Workers made false claims, MOM?

The report continued:

"There was regular cleaning of common areas and sanitary facilities and also fogging and spraying and rodent control measures in place," he said. MOM officers spoke to several workers during the visit and none raised any issue with their accommodation.”

There are several obvious questions one should ask about the MOM’s statement, questions which the Straits Times reporter, Amelia Tan, seemed to have not asked or seek clarification of. They are, as pointed out by the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME), a non-governmental organisation (NGO) which provides aid to foreign workers:

1. Why did MOM visit the living quarters of the workers only on 12 December, one week after the men’s protest? How does MOM find it responsible to conclude with such conviction that the workers’ claims were “false” based on one belated inspection?

2. Why did MOM not visit the other two places where the men had stayed at as well? Or did MOM not know about these? HOME, in fact, managed to obtained pictures of the men’s previous place of lodging. How then is MOM apparently oblivious of this?

3. The company which the men worked for had an earlier case of a worker who also went on a protest over salary and living conditions. In fact, that earlier incident was similar to the protest by the two men in December. In July 2011, one of the company’s Chinese construction workers also climbed up a crane at a Changi work site to protest being owed $5,000 in overtime pay, medical expenses and repatriation costs. The worker was later jailed for 5 weeks, but it is unclear if any action was taken against the company for any breach of employment laws. [See here.]

What is also important, as HOME also pointed out, is that by charging and jailing the men, and then so conveniently dismissing their claims and in fact painting them as liars, the MOM has cast aspersions on the men who are, incidentally, in jail and cannot defend themselves against MOM’s charges.

MOM should shed some light on these questions, and the action (or failures) to address the men’s claims properly, and thoroughly, before dismissing them.

Foreign workers’ claims of poor living conditions are not new. They have been highlighted for many years now. There are, of course, improvements. One should not deny this. But when claims of poor conditions arise, we should hold thorough investigations and take those responsible to task.

For example, when the SMRT drivers who went on strike last year made similar claims about poor living conditions, all that happened was that SMRT “acknowledged” these conditions and promised to take “swift action to improve them.”

There were no actions taken against SMRT by the authorities, despite SMRT’s own admission of guilt. Instead, the drivers were all either deported, charged and jailed, or given warnings.

What message does that send?

Yes, it tells foreign workers of the serious consequences to them if they should take similar actions as these strikers. But it also tells employers that they can get away with abusing their workers as well, and workers with genuine grievances may now be cowed into silence.

While Singapore talks of a larger population, and improving and expanding its infrastructure, let us also not forget the foreign men and women who help us achieve these things which then put us on the world map.

It is unconscionable that at this day and age, where we boasts of being one of the richest “first world countries” on earth, that we still allow our foreign workers to live in utterly deplorable conditions.

Inhumane living conditions like this one this writer wrote about 3 months ago: “Hidden slums of Singapore revealed.”

{youtube}NBfwNLUDrCY|600|450|0{/youtube}

This writer visited the dorms again on 29 March 2013, and conditions have remained just as bad. These dormitories have been around for at least two years already.

The Ministry of Manpower surely must be aware of them. If it does not, then one must question its competence.

So, why is the ministry not doing anything about it? Is it hoping for the workers to go on strike? Or is it pretending to not be aware? Or is it turning a blind eye to the atrocious conditions which these men – some 40 to a room – have lived in for so long?

The MOM should not cast aspersions on helpless foreign workers when they make genuine complaints about their living conditions, especially when they are unable to defend themselves. There are enough examples of these deplorable living conditions for MOM to take it seriously, and not dismiss these claims as “false”, especially when its own investigation is found to be wanting.

If the MOM is serious, perhaps it should pay a visit to the row of make-shift dormitories at Kaki Bukit Industrial Terrace, hidden away from public view, and speak to the men there, which number not a few, who are pleading for better living conditions.

Housing 30 or 40 workers to a room is simply unacceptable.

The question is: does MOM agree - and what will it do about it?

READ ALSO: "Abused and exploited - but now in jail".