KiasuParents - Parenting in Singapore

Extracting from external site.
If you've been an employer managed by your FDW or keen to know how to protect yourself, you would know where I got this from.

Actual article related to bio data was published in the Straits Times on Sep 16 2012.

blog owner commented: Employers pay maid agencies a lot of money to employ maids, why is it unfair to make them responsible for providing accurate biodata ?

Is it fair for employers to be cheated by false biodata for so many years ? MOM has finally realized the problem that maid agencies tend to tell lies in order to "sell" their maids. However, how are they going to ensure that the new "standard biodata" really contains accurate information ? It is just a piece of paper, and maid agencies can continue to write false information on it.

The employment history and remarks from previous employers can also be easily made up by the maid agencies. MOM has forgotten that maid agencies always want to make money. If there are bad comments from previous employers, who will take the maid ?

Just like the mandatory weekly off day and no cleaning of windows, MOM seem to always come up with regulations which they cannot enforce.

Only MOM can ensure that the biodata of every maid is accurate. MOM should allow all employers to write comments for their maids, and allow all prospective employers to read the comments of the maid on the MOM website. Currently MOM website already allows employers to check the employment history of the maid, it should be very easy to add the extra functionality of writing and viewing comments. Instead of working on this function, MOM pushes responsibilities to the maid agencies instead. The maid agencies then threaten to increase costs for employers. Employers are already paying about $1000+ of agency fees. Now we have to pay even more to ensure "accurate biodata" ?

Simply employer said...
Just rec'd email reply from MOM. I wrote:
* MOM to impose a cap to agency fee, payable by fdw-employers
* MOM should stop agencies from earning money and treat FDWs like commodities, disregard their welfare, tell lies con them to work in Spore with a hefty 9 month loan
* Repatriation cost ie one way ticket for FDW and maid loan be borned by agency who failed to provide a FDW as per bio data and employer's requirement
* Why the lemon law concept doesn't apply to FDWs? Why we can't return FDW within 3 days and fdw-employer get all their money back from agency?


====================
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your email dated 21 September 2012 to Acting Minister for Manpower, Mr Tan Chuan-Jin.

2) Through our engagements with employers, one of the key complaints that surfaced was on incomplete or inaccurate foreign domestic worker (FDW) biodata. As such we have introduced the standard FDW biodata which will help ensure that key information will be made available and presented in a standard format regardless of the employment agency (EA) that the employer uses. In the longer term this will help improve service standards of the EA industry as EAs will be incentivised to provide value-added information to employers seeking to employ a FDW.

3) Some of the key features of the standard biodata form include an assessment of the FDW’s skills and how these skills were assessed. Where there is no assessment by the EA, the EA is free to indicate so as well. This will help prospective employers make an informed decision when selecting an FDW. We already require EAs to provide the FDW’s employment history of the FDW to the prospective employer and obtain the employer’s written acknowledgement that the information was furnished to them.

4)The EA directory that is available on our website is intended to help employers make an informed choice of the EAs they engage. The directory allows employers to search and sieve out EAs according to their needs, (i.e. placement type, EA location, years in operation, placement volume and number of demerit points), and include information on the FDW transfer rate and retention success rate. Employers should also consider the refund and replacement policy of EAs, as stated in the service agreements, when engaging EAs to ensure that the terms are acceptable to them.

5) We would also like to clarify that the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not forfeit the security bond if the FDW violates her own work permit conditions or runs away to MOM, an NGO or embassy, for example. However, where the FDW goes missing, only half the security bond will be forfeited as long as the employer made reasonable efforts to locate the FDW. We also do not forfeit the security bond if the FDW runs away and our records show she left the country.

6) If you have feedback on your FDW’s conduct, you can lodge a complaint with our Domestic Permits Section, Work Pass Division, Ministry of Manpower, 18 Havelock Road, Singapore 059764 or send an email to [email protected]. MOM will inform the FDW’s prospective employer of the feedback so that it can be taken into account by the prospective employer when considering whether to employ the FDW.

7) If you have any further queries, please feel free to email us at [email protected]

sad citizen wrote:3) Some of the key features of the standard biodata form include an assessment of the FDW’s skills and how these skills were assessed. Where there is no assessment by the EA, the EA is free to indicate so as well. This will help prospective employers make an informed decision when selecting an FDW. We already require EAs to provide the FDW’s employment history of the FDW to the prospective employer and obtain the employer’s written acknowledgement that the information was furnished to them.

Since EA is free to indicate skill, how true can it be when EAs are opened for business, to oversell for a profit!

MOM should let employers give feedback online and let prospective employers access, just like the number of employers an FDW had by logging in with WP, using Singpass.

Don't see how this bio data template is going to give employers a better view, can only see more money coming out from our pockets as placement fee.

how come there is no black list of agencies so that every prospective employer can check?

don't think any maid agency in s'pore is following the new rule