Easin (not his real name) seems remarkably cheerful as he tells us his story. He is back in Singapore in a new job, and so the events he is recalling are now history. Perhaps that is why he does not sound too aggrieved.
He has every reason to be, though. And we’re sure he most certainly was at the time it was happening.
This is the background: After a few years in a job, and not having seen his family for too long, Easin took home leave. He paid for a return ticket Singapore – Dhaka – Singapore out of his own pocket. Employers of Work Permit holders are only responsible for return flights at the end of contract, not for home leave travel.
After a few weeks back in his home town seeing cousins and old friends, and enjoying home-cooked meals, Easin bid goodbye to his family and flew back to Singapore to resume work. But, at Changi airport, he was refused entry. This was a shock.
He then learned that while he was away, his employer had cancelled his Work Permit; employers can do so with a few clicks of the mouse through an online portal of the Ministry of Manpower. No one had told Easin.
The airline that had flown him in was held responsible for flying him back to the point of embarcation, which was Dhaka. However, this airline only had a once-daily flight on this route and so Easin had to loiter around the airport for twenty-four hours with nowhere to lie down or take a shower.
The injustice of having his permit cancelled, with not even the courtesy of informing him, and the embarrassment of having to fly back to his home country jobless, was not the end of it. The airline, which had been fined “about 50,000 taka” by Changi Airport naturally demanded to recover the sum from Easin. At the then-exchange rate, that would be about $700, or about three times the cost of a one-way ticket Singapore to Dhaka.
How is this possible? The Employment of Foreign Manpower Regulations permit employers to cancel Work Permits at any time. There is no obligation on the part of employers to inform their employees. And once an employee had already gone home (e.g. on home leave) it’s not even clear that the employer is responsible for covering the cost of the flight home.
Easin didn’t know how or where to seek remedy for the losses he suffered through no fault of his own. He was also put in a position of having to look for a new job, which came with demands for agent fees.
The Singapore government is proud of their “employer friendly” policies. Little thought is given to the consequences and victims when employers use the vast powers given to them. Being dastardly is perfectly legal.