The following article was published in the Straits Times on 13 Feb 2006.
Careless maids not our fault, bosses say
By Arlina Arshad and Arti Mulchand
Straits Times, 13 February 2006
They worry about being held responsible for all mishaps following court case
THE case of the falling maid is causing jitters among employers, who wonder if they would be held responsible for every mishap to their maids, even through no fault of theirs.
Some point out that the maids sometimes put themselves in danger while working in the home, like Madam Gina Ho's Indonesian maid whom she caught climbing a ladder to clean the exterior of her flat's 17th-storey windows.
Said Madam Ho: 'I shouted at her. I said if she did it again, I'd get the embassy to tell her in her language.'
Or like Ms Grace Asha's Indian maid, whom her son caught standing on a stool cleaning windows with the grilles wide open recently.
The maid of three years insisted that she understood safety and knew what she was doing.
'Now, we don't let her clean the windows unless we're at home. I know it's because she wants to prove that she can perform the job well, but she didn't realise the danger,' Ms Asha said.
Miss Udaya, 36, said in Tamil: 'I didn't really think I would die. I don't clean the windows like that anymore.'
Last Tuesday, housewife Ngu Mei Mei, 37, was sentenced to two weeks' jail for endangering her Indonesian maid's life. Miss Yanti, 22, plunged eight floors to her death while out on a ledge to hang laundry.
Employers who put their maids' lives in danger could be jailed for up to three months or fined up to $250, or both. They will also be permanently barred from employing a foreign domestic worker.
Under the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, employers who fail to provide safe working conditions can also be jailed for up to six months, fined up to $5,000, or both.
Employers interviewed are willing to take the rap should their maids die because they had given reckless instructions, but they said they should not be blamed when their maids are careless.
Madam Ho asked: 'If the employer totally doesn't know and the fault ends up on them, it's harsh. If my maid accidentally cuts herself, could I be charged for negligence?'
Ngu was jailed even though her mother-in-law had admitted to instructing the maid to hang the laundry on the ledge, as the courts made it clear that the employer bore the ultimate responsibility for the maid's safety.
Madam Janice Tan, 41, who is self-employed, said her in-laws supervise her Filipino maid during the day when she is at work.
'Would it then be fair to blame me just because I have hired the maid under my name? If anything was going on, I may not know. How can I be held responsible?' she said.
Corporate sales manager Rabia Muir, 41, said the maid should be a 'shared responsibility' among family members.
'One should not generalise based on the one case that everything that goes wrong is the employer's fault,' she said.
Agreeing, computer operations officer Doris Yeo, in her 40s, said her niece - who lives with her - may be the maid's legal employer, but she should not take the rap for any mishap she did not cause.
Employers also could not be expected to keep a watch on maids at all times or be the only ones to instruct them.
'Does that mean I have to be stuck with her 24 hours and take her along everywhere? That is unrealistic,' said Madam Carly Yu, 44, who is self-employed.
Employers point out that the axe would fall mainly on working mothers, as they can claim foreign maid relief.
Only a handful of employers like software engineer Hock Chue Ha, 37, thought it right that they should bear ultimate responsibility.
Madam Hock said her 67-year-old mother once told her maid to put a soiled mattress to dry on bamboo poles outside their 16th-storey kitchen window when she was at work.
'I forbade her to do so before going for work but saw the mattress outside when I returned in the evening. I had to warn her it's dangerous for the maid and people walking below,' she added.
But she would not blame her mother if her maid fell out because she considers it her duty to remind family members to take safety precautions.
Lawyers interviewed concurred with the court's verdict, saying that Ngu could have stopped her mother-in-law from insisting on the laundry being hung on the ledge, but she chose not to.
Litigation lawyer Bernard Doray said: 'It's a question of responsibility. It is like A giving B poison and C standing by and allowing it to happen. Ngu is the lawful employer and should intervene.'
Is there a chance that employers may escape charges if an accident happens to the maid while they are not home?
Lawyers do not think so.
Criminal lawyer Amolat Singh said employers have the duty to lay down the dos and don'ts, including safety issues, to the person who supervises the maid in their absence. 'Employers cannot wash their hands. They can delegate duty to another person, but not burden and responsibility. They are still liable.'
