover the rise in costs of having to compensate an FDW for working on her rest days.
Some employers have also advocated the removal of the $5,000 security bond, on the grounds that employers should not be responsible for what the FDW does on her rest day. Since January 2010, MOM has already removed employers’ liability if the FDW breaches Work Permit conditions that relate to her own behaviour. MOM does not forfeit employers’ security bonds if the FDW violates her own Work Permit conditions, for instance if she moonlights on a rest day or gets pregnant. FDWs will be held accountable for committing crimes or breaching their work permit conditions. In reality, MOM forfeits very few security bonds each year. We are currently reviewing the employers’ obligations for medical and repatriation costs for exceptional circumstances that they have little or no control over.
If a rest day is meant to be a physical, mental and emotional break from work, it would be counterproductive for the FDW to be allowed to spend her rest day working for someone else instead.
Concerns have also been raised about employment terms and the activities of FDWs on their rest days. As with any employment relationship, FDWs do negotiate for better terms, whether they have a rest day or otherwise. Any change must be agreed upon by both employer and FDW. MOM is stepping up audits to ensure employment agencies are able to facilitate better matches between employers and FDWs. MOM is also working closely with employment agencies, non-governmental organisations, embassies and other stakeholders to educate FDWs on appropriate behaviour on their rest days, and to offer skills training and other activities to help FDWs spend their rest days productively.