The job search and pre-departure phase of a migrant workers’ journey is often where the foundation for their exploitation begins. This is when workers, especially first time workers who have never been to Singapore before, are at their most vulnerable. It is when they are liable to be fed with misinformation and false promises and yet have to make significant financial commitments. These are irreversible decisions, often incurable even if they were later to file complaints in the destination country.

A qualitative study was carried out in May and June 2025, based on semi-structured, in-depth interview with twenty participants. Interviewees were Bangladeshi men who were in Singapore on Work Permits and had gone through the recruitment and migration process to Singapore via training centres and placement agents.

This is the first of three reports:

  • Fog and minefields – pre-departure hazards faced by Bangladeshi migrant workers coming to Singapore;
  • The rocky road to a transfer – experiences in looking for new jobs with Change of Employer letters in hand;
  • Not good anywhere – laws and gaps affecting Bangladeshi workers in other major destination countries.

All participants interviewed were either new or existing clients of Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2). Each interview lasted approximately one hour and followed a standard set of questions designed to elicit a picture of the migration journeys they had experienced.

We found considerable weight given to interpersonal contacts and what they described as the job offer. Nearly all respondents reported that there were no direct interviews between them and their future employers prior to their agreeing to the job; all communication was through the personal contact or the agent (mostly unlicensed). Many respondents were uncertain about what information they were entitled to, or what questions they should have asked. The result is that such workers often go into jobs with little clarity about the job scope.

In any case, employers are permitted to declare on the In-principle Approval (IPA) vague job descriptions under “Occupation”, and many interviewees reported that the actual jobs turned out to be different from what they had been led to believe.  The IPA document is issued by the Singapore government, but the description of the job stated there is based on submissions made by employers.

Workers pay attention to the salary stated on the IPA, but outside of that one detail, interviewees seemed to pay less attention to other details on the document compared to what their interpersonal contacts and agents told them.

Even when a worker notices that the salary declared in the IPA is different (usually lower) than what had been verbally promised, it is hard to extricate himself from this situation, which is obviously a red flag. Interviewees recounted how the agents might became “gangsters and monsters” threatening violence on them when the discrepancy was pointed out.

Prospective construction workers have to undergo a basic skills training course and pass an examination set by Singapore’s Building and Construction Authority before they are eligible for Work Permits. Interviewees who attended various training centres had recounted that people who owned, taught at, or worked in the administrative departments of these training centres doubled up as job placement agents. This incestuous nexus gives rise to exploitation and coercion. The training centres are not the safe havens for learning that they may be thought to be.

The full report (11 pages, PDF) can be seen by clicking the icon at right.