The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented challenges to countries worldwide, and Singapore is no exception. While the national attention is on migrant workers who have been infected with COVID-19 in dormitories, what has slipped quietly under the radar is the employment situation of another group of migrant workers – the foreign domestic workers or FDWs for short.

Compared to March, the Centre for Domestic Employees (CDE) saw a 25% increase in the number of FDWs seeking assistance and a two-fold increase in calls made to our 24-hour helpline in April. Approximately 13% of the calls on our helpline pertain to requests by FDWs for transfers or are with regards to the distress they face due to termination of employment contract. It was recently announced (https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/covid-19-foreign-domestic-helpers-travel-restrictions-12742236 ) that from 20th May 2020, employers can transfer FDWs more easily to other households with the help of an employment agent (EA).

CDE has observed that there is always some confusion between employers and EAs regarding who should bear the costs of upkeep and maintenance for FDWs in transit. Some EAs will house the FDWs but will ask employers to pay for maintenance and upkeep, including medical and repatriation expenses. Employers might refuse to do so because they believe that once they have returned the FDWs back to EAs, they are hence no longer legally and financially responsible for the FDWs. Both parties then come into conflict and require mediation. 

CDE understands that the new Employment Agency Licence Conditions (EALC) that came into effect from 20 May 2020 states that if the employers no longer require the service of their FDWs, they can hand the FDW over to an EA who is willing to be responsible for her upkeep and maintenance, including insurance and medical costs up till the point where she is transferred or repatriated, and these should be done within 14 days – that being said, an extension could be granted under specific conditions. We believe that the new condition will help to clarify at what point the responsibilities of the employers’ end and when will the responsibilities of EAs begin. The new condition may also enhance the ease of transfer as EAs are now able to effect a transfer for the FDW once the employer hands her over.

CDE believes that while this small shift in policy may ease the process of transfer, the prerequisite to transfer still hinges on negotiation, mutual agreement, and sometimes luck – it is dependent on whether employers are willing to return the FDWs to EAs, whether EAs are willing to take them back and bear all responsibilities, and also whether the FDWs are able to find a suitable new employer.

CDE wishes to offer five suggestions on how to further enhance the mobility of FDWs.

1. Make medical insurance portable

Under the current work pass conditions, medical insurance of FDW is tied to her work permit and is terminated upon the cancellation of her work permit by either her employer or EA. Based on CDE’s ground sensing, the willingness of EAs to participate in this opt-in scheme hinges on the amount of cost and risk they need to bear. Apart from the cost of upkeep and maintenance, a new cost in the form of 14-day insurance is also levied upon EAs as they need to purchase a term medical insurance for FDWs in transit. While the absolute monetary cost of this term insurance is not high, it represents an addition layer of administrative work the EAs must perform.

One of the ways to reduce the cost and the administrative burden of EAs is to make medical insurance portable. While EAs are responsible for medical expenses of the FDWs during transition, CDE suggests that the medical insurance that FDWs have can continue to run for the entire transition period when they are on special pass after their work permit have been cancelled by EA. This might help to encourage more EAs to opt-in for the scheme as it is now administratively easier and less costly for them to do so.

This is also in line with a larger call to make insurance portable across employers so that there is seamless transition in insurance coverage when FDWs switch their jobs. From the employers’ perspective, this is beneficial as they no longer have to purchase a term medical insurance with premium that cannot be refunded if the FDWs’ work permit is terminated after 180 days of her deployment.   

2. Extend the transition period

The search for a new employer is beyond the control of the FDWs and EAs. At times, the search may even take longer than 14 days and the FDWs may end up being repatriated despite their wishes to continue working here in Singapore. There are two noteworthy points that we need to be cognizant that might render the 14-day transition period insufficient.

First, with the scheme being an opt-in one, not all EAs will be part of the pool that can help to effect transfers. Second, it was reported in a broadcast news on 19 May 2020 (ChannelNewsAsia) that more than 200 EAs in Singapore are currently on the scheme. An employer who wishes to participate in the scheme is likely to hand his/her FDW to an EA who might not be the original EA who placed the girl. Being not the original EA, the EA who took over the FDW may find it difficult to assess her skills, competencies, job attitudes, and successfully place her out within 14 days. Failure to place the FDW out within 14 days means that the EA will have to bear the cost of her repatriation. This constitute additional financial risk to EAs and may potentially pressure them to place FDWs out expeditiously, thus resulting in possible poorer matches between FDWs and new employers.

To ensure that the transfer is complemented with a higher chance of placement success, a longer transition period is necessary. This will help reduce the perceived risk faced by EAs as they have a longer timeframe to assess and place the FDW with the right employer. In this long run, this may help to enhance matching success and better retention of FDWs with their employers.

3. Disallow transfer pricing

While the new conditions stated that the EA is responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of FDW in transit, CDE is concerned that this cost might eventually be passed on to FDWs as additional loan. This concern is magnified for new FDWs who are still working within their loan period. Any passing on of cost to FDWs will be detrimental to their economic and social well-being. We urge all original EAs of FDWs to abide by the existing regulations to refund at least 50% of the FDW placement fee paid to them if the FDW has worked for less than 6 months and is terminated by her employer.

4. Compulsory to facilitate transfers

In the current market, transfer is not always the first recourse. Employers who no longer require the service of FDWs would terminate their employment contracts, cancel their work permit, and repatriate them back home. This is done despite FDWs expressing their wish to continue working in Singapore. CDE believes that FDWs should be given a chance to continue working in Singapore if they desire, and both employers and EAs must consider her wishes. She should be repatriated only if she no longer wishes to work in Singapore. We urge MOM to disallow unilateral and forced repatriation of FDWs as this severely undermines their well-being.

It is a well-known fact that FDWs, and for the same matter, migrant workers, have taken on placement loans and have paid agency fees to work in Singapore. Unilateral and forced repatriation will result in deleterious economic hardships for them. We urge the authorities to mandate facilitation of transfer as the first course of action, with repatriation as the last recourse. This may help to rebalance the market by ensuring that EAs bring in high quality FDWs who can be placed and subsequently successfully transferred.

5. Full job mobility for FDW

CDE believes that a more effective long-term policy would be for the Change of Employer (COE) consent letter to be scrapped for FDWs who have completed their 2-year contract with the same employer. FDWs should be like any worker, free to explore opportunities that may come their way.

We hope that all employers will provide employment certainty to FDWs by informing them at least three months before their 2-year contract is up whether their contact will be renewed, so that FDWs can have ample time to seek out new employers. There should not be a need for current employers to sign a release paper too.  Employers who wish to retain the services of FDWs should inform them in writing and sign a new contract before the old one expires. Employers who wish to change FDWs can also make use of the three-month (or longer) notice period to source for and to interview prospective candidates because the process of bringing in a suitable new FDW will take time.

Any termination of work permit must be discussed between the employer and FDW and should not be implemented unilaterally by employer without due concern for the FDW’s well-being.  FDWs have the rights to be alerted that her work permit has been cancelled and given the chance to understand the reasons behind her termination before the repatriation flight can be arranged by either the EA or employer. The flight should be arranged only after the FDW consents to it.

Conclusion

Any changes in policies will inevitably bring about adjustments to business models and may lead to short term market disequilibrium. What is most crucial is that policy changes must not make the most vulnerable stakeholder worse off – in this case, the FDW. CDE hopes that detailed follow-ups by the authority with the EAs can be done and feedback from the FDWs can be garnered after the effects of the new EALC has been given sufficient time to percolate to the ground. We urge the authorities to review the effectiveness of these policy changes and, in the long run, work towards full job mobility for FDWs.