Singapore allows employers to act in bad faith while pretending to have rules that allow retention of skills and experience.
We ask two workers to describe what exactly were the barriers they faced when they needed to leave their dorms. A third worker shares a screenshot of a WhatsApp exchange.
TWC2 found postings on a publicly-accessible forum divulging personal data of domestic workers. Whilst these have been taken down, there remains a broader issue of social attitudes.
A review of cases related to the SCAL retention scheme identified the main obstacles workers faced in getting onto the scheme. These obstacles meant more work at MOM and reduced effectiveness of the scheme.
Local media carried a story about a migrant worker in Japan repeatedly asssaulted at work. There are many similarities to cases we see here in Singapore. What's needs to be done?
Workers are sent by their employers to worksites way too early before their shift starts, thus depriving them of sufficient rest in their beds at the dorms.
Many low-wage migrant workers fear that lodging any complaint with the authorities may lead to their being blacklisted. Is this real or imagined? Our intern investigates.
Boss and worker agreed to renew work permit, but renewal process got stuck. Another company laid claim to the worker; its IPA approved by the Manpower ministry.
Dulal did not want to work for the current employer anymore. He would find a new job. The employer's reaction was to shackle him. The manpower ministry provided the metaphorical shackle.
MOM's "adjustment" of the no-consent period makes it contingent upon employers giving consent. Circular logic?
