Staggered working hours for FDHs sought

Migrant domestic workers join the May 1 Labor Day rally and march that began at the Victoria Park in Causeway Bay. Migrant groups decry long working hours, saying at least 137 foreign domestic workers died in Hong Kong last year owing to, among others, lack of rest time (file photo).

PHILIPPINE officials proposed that a staggered work schedule be granted to Filipino household service workers so the latter could enjoy rest hours within their working day.

The proposal was made during the latest Technical Working Group meeting between Hong Kong and Philippine officials held on July 19.

The staggered working hours would grant rest hours within the working day of the domestic helpers.

Hong Kong’s Labour Department, however,  raised the difficulty of setting fixed working hours for foreign domestic helpers as even local employees had no standard working hours.

“They (LD) added that it is hard to quantify the working time of an FDH in a household setting,” said a report about the meeting submitted by the Philippine Consulate General to its head office in Manila.

Instead, the LD said they would continue to encourage employers to be more humane and considerate in providing sufficient rest to their helpers.

“LD again vowed to step up the education (campaign) for employers,” the report said.

“Post’s counter-proposal to LD’s concern is to specify in the attachment to the FDH contract the staggered work schedule of the helper, e.g. for 10-hour-a-day work, 5 a.m. to 9 a.m., 2 p.m. to 6 p.m., and 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.,” the report said.

In June, migrant domestic workers’ groups slammed the LD’s proposal that excluded them from “contract” working hours, saying the step affirmed Hong Kong’s “total disregard” of their slave-like conditions.

The LD, however, defended the exclusion of MDWs from its proposal, citing the “nature of work” of the live-in domestic workers and its “socio-economic ramifications”.

Leaders of Asian Migrants’ Coordinating Body and the Progressive Labor Union of Domestic Workers in Hong Kong had expressed their disappointment and anger over the proposal.

“The [standard] working hours could have been significant advancement to address modern-day slavery of migrant domestic workers. But it seems the Hong Kong government is promoting slavery and slave-like treatment of MDWs instead of resolving it,” said AMCB spokesman Eman Villanueva.

Shiella Grace Estrada, chairperson of PLUDW-HK, said they were disappointed that despite consulting migrant domestic workers about standardizing working hours, they were still excluded from the proposal.

“Sa consultation na ginawa nila sa Hong Kong, lahat halos (ng labor unions) may representatives and they even accepted our statement about the need of MDWs to have standard working hours.

“Then if they already had in mind to exclude us, why did they include us in the consultation? That consultation was not real then because they know that domestic workers suffer the most because of long working hours,” Estrada said.

She added that, ultimately, allowing migrant domestic workers to continue working long hours, would be detrimental to employers as insufficient rest could lead to ill health.

“Many employers do not allow their domestic workers to take a sick leave unless the (illness) is serious. Some employers, walang binibiling medical insurance…It’s a shame as Hong Kong government keeps claiming that Hong Kong is the best place for domestic workers, but why is there exclusion from labor protection?” Estrada said.

The LD’s proposal drew widespread criticism both from those who are supporting and opposing setting standard working hours in Hong Kong.

To address long working hours in the city, the LD proposed that employers include or state in the contract of low-income workers, or those earning $11,000 or less each month, their contract working hours.

According to the 2016 UBS’ annual Prices and Earnings” study, workers in Hong Kong spent 50.11 hours a week at the workplace, the longest hours out of the 71 global cities included in the poll.

Many foreign domestic workers, meanwhile, have been complaining that they work between 12 and 18 hours a day to serve their employers.

On December 18 last year, the International Migrants Day, a group of migrant workers turned over to the office of Hong Kong Chief Executive C.Y. Leung a petition asking for standardized working hours, particularly “11 hours of uninterrupted rest.” Migrant workers from the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, and Nepal signed the petition.

Villanueva and Estrada lambasted the LD representatives’ statement that “most of the employers are friendly” as the reason for the exclusion of migrant domestic workers from contract working hours, saying the need to ensure proper rest be given to them should be legislated.

Villanueva added that the latest proposal from the LD showed the “blatant discrimination” and “unfair treatment” of MDWS.

“Kahit na sa contracted working hours, they still excluded MDWs. Officially, sa recommendation excluded daw ang lahat ng hindi covered sa Employment Ordinance or sa Statutory Minimum Wage Ordinance. Nasa second category ang MDWs,” he said.

Hong Kong, Villanueva said, has repeatedly taken steps that resulted in the social exclusion of MDWs.

“Noon sa minimum wage, excluded ang live-in [workers]. Around 98 percent or more of live-in domestic workers are migrants. After na-exclude kami sa Mimnimum Wage Ordinance, ngayon naman ay excluded ulit kami sa working hours regulation dahil excluded kami sa Minimum Wage Ordinance.

“The discrimination, exclusion, and slavery of MDWs have been made systematic and institutionalized here in Hong Kong,” he said.

Hong Kong lawmakers had asked the LD to withdraw the proposal, he said.

In addressing the opposition to the Standard Working Hours Committee proposal, a LD spokesperson had told Hong Kong News they would “adopt a legislative approach to mandate employers to enter into written employment contracts with the lower-income grassroots employees, which shall include terms on working hours and overtime compensation arrangements.”

“And specify that lower-income grassroots employees should be entitled to overtime compensation by way of overtime pay at a rate no less than the rate of the agreed wages or the equivalent time off in lieu.”

The spokesperson added that the exclusion of live-in domestic workers was made owing to their “distinct working pattern and nature” of their work, and the “potential socio-economic ramifications and the long-established policy of FDHs.”

The LD said it would continue to listen to the views of the “community in finalising the proposals”.