Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Vulcann

CNA: Employers' Concerns Considered, Says MOM

Recommended Posts

From CNA:

 

http://www.mycarforum.com/index.php?act=po...w_post&f=15

 

MAIDS' WEEKLY DAY OFF

Employers' concerns considered, says MOM

Published on Mar 13, 2012

 

SENTIMENTS expressed in recent Forum letters on the weekly rest day requirement for foreign domestic workers (FDWs) are largely similar to those that the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) encountered during its extensive consultation exercise on the review of the FDW management framework since June last year. Some of the feedback have been incorporated, including the flexibility of mutually agreeing when rest days should fall, or compensation with a day's wage.

 

A few called for a reduction or removal of the levy. The levy serves to moderate demand for FDWs and ensures that only employers who need and have the financial means to hire them are able to do so.

 

Singapore already has one of the world's highest number of FDWs per 1,000 households. While significantly higher wages would also moderate demand and increase our attractiveness as a place to work for quality FDWs, it remains unclear that the market-determined wages of all FDWs will in fact adjust proportionately to levy reductions.

 

Previous levy reductions did not result in a corresponding rise in wages. The majority of households in Singapore with young children, elderly or disabled members already enjoy a $95 monthly levy concession.

 

Together with the $120 FDW grant for households with frail elderly people or persons with severe disabilities, these concessions are more than adequate to cover the rise in costs from compensating FDWs for working on their rest days.

 

Since January 2010, the MOM has already removed employers' liability if FDWs breach work permit conditions that relate to their own behaviour. The ministry does not forfeit employers' security bonds if FDWs violate their own work permit conditions, for instance, if they moonlight or get pregnant.

 

In reality, the ministry 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.

 

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 rest days or otherwise. Any change must be agreed upon by both employer and FDW.

 

The MOM is stepping up audits to ensure employment agencies facilitate better matches between employers and FDWs. It is also working closely with various stakeholders to educate FDWs on appropriate behaviour on their days off, and offer activities to help them spend their rest days productively.

 

Farah Abdul Rahim (Ms)

 

Director, Corporate Communications

 

Ministry of Manpower

 

 

 

↡ Advertisement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few called for a reduction or removal of the levy. The levy serves to moderate demand for FDWs and ensures that only employers who need and have the financial means to hire them are able to do so.

 

Levy is to moderate demand?

 

I believe most families employ maids to ease their burden at home or to take care of young child/old folks and do not agree that with the present levy some how homeowners will "moderate" their demand. To them it is simply an additional financial burden to the households.

 

And it is pretty clear from the authority's response "only employers who need and have the financial means to hire them are able to do so" means that only families who are affluent are in need of maids while poorer ones sorry they do need them because they simply cannot afford paying them.

 

If all the levies collected are for a legitimate purpose, say setting up a Maid Welfare Agency, then I guess most employers will not feel that the levies are just another guise for state's revenue collection.

Edited by Vulcann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it is pretty clear from the authority's response "only employers who need and have the financial means to hire them are able to do so" means that only families who are affluent are in need of maids while poorer ones sorry they do need them because they simply cannot afford paying them.

 

they shld increase the min household income to hire a maid in the first place... alot of ppl i know cant really afford a maid but they still hire. In the end the maid suffers , because the family squeeze every drop of blood from the maid. From eating stale bread to no dinner..

When this news is out... i overheard a AA complaining big time.. Frankly, she only earn $1+k per mth, together with her hubby income... They seriously cannot afford a maid. So this come as a big thing to her..

Edited by Jrage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've made a good point. We've read a lot of stories about foreign spouses not getting their social visit pass because of insufficient income. Yet, it seems people are allowed to hire domestic helpers with low income.

 

they shld increase the min household income to hire a maid in the first place... alot of ppl i know cant really afford a maid but they still hire. In the end the maid suffers , because the family squeeze every drop of blood from the maid. From eating stale bread to no dinner..

When this news is out... i overheard a AA complaining big time.. Frankly, she only earn $1+k per mth, together with her hubby income... They seriously cannot afford a maid. So this come as a big thing to her..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they shld increase the min household income to hire a maid in the first place... alot of ppl i know cant really afford a maid but they still hire. In the end the maid suffers , because the family squeeze every drop of blood from the maid. From eating stale bread to no dinner..

When this news is out... i overheard a AA complaining big time.. Frankly, she only earn $1+k per mth, together with her hubby income... They seriously cannot afford a maid. So this come as a big thing to her..

 

The problem is that the maid levy simply add an additional cost component to the hiring of maids. Without this punitive measure, I believe it will make live a lot easier for many households especially those poorer ones who also need their services.

 

Granted there will be some families who still attempt to employ them without the means to pay them, the mass majority who can are simply being penalized which is rather unfair.

 

 

↡ Advertisement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of the bigger picture if ALL households can employ a maid...

SG population will hit 6.5 mill in no time...

good for statistical achievement bad for social cohesion.

The Levy is to restrict low income to hire maid as they are working like one so can't be entitled to have one.

 

Truth hurts...

Edited by Tigerwoods

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did domestic help becomes a basic need ?

 

The problem is that the maid levy simply add an additional cost component to the hiring of maids. Without this punitive measure, I believe it will make live a lot easier for many households especially those poorer ones who also need their services.

 

Granted there will be some families who still attempt to employ them without the means to pay them, the mass majority who can are simply being penalized which is rather unfair.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of the bigger picture if ALL households can employ a maid...

SG population will hit 6.5 mill in no time...

good for statistical achievement bad for social cohesion.

The Levy is to restrict low income to hire maid as they are working like one so can't be entitled to have one.

 

Truth hurts...

 

My argument is that the poor also need to work like their rich counterparts and if they have worked out their finances and able to squeeze out some money to take care of their young or elderly then the state should not impose the levy on folks like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did domestic help becomes a basic need ?

When both parents got to work to pay for their 30 year loan on their HDB flat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My argument is that the poor also need to work like their rich counterparts and if they have worked out their finances and able to squeeze out some money to take care of their young or elderly then the state should not impose the levy on folks like them.

it started from the 90s Singapore is trying to transform to a place for the well heeled.

if you are low income group, you have to find a way to dig out of this hole to a nicer one.

But sorry maids are for those who can afford.

Elites will laugh if they hear a story of their servants have maids at home...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Childcare centre.

One maid looking after 3 kids is cheaper than child care fees...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Triplets ? Child care subsidy (50%) + additional Assistance Scheme for Child Care for < $1,800 income. Can one maid cope with triplets ? Cheaper maybe, is it safe ? Does it make sense ?

 

One maid looking after 3 kids is cheaper than child care fees...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did domestic help becomes a basic need ?

 

It seems common that many households employ maids but not all need them lah so I do not think it is a basic need. Knowing getting and employing maid is costly, I am sure most folks do not employ them to just arrange newspapers and magazines at home [rolleyes]

 

We have never employed a maid to date but able to survive without one raising our two kids. Just a matter of time management and getting them into childcare centres during day time. But many are unable to do that so may need maids to assist them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be discouraged for low income households unless absolutely necessary. It's not just about the salary and levy -- easily $700-800, its also providing the helper's living needs with dignity -- not giving her bare minimal, starving her, and work 24/7, sleep in kitchen with no personal space. Not slavery.

 

It seems common that many households employ maids but not all need them lah so I do not think it is a basic need. Knowing getting and employing maid is costly, I am sure most folks do not employ them to just arrange newspapers and magazines at home [rolleyes]

 

We have never employed a maid to date but able to survive without one raising our two kids. Just a matter of time management and getting them into childcare centres during day time. But many are unable to do that so may need maids to assist them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One maid looking after 3 kids is cheaper than child care fees...

Obiviously, u don't have children in childcare. Childcare are closed at less 10 days in a yr. Also when the child is sick, also can't go school. When there is hmfd in the centre then it closes for another 10 days. Actually many household still send their children to school even when they have a maid because as long they need to work , they need someone to attend to the children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be discouraged for low income households unless absolutely necessary. It's not just about the salary and levy -- easily $700-800, its also providing the helper's living needs with dignity -- not giving her bare minimal, starving her, and work 24/7, sleep in kitchen with no personal space. Not slavery.

 

No one can guarantee that maids will be treated humanely or paid timely even if they are being employed by more affluent families. Just like us paid employees are not guaranteed our pay cheques at the end of every month.

 

I also find it distasteful that some maids are ill-treated by their animal employers and the full brunt of the law should be applied to these clowns but the argument here is should maid levy be imposed to make it so much more expensive to hire a maid, other than the official stance that is to "moderate demand"?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your employer live with you and feed you food meh ? The domestic helper live with you and eat what you give wor. If you feel you are underpaid, you can resign and seek a new job, the helpers here are tied to a contract with the agent, going without salary for months.

 

In Hong Kong, they are are paid higher so they can pay for rent and food. But people are already complaining domestic helpers are too expensive here even without paying for rent/food ? What does it say about employers in SG ?

 

No one can guarantee that maids will be treated humanely or paid timely even if they are being employed by more affluent families. Just like us paid employees are not guaranteed our pay cheques at the end of every month.

 

I also find it distasteful that some maids are ill-treated by their animal employers and the full brunt of the law should be applied to these clowns but the argument here is should maid levy be imposed to make it so much more expensive to hire a maid, other than the official stance that is to "moderate demand"?

Edited by Roadrunner2029
↡ Advertisement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×