# Legal or not?



## BedouGirl (Sep 15, 2011)

I everyone, I'm one of the mods on the 'other side'. I'm actually posting to see if I can get some advice for a very good friend of mine. Okay, so here goes. My friend, a Brit with a British passport, was employed by a couple, one Singaporean and one of another nationality. She was given a contract, went through it, made some changes and handed it back to the employer but it was never seen again. My friend was employed to look after two children. I believe the visa in the passport was for some sort of household staff, not the correct designation. Unfortunately, my friend developed cancer and ended up receiving treatment, successfully thankfully, in Singapore. Seemingly, no medical insurance was ever provided for my friend because all the bills were settled by the employer (and even prior to that if my friend just had something like flu, the employers settled the bills with the doctors direct). So, my friend has returned home and is still being harassed by the ex-employers demanding a refund for the bills they settled. According to what I've seen on line, the employer is bound to provide medical insurance, so I would say they are wrong on that count. I believe the designation on the visa did not reflect the true status of my friend's job, but I'm not sure if that's something that's going to make any difference. I think the employer had to call in some favors, for whatever reason to get the visa. I don't think my friend needs a lawyer, I think just having done some research and having knowledge of the labor law on their side will be enough to stop these people in their tracks. If anyone can shed any light on this, it would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

BedouGirl said:


> My friend was employed to look after two children. I believe the visa in the passport was for some sort of household staff, not the correct designation.


That is the correct designation. It appears she was classified as a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW), and that's perfectly routine in Singapore.

Here's the guide for employers of foreign domestic workers. Under Singapore law, employers are responsible for bearing the full cost of medical care for their FDWs. They cannot deduct or recover those expenses from her salary. Employers are required to carry medical insurance for their FDWs, but if they violate that part of the law they're still not allowed to violate another part of the law.


----------



## simonsays (Feb 11, 2009)

BBCWatcher said:


> That is the correct designation. It appears she was classified as a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW), and that's perfectly routine in Singapore.
> 
> Here's the guide for employers of foreign domestic workers. Under Singapore law, employers are responsible for bearing the full cost of medical care for their FDWs. They cannot deduct or recover those expenses from her salary. Employers are required to carry medical insurance for their FDWs, but if they violate that part of the law they're still not allowed to violate another part of the law.


Insurance doesn't cover sickness like cancer and pre existing medication conditions 

In a way the employer did good getting treatment but also could have refused and sent the maid home for not declaring pre existing medical conditions 

It is not, again, fair to an employer who may be struggling to make ends meet, be burdened with a large bill

And majority of the employers are not rich and they employ a maid not due to additional disposable income but on the contrary due to both parents working ..

I know enough employers who got burdened by maids who hid their medical conditions before coming here hoping to get treated and some employers borrowed and ran into debt to treat their maids and some didn't even get thank you, but got demand letters from the maid's instant human rights lawyers asking for additional compensation. After all why miss the chance to extract few more dollars from the employer ?

These reverse harassment cases never see the news ..

Some consulted MOM and being a very grey area and the employer struggling, terminated the contract and sent the maid back and cold hearted it may be .. it is not wrong

Example .. dialysis in Singapore costs approximately S$1000 vs S$ 40 plus in Philippines..

And surgeries cost over 10,000 $ vs A fraction in Philippines and the Filipino can avail of the Phil Health benefits and pay even much lesser.


----------



## simonsays (Feb 11, 2009)

BedouGirl said:


> I everyone, I'm one of the mods on the 'other side'. I'm actually posting to see if I can get some advice for a very good friend of mine. Okay, so here goes. My friend, a Brit with a British passport, was employed by a couple, one Singaporean and one of another nationality. She was given a contract, went through it, made some changes and handed it back to the employer but it was never seen again. My friend was employed to look after two children. I believe the visa in the passport was for some sort of household staff, not the correct designation. Unfortunately, my friend developed cancer and ended up receiving treatment, successfully thankfully, in Singapore. Seemingly, no medical insurance was ever provided for my friend because all the bills were settled by the employer (and even prior to that if my friend just had something like flu, the employers settled the bills with the doctors direct). So, my friend has returned home and is still being harassed by the ex-employers demanding a refund for the bills they settled. According to what I've seen on line, the employer is bound to provide medical insurance, so I would say they are wrong on that count. I believe the designation on the visa did not reflect the true status of my friend's job, but I'm not sure if that's something that's going to make any difference. I think the employer had to call in some favors, for whatever reason to get the visa. I don't think my friend needs a lawyer, I think just having done some research and having knowledge of the labor law on their side will be enough to stop these people in their tracks. If anyone can shed any light on this, it would be greatly appreciated.


Wait .. You British passport friend worked as a maid in Singapore ?

That's a very tall story ..

And you don't call in favours in Singapore as Singapore civil service is extremely in corruption free. 

Civil servants land in jail pretty fast for breaking or bending rules even minor ones 

Your friend story is very far fetched says me .. for now


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

ecureilx said:


> Insurance doesn't cover sickness like cancer and pre existing medication conditions.


How do you jump to the conclusion that the cancer was a preexisting condition -- or at least a known preexisting condition? There is no evidence presented of that. Moreover, it's an extremely unlikely idea given the details presented. A U.K. citizen resident in the U.K. (or who simply becomes or returns to be a U.K. resident) enjoys excellent National Health Service (NHS) care, including cancer treatment, at zero or low cost depending on ability to pay.

Nonetheless, employers are liable for their FDWs' medical expenses, period. It's solely their (and their insurance companies') risk and cost to bear, by law. FDWs are at will employees and may be dismissed (with caveats), but the employer is responsible for all medical costs until the FDW is medically stable enough to travel. The law is quite clear. It's part of the cost and risk associated with hiring an FDW, and it's unavoidable.

There are some FDWs in Singapore with U.K. citizenship. Not many, but some.


----------



## BedouGirl (Sep 15, 2011)

Thank you. To clarify, the family also employed two maids to look after the home and a driver. My friend, who is qualified in childcare, was employed solely to look after the children. It seems the employer did meet the legal obligation of covering the bills till my friend was given the all clear to travel, however, is not correct in trying to recoup the costs!


----------



## simonsays (Feb 11, 2009)

BBCWatcher said:


> How do you jump to the conclusion that the cancer was a preexisting condition -- or at least a known preexisting condition? There is no evidence presented of that. Moreover, it's an extremely unlikely idea given the details presented. A U.K. citizen resident in the U.K. (or who simply becomes or returns to be a U.K. resident) enjoys excellent National Health Service (NHS) care, including cancer treatment, at zero or low cost depending on ability to pay.
> .


Pardon my words 

The medical insurance and obligation mandated by law is not exhaustive ... You can verify that.

Cover is limited to accidents and related, not serious and excludes the likes of cancer, to rephrase my words 

If the employer is to be burdened with the likes of cancer or pre eclampsia for example (saw enough such cases) none of the employer will get a maid as insurance will be sky high and very few of the insurances in any case cover such extremely expensive costs. And in all cases the employers preferred to repatriate the person and out of good will paid for treatment back home costing a fraction vs SG.


----------



## simonsays (Feb 11, 2009)

BedouGirl said:


> Thank you. To clarify, the family also employed two maids to look after the home and a driver. My friend, who is qualified in childcare, was employed solely to look after the children. It seems the employer did meet the legal obligation of covering the bills till my friend was given the all clear to travel, however, is not correct in trying to recoup the costs!


Well, You initial post sort of implied the employer pulled strings .. to employ her ...

Again as I said the employer has next to no obligation, as long as she was fit to travel, they could have just put her in the next flight and sent her back, as a few struggling employers have been forced to do when the newly arrived maid has such medical conditions and cost of surgery for non citizens is extremely high.

Then again I believe there is more to this story, as, if the employer can afford two maids plus a diver plus a care au pair, I doubt they are that mean to ask repayment ... and am wildly guessing agsib that your friend agreed to pay back, as a private arrangement and now unable to do so or there is more to it.

You friend can approach MOM .. or did she try that path?


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

ecureilx said:


> Cover is limited to accidents and related, not serious and excludes the likes of cancer, to rephrase my words


You may have a certain idea in mind, but you're just flat out wrong on the facts. The law is clear (official Ministry of Manpower guidance). Employers must pay for *all* of the FDW's medical costs for all medically necessary care (including dental care) incurred in Singapore. Every dollar, inpatient and outpatient, work-related or not, no exceptions. Including cancer-related treatment. Repatriation after the FDW becomes medically stable for travel is the only legal option if the employer wishes to stop paying the FDW's medical bills. Even then all bills incurred for medically necessary care in Singapore are solely the employer's (and the employer's insurance company's) responsibility, not the FDW's.

To screen for preexisting conditions, and to make sure FDWs are and remain healthy, there is a mandatory pre-employment medical screening and twice yearly medical exams. But whether or not medical screening finds an issue that prevents employment, the employer is responsible.

An employer that fails in their responsibility has committed a criminal act and is liable for criminal penalties under Singapore law, detailed in the guide linked above.


----------



## BedouGirl (Sep 15, 2011)

My friend was working for the family for a year before the cancer was diagnosed AND was clearly told a favor was called in for the visa. My friend was told first class medical cover had been provided. I believe the employer is obligated to pay for the treatment but is hoping my friend will pay up so they can recoup the costs. If there had been adequate cover provided, as per the labor law, this discussion would not even exist. It's not even a matter of semantics, it's a matter of the law.


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

I should note that I'm assuming that this individual was a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) in Singapore, a very specific immigration status with specific rules. The original post suggests that was the case with the comment about a "household" visa. It's quite unusual for a U.K. citizen to be classified as a FDW, though it's not unprecedented. As an example, a U.K. citizen who is also the citizen of one of the preferred source countries could have been a FDW on that second passport.

*It does not matter whether the employer obtained "adequate" medical insurance.* Insured or not, at any level, the employer must bear the full cost of the FDW's medically necessary care in Singapore, by law. No exceptions, no excuses. First-time FDW employers must even attend a government orientation session that clearly explains this fact (and several others).


----------



## BedouGirl (Sep 15, 2011)

BBCWatcher said:


> I should note that I'm assuming that this individual was a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) in Singapore, a very specific immigration status with specific rules. The original post suggests that was the case with the comment about a "household" visa. It's quite unusual for a U.K. citizen to be classified as a FDW, though it's not unprecedented. As an example, a U.K. citizen who is also the citizen of one of the preferred source countries could have been a FDW on that second passport. It does not matter whether the employer obtained "adequate" medical insurance. Insured or not, at any level, the employer must bear the full cost of the FDW's medically necessary care in Singapore, by law. No exceptions, no excuses. First-time FDW employers must even attend a government orientation session that clearly explains this fact (and several others).


You're quite right. British, on a a British passport. Thanks so much. The links you've given will help immensely. My friend is back in he UK now and although the cancer is in remission, some other health issues have arisen which look likely to require major surgery, so having this knowledge will be a huge relief.


----------



## simonsays (Feb 11, 2009)

BBCWatcher said:


> I should note that I'm assuming that this individual was a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) in Singapore, a very specific immigration status with specific rules. The original post suggests that was the case with the comment about a "household" visa. It's quite unusual for a U.K. citizen to be classified as a FDW, though it's not unprecedented. As an example, a U.K. citizen who is also the citizen of one of the preferred source countries could have been a FDW on that second passport.
> 
> *It does not matter whether the employer obtained "adequate" medical insurance.* Insured or not, at any level, the employer must bear the full cost of the FDW's medically necessary care in Singapore, by law. No exceptions, no excuses. First-time FDW employers must even attend a government orientation session that clearly explains this fact (and several others).


we can argue till the cows come home, but from my years of counselling, I know for a fact that there is no liability for employer, if the maid, after arrival, shows symptoms of cancer, or such sicknesses

The employer's liability is limited to her getting treated for common sicknesses, injuries and the related

And about the medical, the medical is not comprehensive, and covers HIV, TB, and Basic health check

And the half yearly check is limited to Pregnancy and HIV, and there are cases of maids having having contracted HSV and handling children, none of the screening caught it

So back to the question.

Does the employer have to treat his maid for Cancer ? In my experience, NO, unless she was unfit for travel

Do the employers take the easy way out and send the maids diagnosed with sickness such as cancer or such, back home ? Yes and No

In extreme rare cases, the employers have taken the easy way out and sent the maid back home. In most cases, either the employer has paid for the treatment out of goodwill, or sent the maid back to Philippines or Indonesia, and paid the cheaper cost of treatment.

The closest case I can identify with the above was a maid who got pregnant and had excessive bleeding. The employer had all the right to patch her and send her packing, than incur the cost of 20,000 $ and above medical cost. In this case the employer got her prepped to go back to PH, and paid for her treatment there in PH, which cost about 3,000 $

Subsequently the maid agent did try to get the employer to pay compensation for early termination etc, but MOM ruled in favour of the employer

Over and out.

Good luck getting MOM to support this case. 

My 2 cents is the employer paid out of pocket, over the basic insurance, and is expecting it to be paid back (as I surmise .. ) 

Now if you still insist the employer must bear the cost 100%, I will leave it at that, and again, what I have written is from my counselling experience !

PS, if you have lived in Singapore, the standard Medical Insurance excludes a whole lot of illnesses. You will know, as a foreigner, she will be billed Foreigner rate, in Restructured Hospitals, and there is a co-pay component !


----------



## simonsays (Feb 11, 2009)

BedouGirl said:


> My friend was working for the family for a year before the cancer was diagnosed AND was clearly told a favor was called in for the visa. My friend was told first class medical cover had been provided. I believe the employer is obligated to pay for the treatment but is hoping my friend will pay up so they can recoup the costs. If there had been adequate cover provided, as per the labor law, this discussion would not even exist. It's not even a matter of semantics, it's a matter of the law.


as I repeated, the mandated cover is not comprehensive, and there is a limit on the costs claimable !

If your friend came and favour was called in, that is cause for reporting to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, unless the favour here was possibly getting her Employment pass under the Employer's own company or something like that.

Singapore Civil Services take pride in being the least corrupt, and pulling favours is not going to happen, never happens, especially for a case such as a maid, whoever the person was.

And if the person in question was legally employed in Employer A's work place, but worked for Employer A's home, or Employer B's home, too many laws have been broken. 

And if your friend is educated enough she will be charged for being part of the crime.

Good luck again.


----------



## BBCWatcher (Dec 28, 2012)

ecureilx said:


> we can argue till the cows come home, but from my years of counselling, I know for a fact that there is no liability for employer, if the maid, after arrival, shows symptoms of cancer, or such sicknesses


Then find an official, current Singapore government source that says employers of FDWs can avoid paying for their FDWs' cancer treatment. I just linked to the Ministry of Manpower's official guidance that says that they must. There are no exclusions for cancer or any other medically necessary treatment. All medically necessary treatment in Singapore is the employer's responsibility. *Taxpayers are not responsible* for these costs, which is what you seem to be arguing (and what the government expressly forbids), since that's the reality otherwise.

You can argue, perhaps, but you're arguing against the law and MOM's clear information.

The laws concerning FDWs have fairly recently changed, so if you're not current on your understanding of employer legal requirements, you may be misinformed.


----------



## WestCoastCanadianGirl (Mar 17, 2012)

This is going nowhere, so the thread is now officially CLOSED.


----------

