News
Female migrant workers: Whither welfare of the goose that lays the golden egg
View(s):The exodus of female workers, over the years, to work abroad, is a boon to Sri Lanka’s economy. During the armed conflict, migrant workers’ remittances were equal to that spent on the military campaign to quell the LTTE rebellion. Even in 2014, remittances accounted for nearly 10% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), an amount in excess of US $7.1 billion.
However, this phenomenon of female migration resulted in a tremendous social cost to the country, with a negative impact on the families of these migrant workers.
Those worst affected were children, deprived of maternal care during their formative years, and had to grow up as virtual orphans, without the emotional support of their mothers.
The ‘fortunate’ few were looked after by grandparents, while many were left in the care of fathers who could not fill the void left behind by the mothers.
The social issues surrounding female migrants was a matter of concern for social activists, as well as the Government, which finally came up with the mechanism of a pre-departure Family Background Report (FBR), to minimise the impact of migration of mothers, on their children, during their early childhood.
The Government introduced the FBR requirement in 2013, with the aim of reducing adverse psycho-social implications on the children left behind by migrating mothers. Under this arrangement, females, with children under the age of 5 years, were not allowed to seek employment abroad, while those having children over 5 years, could do so, only after proving there were sufficient arrangements in place to care for them, in their mothers’ absence.
Last week, however, there were disturbing reports in the media that the FBR may be scrapped. The reason being the perennial problem of corruption. However, the Government needs to seriously reconsider its decision.
If corruption is the reason, the remedy is to minimise the possibilities of such corruption, rather than do away with the FBR. Such action by the Government would almost literally amount to throwing the baby with the bathwater.
The issue of migration, which touches the lives of a substantial section of the citizenry, has to be dealt with holistically, from the perspective of a caring State, rather than a country which sends its citizens out to work, while doing little to ensure their welfare. A Sri Lankan Ambassador to a Gulf country once told Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar that, though people often complained that Recruiting Agents exploited the migrant workers, it was the State that was the greatest exploiter.
Asked to explain, the Ambassador pointed out that, although those who went abroad to work as labourers and domestics, belonged to the most vulnerable and deprived sections of society, who sent their hard earned remuneration back to the country, the State did precious little to look after them. The benefit to the country’s economy was without any investment by the State.
While successive Governments took small steps in this regard, the migrant worker still remains a much neglected species. In fact, Sri Lanka needs to take an example from the Philippines, where the government is kept on its toes by a vibrant civil society, which is very vigilant in this regard.
The problems faced by Sri Lankan domestic workers in the Gulf States can be broadly divided into two categories.
Firstly, the problems that arise due to a flawed recruitment process at the Sri Lanka end. For example, there is no proper evaluation of an individual’s suitability to be recruited as a housemaid. Before a housemaid is recruited, it is not enough to merely train them to handle electrical household items. Equally, and sometimes even more important, is to find out their temperament, their personal circumstances, to make them aware of the “dos and don’ts” of Arab Culture, the lifestyle they will have to adopt when they go to work as maids in those countries, and so on.
If all this information is provided to a housemaid, she will be better positioned to make an informed decision, as to whether she should go for employment in those countries or, not. In the absence of such information, housemaids who go to the Middle East have different expectations and, as a result, face situations of conflict with their Employers.
The second category of problems relate to the laws and practices prevalent in the Gulf and Arab States. When the housemaid reaches her Employers residence, her passport is retained in the custody of her Employer. As a result, she does not enjoy the right to leave the country without the consent of the Employer. This places her in a position of great disadvantage.
Furthermore, the Legal and Policing system in these countries are procedurally not as sophisticated as, for example, the Sri Lankan Legal system. As a result, the quality of justice meted out to housemaids and other migrant workers varies according to the individual propensities of the person entrusted with judicial or administrative functions.
Two anecdotes may be cited to illustrate such a proposition. In the ’90s, a Sri Lankan who had been sentenced to death, on the strength of a confession, was asked by the Judge, on a subsequent date when the case was called up, whether his confession was voluntary or coerced. He stated that it was voluntary. The Judge postponed the case on 3 occasions and, on every occasion, he was asked the same question, and the convicted person repeated his confession was voluntary.
Finally, the date for the execution. On that day, he was asked the same question one final time, but on this occasion he stated his confession had been obtained under duress. He was immediately acquitted.
On another occasion, the wife of a Saudi Employer was imprisoned for having caused the death of a housemaid. The Judge directed the Employer to produce the details of the next-ofkin of the deceased housemaid, to ensure the payment of compensation to them. The Employer contacted the Embassy to assist him to obtain the necessary information. Through the authorities in Sri Lanka, the Embassy found that the address given by the housemaid as Main Street, Anuradhapura, was false and, as a result, it was not possible to locate the next-of-kin. The judge was not prepared to accept this explanation and repeatedly warned the Employer that he too would be imprisoned, if he did not furnish the necessary information to Court. As a result, the Saudi Employer virtually took up residence in the Sri Lanka Embassy, refusing to go away until he was given the necessary information relating to the next-of-kin.
Another problem faced by housemaids in the Middle East is the difficulty in communicating with their next-of-kin back home. In these countries, the postal addresses are usually Post Boxes and there is no home delivery of letters. The local Employers communicate between themselves through the phone or, when they wish to write, through courier services. Consequently, when a housemaid sends or receives letters, she is dependent on her Employer going to the Post Office to collect or post letters. The visits to the Post Office by the Employer are few and far inbetween, because he does not himself have the need to do so.
If the recruitment process is streamlined and improved at the Sri Lankan end, then the problems at the Employer’s end will be minimised. If one is to quote a figure, maybe even 75% of the problems will be reduced, to the huge relief of the housemaids and the Sri Lankan Embassy.
The migrant housemaids should be given adequate information about their working environment, so that, they can take informed decisions as to whether they wish to take up employment or not.
To address the issues at the Employer’s end, it is best that the Sri Lankan authorities negotiate a set of minimum safeguards for our housemaids, through bilateral agreements. They also need to work towards this objective through collaborative efforts with other labour exporting countries. This will address at least some, but not all, the problems that a housemaid faces, because the working environment she faces makes her vulnerable to different situations.
In the final analysis, Sri Lanka must review the whole issue of sending female workers abroad to work as domestics. Given the fact they are exposed to vulnerable situations and also the tremendous social cost incurred by their families back home, particularly the children, we must seriously consider whether we wish to continue to let our women work abroad as housemaids.
(javidyusuf@gmail.com)