Maid policies should be changed
-
I'm afraid not many Singaporeans treat their maid like what you do.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:We have a maid in Singapore. I don't think she is particularly lucky if she has to leave her family behind to find work so far from home. But I think we try to treat her decently. She has her own room with a big window, an electric fan, a bed, a wardrobe, shelves for books, a table and chair. She gets a day off a week but sometimes she does not want to go out; in which case, we pay her an extra day's salary.
The only other thing we did for her which may be more than what's expected of an employer is that we gave her $30 pocket money per month for the first few months. Many Singaporeans may not realize that for the first 3-6 months, your maid's salary does not go to her. It goes to the agent who paid for her airfare and other administrative costs. We feel that it would be good for her to have some pocket money over the first few months as she gets settled down in a foreign land.
Singaporeans will work as domestic help if the pay is good. With full-time foreign maids being so cheap, who would hire Singaporeans? If it were up to me, I would ban all live-in foreign maids. Instead of that, agencies bring in foreign maids, provide domitories to house them and hire them out to provide domestic service on an hourly charge basis. But Singaporeans will rise up in protest: so the government will never adopt that policy.
This is the very least that they deserve. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
Unfortunately with Singaporeans like you who are so blinkered that you cannot see facts as they are or debate in a logical manner, this will never be resolved.
While your intent is good welfare towards the maid, it is unfortunately another one more of your mindless [b]derogatory swipe at Singaporeans in general.
One more piece of sensational news on the front page to generate more sales revenue for SPH, and you jump to swipe at Singaporeans.
Amongst the large number of maids that have been employed in Singapore, what is the percentage of ill-treatment from the entire population ?
As many of the ill-treating abuses that surfaced in the pages of the various gossip papers in Singapore, there have also been news report in print and TV broadcast on families who have gone beyond the role of employers in the welfare extended to the employee-maids.
Are Singaporeans slave masters in general ?
With no history of slavery in our country, what possibly can make normal Singaporeans to behave in such an ugly manner ?
Is this a reflection of the economic-social-political environment that a tightly and closely managed society is governed through tough legislations to govern all aspects of social behaviour and attitude ?
Should we be surprised that the government has stayed their hand in legislating another piece of legislation to mould Singaporean attitude, when so many have been legislated to little effect - but giving Singapore a dark reputation of being a very 'FINE' country ?
Even the Minister of Manpower has admitted that there are enough existing laws to deal with errant employers and maids.
Those errant few are the black sheeps in Singapore - typifying the ugly Singaporeans who have no regards towards others, talk loud, and purposeful with their crass behaviour.
Fortunately, these are only a minority few amongst the 4.5 Million Singaporeans.
[/b]
I admitted I am n the minority here. The majority of Singaporeans are happy to treat their maids as they do and there is therefore no incentive for the government to change the legislation.
Majority rules and in this case, the majority like you choose to keep or maids in a state of fearful servitude. -
yes, ban all live-in maids.
or make them extravagantly expensive. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Me - "Blinkered" ? versus you being a "knee-jerk" ?
Unfortunately with Singaporeans like you who are so blinkered that you cannot see facts as they are or debate in a logical manner, this will never be resolved.
I admitted I am n the minority here. The majority of Singaporeans are happy to treat their maids as they do and there is therefore no incentive for the government to change the legislation.
Majority rules and in this case, the majority like you choose to keep or maids in a state of fearful servitude.
Even if I am blinered, at least I get to see ahead - way ahead; but what else can you be good at except to jerk yourself off in a predictable reaction ?
What are facts to you - as you prefer to see things with a myopic view, seen through your preferred colored lens - may not necessarily be the same set of supposed facts as seen under different lighting or environmental conditions.
Surely you can discern such simple basic logic, or must you have it your way all the time ?
If you admit to being a minority here, is it not typical of an autocrat to impose your views onto the majority ?
What makes you think that I employ a maid, or that I am capable of being abusive ?
If we are to make a comparison of character from the style of debate in this sgForum, I would think that you are more dangerous as an employer of any maid, when we know you already to be a sadist and masochitic autocrat.
Is it any wonder that you will want to have the law to be implemented to protect yourself from abusing the maids ? -
The current Govt's fundamental principle towards non-skilled foreign workers employed in S'pore is to make the local employer be responsible for them. The other principle is to introduce harsh penalties to prevent these foreign workers from committing too much crime in our society (as in any society, we also blame the foreign workers for high crime rates, etc).
As of now, none of the civil servants in the Manpower Ministry has got a good solution of how to deal with errant or delinquent foreign workers in our country. It is therefore, not unusual for the Govt to introduce the Foreign Worker Bond to hold their employers responsible.
I am not sure if anyone out there knows that if a foreign worker is to be deported back to their home country, it is the responsibility of the employer to ensure that their charges are "escorted" into the non-returnable area of the airport or seaport. If the foreign worker somehow escapes, the bond is confiscated too! If the foreign worker hurts himself or the employer hurts him/her in the process of this "escort", the local laws of "causing hurt" or "unlawful restraint" may be applicable to the employer as seen in the eyes of the police. Do take note that the employer is responsible for all hospitalisation and even morgue and body retrieval charges (if the employee dies).
The odds are heavily stacked against the employer and I hope everyone out there will appreciate it. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
You have a knack for backing the wrong horse and dig in your heels despite being clearly wrong...well, that's just typical of you. Myopic? Coloured lens? Well, put forth your arguments in a proper debate rather than making snide remarks. But then again, that's just typical of you again...
What are facts to you - as you prefer to see things with a myopic view, seen through your preferred colored lens - may not necessarily be the same set of supposed facts as seen under different lighting or environmental conditions. -
Higher levy or higher pay for the maids.Whichever way SIngaporean would still pay.Originally posted by nismoS132:yes, ban all live-in maids.
or make them extravagantly expensive. -
Unfortunately that has not stopped Singaporeans from employing maids when many are just not suitable employers.Originally posted by livspore2006:The odds are heavily stacked against the employer and I hope everyone out there will appreciate it.
The policy concerning the bond is wrong and should be changed, as I have been saying. However, that does not in any way excuse Singaporean employers from treating their maids as virtual prisoners.
Ban all live-in maids and instead have maid agencies responsible as their employers. Singaporeans can hire maid services on an hourly basis but they can avoid all the problems you have mentioned. It is also easier to regulate the maid agencies rather than the activities of employers in their own homes. -
Tiok-Lah and that is why the TS message is crystal clear.Originally posted by livspore2006:The current Govt's fundamental principle towards non-skilled foreign workers employed in S'pore is to make the local employer be responsible for them. The other principle is to introduce harsh penalties to prevent these foreign workers from committing too much crime in our society (as in any society, we also blame the foreign workers for high crime rates, etc).
As of now, none of the civil servants in the Manpower Ministry has got a good solution of how to deal with errant or delinquent foreign workers in our country. It is therefore, not unusual for the Govt to introduce the Foreign Worker Bond to hold their employers responsible.
I am not sure if anyone out there knows that if a foreign worker is to be deported back to their home country, it is the responsibility of the employer to ensure that their charges are "escorted" into the non-returnable area of the airport or seaport. If the foreign worker somehow escapes, the bond is confiscated too! If the foreign worker hurts himself or the employer hurts him/her in the process of this "escort", the local laws of "causing hurt" or "unlawful restraint" may be applicable to the employer as seen in the eyes of the police. Do take note that the employer is responsible for all hospitalisation and even morgue and body retrieval charges (if the employee dies).
The odds are heavily stacked against the employer and I hope everyone out there will appreciate it. -
The maid should have knocked on the door of her employer. She chose to climb back to her flat and in the end it resulted in her death.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Once again in the Straits Times we read about a maid who fell to her death trying to climb back to her flat after a rendez-vous with her lover and finding that her employer had locked the flat. Another article wrote about a man who spent 5 hours on the window ledge when his lover's employer came home earlier than expected.
There are better ways to deal with this problem than to imprison your maids in your homes.
A man who has no permission to enter a property complaining about 5 hours on a window ledge? In the first place, an employer have the right to ban any stranger from the house for their own protection. If they wanted to fuck, they could have do it on the maid's rest day and out of the house.
There are better ways to deal with the problem - a compulsory allowance of 1 day per week as a rest day and the maid is allowed to do whatever she wants. I agree that there should be no confiscation of maid levy if a maid gets pregnant . She is an adult - she made her choice - so deport her -agencies I understand withold a certain amount of money - they can deduct the cost of deportation from the amount she earnt.
Some one was talking about hours - my gawd how naive . You can set a rest period for the maid - at least 10 hrs of rest should be allowed and occasional meal breaks. But 8 hrs of work only with overtime pay? Come on ...other Singaporeans have to work from 8 am til 12 midnight and without overtime pay. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
So are u waiting for your trust to be misplaced before you do something?
Nonsense. Singaporeans will still employ maids even with tighter legislation to protect the welfare of maids. If they all stop employing maids, that's good for the older, unemployed Singaporeans who can finally compete for domestic services with cheap foreign maids. But I do not believe Singaporeans will give up their maids.
If the maid gets pregnant, she gets deported as according to the law. Your daughter can also allow a boyfriend in and rape her. It is very simple, if you do not trust your maid, you have [b]no business employing one.
[/b]
If you read through the terms in hiring a maid correctly, its the employers who stands to lose out. It because most singaporeans are too busy with their work that they have no choice but to entrust their child or elderly parents into the trust of these workers. -
Having a live-in maid requires a great deal of trust. If you do not want to take the risk, do not hire one...simple. Let maid agencies bring in the maids and provide them with accommodation...hire them out for the hours you need.Originally posted by TYING:So are u waiting for your trust to be misplaced before you do something?
If you read through the terms in hiring a maid correctly, its the employers who stands to lose out. It because most singaporeans are too busy with their work that they have no choice but to entrust their child or elderly parents into the trust of these workers.
Imprisoning your maid is not the way to deal with your concerns. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Am I the one backing the wrong horse, or were you putting the cart before the horse all the time, and being caught with the wrong hoofs in your mouth ?
You have a knack for backing the wrong horse and dig in your heels despite being clearly wrong...well, that's just typical of you. Myopic? Coloured lens? Well, put forth your arguments in a proper debate rather than making snide remarks. But then again, that's just typical of you again...
Have you become so desparate to even hope that I should not dig in my heels but to defer to your opinions without any debate ?
If my views remain errorneous when I continue to dig in my heels, why are you incapable to pull the carpet from under my feet ?
Take this thread which you have started - do you even know the mentality of the maids that work in Singapore ?
How many maids would even go to extent to break their contracts within two to three months since starting work - taking this short period to live in Singapore and taking in the sights during their day off ?
Some have even gone to the extent of telling blasphemeous lies about parents dying backhome, just to get sympathetic leave and never to return.
Can we expect you to know anything about the abuse by the maids towards the employer's good natured trusting attitude ?
A recent news article in the local Straits Times had reported that the Employer came back earlier then their usual Sunday schedule; and in her panic, the maid asked her lover to take cover on the overhang below the window ledge of their kitchen area.
Did you say that you are residing in the UK ?
Can we expect you to know the mentality of the maids coming from Indonesia, Philippines and Sri Lanka ?
Concerning this thread that you have started, did you realise that the employer of the maids was an expatriate family - not Singapore Residents no doubt but NOT EXACTLY SINGAPOREAN ?
Now, which horse were you riding with all the derogatory statements made about the general Singaporean employers of domestic maids ? -
With Atobe's attitude towards domestic maids, it is no wonder that we keep hearing instances of maid abuse by Singaporeans so typical of the likes of him. What's worse is that he persists in taking the side of the abusive employers and ravel in oppressing the foreign maids that have next to no bargaining position.
Maids who take advantage of their employers? What do you call working 18 hours a day, seven days a week without annual leave or weekend off? What do you call restriction of movement and the freedom to associate with whom she wishes?
Unfortunately, as I have said, the majority of Singaporeans are abusive employers like Atobe has shown himself. Without public support for a change in policy, the government is unlikely to effect any policy change in this regard. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
The quality of your replies continue to amaze me.
With Atobe's attitude towards domestic maids, it is no wonder that we keep hearing instances of maid abuse by Singaporeans so typical of the likes of him. What's worse is that he persists in taking the side of the abusive employers and ravel in oppressing the foreign maids that have next to no bargaining position.
Is this the only way that you can plan your response ?
This is not exactly the kind of skill or ability that one would expect from one who claims PhD qualification.
It brings one to ask if the standards at Oxford has deteriorated to the extent that they could have given you this PhD, when your reading skill is so poor to lead you to the conclusions that you displayed in your response to my writings.
Are you suggesting that I am defending the expatriate employer - not exactly Singaporean - who allowed the maid to sneak back into the house through the window after her midnight tryst, and is responsible for causing her to fall to the ground floor ?
Yes, you are probably right that the expatriate employer was cruel for denying the maid her sexual rights to a lover in her room, forcing her to have an illicit midnight tryst, and endangering her life by locking the door, and forcing her to climb four storeys up to gain entry through the rear window. Cruel expatriate influenced by the Singlish speaking Singaporeans.
It will be brilliant reading and interpretation on your part to conclude that I am also protecting the employer who abused the maid by returning from church earlier than their usual Sunday practice, in the cruel process had interupted the maid's affair with her lover, causing them to panic, and resulting in the maid's lover being forced to hide - by climbing out of the high rise apartment, and to perch on the window ledge for over five hours before being discovered by the neighbor.
Yes, you are right that the Singaporean church goer was cruel to the maid for coming home earlier than usual, and at the end of it all he was cruel enough to let the maid's lover off with a mere police warning.
Yes, perhaps you could be right for concluding that Singaporeans are cruel to the maids that caused them to even lie that their parents have died, so as to be able to gain sympathetic leave home.
Yes, you could be right that Singaporeans are abusive to these maid for not trusting them enough to let them return home after 3 months employment.
Could it be that your PhD title makes you a Prima Donna, and allow you to dictate terms to your UK Employer to release you from your contract, and allow you to return to Singapore for a short holiday after 3 months of being abused by your UK Employers ?
Singaporeans could take a leaf out of your brilliance in handling your UK Employers, and do the same to our Singaporean employers - half of whom are probably working for the Singapore Inc.
We could certainly learn something from your bargaining skill in leveraging the Human Rights consideration to our own Singapore Inc employers.
What would you call the conditions for Singaporeans who have to work 2 jobs in 24 hours, just to put some food on the table, pay the utilities, give their children an education, employ a maid to look after the children and the old folks, while the Singaporean slave through the 2 jobs ?
Maids who take advantage of their employers? What do you call working 18 hours a day, seven days a week without annual leave or weekend off? What do you call restriction of movement and the freedom to associate with whom she wishes?
How many Singaporean - on a new job are put on probation - will be allowed to roam about freely, use the phone lines to chat with their friends, indulge in idle talk with new colleagues, and have the run of the place to make themselves comfortably at home ?
How many factory workers are allowed to roam freely on the production line and associate themselves freely in conversation with anyone they like ?
How many work places will not insist on proper decorum and proprietary restrictions in accessing or use of restricted materials and places, and maintain confidentiality even outsife of the work place ?
Are Singaporeans the only employers imposing such rules of employment on these foreign maids ?
Or are these not the accepted rules expected from those employed as servants, butlers and maids across the entire globe - in which all of them are expected to maintain the expected minimum standard of service and keep the family affairs private ?
Surely, the personal contacts whom the butlers or maids associate with, outside of the working hours, will also be a concern to the employers, simply for the sake of security to the employer and the family ?
With the thinking ability of a kid, it is not difficult to associate you with the character Chicken Little crying out that the 'sky is falling' and that the world is coming to an end, just because an acorn fell on your head.
Unfortunately, as I have said, the majority of Singaporeans are abusive employers like Atobe has shown himself. Without public support for a change in policy, the government is unlikely to effect any policy change in this regard.
How could docile Singaporean become abusive towards another fellow human beings ? Where could they possibly pick-up such inhuman traits ?
If as you said - 'the majority of Singaporeans are abusive' - did they pick it up from their work place ?
Considering that the majority of Singaporeans are employerd by Singapore Inc., - using your line of thinking and coming to your manner of conclusions - we should then be correct to believe that Singaporeans are learning from the abuses that they have been absorbing at their work place in the Great Singapore Inc.
This is the quality of thought from the brilliant deduction methods that we can learn from the brain of a PhD.
Is it any wonder that we have seen the Great Slave Driver at the Singapore helm, always scheming on new ways to abuse the Singaporean pockets ?
Sometimes I believe that autocrats are sadists in their attitude, and masochists for tolerating and wallowing in the abusive reactions.
Is it any wonder that The Autocrat resemble you in character, as he and his offsprings are graduates from Oxbridge but without the patience of taking on a PhD - which makes me always ponder for a reason that both have not pursued this PhD title from Oxbridge despite their brilliance.
Did they realise that to stay longer for a PhD from Oxbridge will make them go nutty - which probably explains your explicit nutty reaction to my writings that is similar to the acorn that fell on you ?
Poor Chicken Little believing himself no longer as a chicken but a Mushroom from Oxford.
This is the kind of verbal abuse that I am familiar with, not the kind that little autocrats does - with sadistic and masochistic joy in abusing others with false assumptions, and printing the wrongly drawn conclusions with a display of unblinking calm authority and without any guilt but with utter delight.
Does chicken little go to church ?
Try coming home earlier than normal, and you will probably find your maid's lover in your bed.
It will be interesting then, to see your autocratic sadism and masochism at work. -
There are always two sides of the story
On one side , you have maids misbehaving and on the other , employers who are just plain nasty and use the maid levy as an excuse .
My aunt had a nasty maid who had to be escorted by the police and the maid agency to the airport . She had threatened to kill my cousins if she was sent back. Reason for sending her back was because she stole things from the house and pawned it - the receipts were found by my cousin who was asking mommy what they were because they were in jie jie's room.
My aunt was never nasty to the maid because she believed in treating people well. Her previous maids used to cry when their contract was completed because they liked working for her - she is a reasonable boss. Everything the children say to the maid has to start with a please and a thank you. She get brought out on outings and even to expensive restaurants for Chinese New Year Reunion where she ate a good share of what the family eats.
So I would hesistate to pass judgements on all employers and all maids . Some are good , some are bad in both sides. -
It is really a waste of time engaging Atobe in any form of debate when all he does is slip into a circumlocutory diatribe that completely discourages any further discourse. I suppose that is his exit strategy whenever he loses an argument. In his latest verbose and rather tedious post, he is even trying justify imprisoning a maid in the home by comparing it with restrictions on harzardous activities in a factory on grounds of health and safety.
If Atobe is typical of what the Opposition party has to offer, what alternative choices are there for Singaporeans apart from the ruling party? Res ipsa loquitur. -
As you said, there are goood and bad maids, just as there are good and bad employers. The big difference is that the employers have all the power, not the maid. The employer can send back a poor maid, whilst a maid cannot escape from an abusive employer. That is why the law must give greater protection to the the weaker party, ie. the foreign maid.Originally posted by fymk:So I would hesistate to pass judgements on all employers and all maids . Some are good , some are bad in both sides. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Should we need to be surprise at your feeling pique and feeling discouraged with an inability to face logical disposal of your preferred arguments ?
It is really a waste of time engaging Atobe in any form of debate when all he does is slip into a circumlocutory diatribe that completely discourages any further discourse. I suppose that is his exit strategy whenever he loses an argument. In his latest verbose and rather tedious post, he is even trying justify imprisoning a maid in the home by comparing it with restrictions on harzardous activities in a factory on grounds of health and safety.
If Atobe is typical of what the Opposition party has to offer, what alternative choices are there for Singaporeans apart from the ruling party? Res ipsa loquitur.
How often has it been that you have been said to simply refused to engage on the core issues raised but prefer to move around at a tangent ?
Are you being honest with yourself in your ability to read ?
Why do you feel confined to relating the maid's terms of employment being compared to the factory workers' only, when the maid's working terms have also been referred to the servants, butlers and maids employed across the globe ?
Is it any wonder that your own exit strategy is to maintain a painful straight face by making further denigrating remarks to my posts that is totally unrelated to the Alternative Parties ?
Yes, the facts do speak for itself, and unfortunately you seem to find it too painful to accept the truth and swallow hurt pride.
Still chasing shadows ? -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Should we be thankful to the Manpower Minister for stating that there is enough laws available to handle any continuing situation concerning Singaporean Employer abusing the foreign maids ?
As you said, there are goood and bad maids, just as there are good and bad employers. The big difference is that the employers have all the power, not the maid. The employer can send back a poor maid, whilst a maid cannot escape from an abusive employer. That is why the law must give greater protection to the the weaker party, ie. the foreign maid.
One can only wonder the anxiety that you have in protecting the foreign maids with more draconian laws, while you are residing in UK.
Why do you care more for the basic human rights of the maids but not the human rights of Singaporeans ?
Are you having a soft spot towards anyone of these foreign maids ?
Have you been getting involved with some midnight tryst with those maids in Singapore that are illegally accessing the employers' computer to have illicit net chat with you, and conducting on-line research with a few of these foreign maids in Singapore, and extrapolating these few sobs to your magic numbers ?
Otherwise how do you come to the conclusion that the majority of Singaporean Employers are abusing the foreign maids ?
Would that also include your parents and relations - presumbaly wealthy enough to employ one maid or more, considering their unfortunate ability to fund your academic qualification; or will you be more circumspect and avoid enlarging the net to embarass yourselves ?
What possibily could be your intention to constantly deride the downtrodden Singaporeans ? -
That is why I said the legislation has to be changed. Employers cannot be held responsible for the behaviour of their empoyees. The policy over the bond has to be abolished. I would like to ask the Minister if he can put up a bond to ensure that his daughter will not get pregnant before marriage.
This government polcy is wrong but it is disappointing that Opposition party MPs fail to even comment on it. Why do we need them at all when they fail to do their job?
great. we are waiting for your discussion with your employer(PAP).
you are finally doing something for the singaporeans though minority(maid owner). -
Originally posted by Atobe:
Unlike you, I speak out because I think the practice is wrong and the law is not adequate. It is precisely because the majority of Singaporeans favour the status quo that the government is not in a rush to change the law. Human rights? Singaporeans' human rights are far more protected compared to those of foreign maids.
Should we be thankful to the Manpower Minister for stating that there is enough laws available to handle any continuing situation concerning Singaporean Employer abusing the foreign maids ?
One can only wonder the anxiety that you have in protecting the foreign maids with more draconian laws, while you are residing in UK.
Why do you care more for the basic human rights of the maids but not the human rights of Singaporeans ?
Are you having a soft spot towards anyone of these foreign maids ?
Have you been getting involved with some midnight tryst with those maids in Singapore that are illegally accessing the employers' computer to have illicit net chat with you, and conducting on-line research with a few of these foreign maids in Singapore, and extrapolating these few sobs to your magic numbers ?
Otherwise how do you come to the conclusion that the [b]majority of Singaporean Employers are abusing the foreign maids ?
Would that also include your parents and relations - presumbaly wealthy enough to employ one maid or more, considering their unfortunate ability to fund your academic qualification; or will you be more circumspect and avoid enlarging the net to embarass yourselves ?
What possibily could be your intention to constantly deride the downtrodden Singaporeans ?
[/b]
How low can you stoop? When you cannot win an argument you resort to name calling and making totally unfounded allegations of 'midnight trysts'. Then again, what can we expect from a rabid anti-government muckraker like you. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Is it any wonder that there are so few PhD as Ministers, and those that exist for so many years in the Cabinet are at best Minister of State despite their brilliant qualification ?
Unlike you, I speak out because I think the practice is wrong and the law is not adequate. It is precisely because the majority of Singaporeans favour the status quo that the government is not in a rush to change the law. Human rights? Singaporeans' human rights are far more protected compared to those of foreign maids.
Now, does one need to wonder too long as to the reasons, when one can see here - the performance of the resident over-qualified participant ?
Are you more qualified to opined that Singapore need tougher laws, when the Manpower Minister has decided that there are more then enough existing laws to deal with maid abuse while perched in the ivory towers in UK ?
If the majority of Singaporeans are "Maid Abusers" - what will the approximate number be from the 4.5 million Singaporeans ?
Half the number of 4.5 million is only 2.25 Million Singaporeans, and this cannot possibly form the majority, as it is an equal number, not a majority.
Will you consider 3.0 Million Singaporeans of all age group to be maid abusers - considering that young toddlers can also be accused of being abusive by groping the maid with their innocence ?
Are you suggesting 3.0 MILLION Singaporeans are maid abusers ?
If your assumption is true, why are maids still coming over in droves ?
Are they suffering from some kind of masochistic disorder like you, enjoying a good abusive session, and seeking more with foreign male laborers working in Singapore ?
Your sado-masochistic mind must be running on high octane - are you feeling so lonely in UK that you are imagining 3.0 MILLION Singaporeans are similarly sadistic and masochistic like you ?
If your wish come true, we probably have to thank you for accepting the fact that one supreme autocrat in Singapore is more then enough.
Do Singaporeans get more Human Rights protection than the Foreigners working as Maids in Singapore ?
Do the Singapore Police get nervous when the maids gather in droves along Orchard Road, or sit together in larege groups at open parks or street corners; compared to police attention towards Singaporeans wearing BROWN T-shirts gathering at an MRT Station ?
Maids are protected from abusive employers, and the employers are not allowed to deduct their wages as punishment for any intransigence or misdeeds.
Are the majority of Singaporeans - who are employed by Singapore Inc - given these same Rights as the Foreign Maids ?
Each time when Singapore Inc give Singaporeans a wage increase, the Singapore Inc will pinch back double the amount given as wage increases.
Are the foreign maids subjected to these abuses ?
How low can I stoop ? Will you believe that I can go as low as you can go.
How low can you stoop? When you cannot win an argument you resort to name calling and making totally unfounded allegations of 'midnight trysts'. Then again, what can we expect from a rabid anti-government muckraker like you.
Can there be an argument when you do not even engage on issues, and have to be provoked to argue on the side issues - which you show your brilliant expertise in side-tracking ?
Perched in faraway UK, - without the 'midnight tryst' - how did you come to your remarkable conclusion that the 'majority of Singaporeans' are maid abusers ?
From the last three response that you made, you were unable to respond to any of the points given in my reply. Your view must have been affected by the toxicity of my rabid points, which must have affected you deeply to the extent of incapacitating your mind from giving any effective response,other than indulging in personal attacks that you accuse me of.
Is it not ironical that you offer no evidence to support your audacious and derogatory claims - a point that you demand from others, while you exempt yourself to this minimum standard ?
Making more wild and rabid statements without the abillity to substantiate your position can only spoil your own image and standing.
Are you so afraid of being exposed of your impotence in clear thinking that you prefer to deal with peripheral non-issues, and merely exchange insults ?
At least, I believe that I have done a better job at insulting your personna and present my case with some degree of facts. -
I suppose they don't teach precis writing in school nowdays...either that or Atobe must have been a poor student. His reading and comprehension also leaves much to be desired.
I have conceded that the majority of Singaporeans do not favour a change in the law and indeed the Minister is not at all keen to rock the boat. There is no political will to do so when most Singaporeans think like Atobe.
They want their maids at $300 a month, work 18 hours a day, seven days a week without any right to movement or free association. Whilst folks like Atobe can hardly guarantee that their teenage daughters are not having sex with boyfriends outside the house, they want to ensure that their maids are chaste as the Virgin Mary
Well, I maintain our policies on domestic maids have to be changed, but that will not happen for a long time to come. The fact is, Singaporeans want compliant, cheap domestic maids in the house with as few rights as possible. By the same token, other compliant, cheap foreign workers are taking away jobs from Singaporeans. I suppose that's rough justice. -
Not so remarkable a performance in simply plagiarizing a statement that has been more often attributed to you, as seen from your many brilliant performance on record.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:I suppose they don't teach precis writing in school nowdays...either that or Atobe must have been a poor student. His reading and comprehension also leaves much to be desired.
Somehow, pirated copies cannot compare with the punch that the original can deliver - you ought to try harder in honing your skills.
Evidence.... evidence.... you need it to substantiate your point.
Why do you not subject yourself to the same demand that you frequently expect from others ?
Is my previous statements not true that you are an abject failure despite your self-inflated PhD credentials - when you cannot even address the core issues, and prefer to indulge in childish distractions with insults that you later accuse others of, when the compliment is merely returned to you ?
You seem to be an expert at inflating every issue - besides inflating your own self-worth.
I have conceded that the majority of Singaporeans do not favour a change in the law and indeed the Minister is not at all keen to rock the boat. There is no political will to do so when most Singaporeans think like Atobe.
Have you conceded anything at all, when you cannot even produce evidence as to the actual number that form the "majority" that you claim are Singaporeans who abuse maids ?
Is the Minister's cautious attitude towards the "majority of Singaporeans" who indulge in criminal sadomasochistic activities with their maids - (Singaporeans like you); or has the Minister proceeded with caution as the majority of Singaporeans are NOT criminal abusers ?
Is it wishful masochistic thinking on your part if "most Singaporeans think like Atobe" ?
I guess it must be a great day for your wish to be fulfilled, as you will probably be having multiple orgasmic pleasures with more Atobees whipping you...
The darkside never fail to reveal itself - especially coming from mushrooms that are said to be accustomed to grow in some damp and dark environment.
They want their maids at $300 a month, work 18 hours a day, seven days a week without any right to movement or free association. Whilst folks like Atobe can hardly guarantee that their teenage daughters are not having sex with boyfriends outside the house, they want to ensure that their maids are chaste as the Virgin Mary
Can folks like us guarantee our daughter's sexual behaviour, when we have mushrooms believing in the total and unbridled rights of Maids to bring their lovers into the place of work, and have sexual affairs before the young minds in their charge ?
You did brilliantly avoided the question previously asked if the servants, butlers and maids -employed by the upper crust society in UK, or in Europe - are also not subjected to the same terms of employment as those expected by most Singaporeans from their foreign maids ?
Is there a reason for you to avoid engaging on the core issues but prefer to involve yourself in this "circumlocutory diatribe" - which you claim that I am indulging ?
For a person of your status to indulge in such hypocritical behavior is quite unbecoming, if not downright dishonest to your inflated self, which can be quite painful even to a sadomasochistic personality.
Perhaps I can overlook this abberation as you performing your "Hypocritical Oath" - which you have never clearly accepted anyway.