Number and Types of Complaints Against Maid Agencies
Ministry of ManpowerSpeakers
Summary
This question concerns Ms Rahayu Mahzam’s inquiry into the volume of complaints against maid agencies, the status of the Trustmark grading scheme, and the potential for stricter hiring guidelines. Minister Josephine Teo reported that MOM received approximately 500 complaints annually from 2016 to 2018, primarily regarding contractual disputes, service lapses, and worker quality. She highlighted that the Employment Agencies Act mandates transparency in service terms and biodata, with enforcement actions taken against an average of 135 agencies each year. For dispute resolution, employers are referred to mediation through CASE or the Small Claims Tribunals, while an online directory helps employers compare agency performance metrics. Minister Josephine Teo added that the Trustmark scheme is being reconsidered to avoid passing additional costs to employers, with the Ministry exploring alternative regulatory approaches.
Transcript
67 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Manpower (a) in each of the last three years, what is the number of complaints made against maid agencies; (b) what are the top three complaints made against the agencies; (c) whether there is an update on Trustmark, the planned grading scheme for maid agencies; and (d) whether the assessment of the Ministry is that stricter guidelines are required to ensure that maid agencies follow standard procedures with regard to maid hiring, training, replacement and repatriation.
Mrs Josephine Teo: From 2016 to 2018, MOM received on average about 500 complaints a year regarding employment agencies (EAs) that place foreign domestic workers (FDWs). The top three complaints are disputes over contractual terms such as EAs' refund and replacement policies, service lapses such as EAs not being responsive, and on the quality of the FDWs not meeting their expectations.
The Employment Agencies Act (EAA) imposes licence conditions on all EAs and sets out key standards that they must comply with. This includes providing employers with the FDW's employment history and a set of biodata to help employers make informed decisions. In addition, EAs must fully disclose the terms and conditions of their services, including the refund and replacement policies. Disputes between EAs and employers must be mediated by an independent third party, such as the Small Claims Tribunals (SCT) the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE).
From 2016 to 2018, MOM took action against an average of 135 EAs per year for FDW-related matters. This ranged from issuance of demerit points to prosecution. Thirteen egregious FDW-placing EAs had their licence suspended or revoked during this period.
Besides enforcing the law and regulations, we actively engage the EA associations to improve service delivery. We also provide an online EA directory. This helps employers make an informed choice after considering EAs' customer rating scores, retention and transfer rates, placement numbers and years of experience.
On the Trustmark Grading Scheme, EAs and employers have cautioned that the costs EAs incur will ultimately be passed on to employers. We therefore need more time to consider alternative approaches.