I refer to the article “MOM: Workers told of rights even before coming here” (Straits Times, Mar 19).
Surprise, surprise?
It states that “Divisional director Kevin Teoh of MOM’s foreign manpower management division told the committee he was surprised that rights group Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2) had testified it was feeding some 350 “abandoned workers” at its soup kitchen daily, given that the Employment Act clearly placed the responsibilities of housing and feeding work permit holders on their employers. ”
– I was equally surprised to read the above, as the “soup kitchen” has been reported widely in the foreign media and local social media for several years.
Just go and talk to the workers?
May I suggest that one or more members of the Little India Committee of Inquiry (COI) may simply have to visit the soup kitchen on any day and see for themselves.
What the Employment Act stipulates and what has really been happening on the ground may be two different issues.
Statistics please?
As to “Mr Teoh disagreed with the notion that MOM abandoned these workers and said when an employer is unable or unwilling to fulfil itd obligation, the ministry would step in to house the worker and provide food – sometimes in partnership with help groups such as the Migrant Workers’ Centre – while a complaint is investigated”
– Can we be given the statistics as to how many such workers were housed and fed for each of the last 5 years?
We can then compare these statistics with TWC2’s documented statistics of how many they have served in the soup kitchens over the years.
Surely, the obvious thing for the committee to do may be to ask TWC2 and MOM for documents to verify and support their apparently vastly different stories.
No such thing as repatriation companies?
With regard to “The ministry begins education efforts even before a worker arrives in Singapore, added Mr Teoh, with employers required to put in writing the wages, deductions and other terms in an employment letter to the worker in his native language.
Guidelines on worker obligations and rights are also issued to overseas training centres”
– how do we explain the widely reported SMRT strike whereby the aggrieved workers complained that much of these May not have been the case?
In respect of “It is also untrue that workers are being forcibly repatriated” – how do we explain the existence of “repatriation” companies that have been providing such services to employers for years and the numerous reported incidents in the foreign media and local social media?
Leong Sze Hian
