The problem of low-wage domestic helpers in Hongkong 香港廉價外傭制度的問題

前天於一單虐傭新聞留言。該印傭被熨斗燙臉、單車鏈鞭打、迫飲厠所水及鎅刀鎅手等，又被拖欠薪金。兩名香港夫婦僱主於2013年被判分別三及五年半。七年後的今天，有外勞團體盼籌錢幫該受害印傭向僱主民事索償。 Day before, there was a news about the abuse of domestic helper case in Hongkong. The Indonesian domestic helper’s face was scalded by clothes iron, also she was whipped by bicycle chain, being forced to drink toilet water and being cut by an utility knife, and wage paid in arrears etc. Back in 2013, The Hongkong couple were sentenced to jailed for three years and five 1/2 years. Seven years later today, a foreign worker organisation is hoping to raise money to help the victim to file a civil claim against the employer. I left some comments and it causes a fire.

先說我看到的留言。不只這則新聞，過去我看到不少港人對外傭的留言都充滿歧視和敵意，卻又認為不可以取消這個引入大量廉價外傭的制度。當然也有不少港人批評其他港人荷刻，亦有對待外傭友善的好僱主；也有些外傭的確是會偷東西/用僱主名義借高利貸、虐待兒童或老弱，因為外傭這個題目很大，一定會不停拉去這些例子。 Let’s first talk about the comments. Not only in this particular case, but in the past, I have been reading many Hongkonger’s comment towards foreign domestic helpers, which were full of discrimination and hostility. However, they would think that the system of introducing a large number of low wage foreign domestic helpers should not be cancelled. Of course, there are also many Hongkongers criticizing those thoughts as well, and there are many Hongkong employers treat their helpers well. Nevertheless, because of the topic of domestic helpers is huge, those discussion always bought up the other issues, such as some foreign domestic helpers steal things from home/borrow usury in the name of their employers, and abuse the children or the elderly.

單單這則新聞的留言，就見到很多人說「要眾籌請找你同鄉，每個星期日你們的人坐得一街，每人一元也夠數，不要用香港人的錢」一類的話。也有人討論到這樣蓄意傷人也只判三五年，根本太便宜那對夫婦了。 In this news alone, many were saying “If you want to raise a crowd-fund, please ask your own people. There are full of you guys sitting on the street on every Sundays. One dollar per person will be enough. Don’t ask us for the money.” The other Hongkongers said that, it is not right that for this kind of deliberate injury, the employers are only sentenced to three, five years.

看到評論，我寫下了這個留言： I leave a comment after reading the other comments:

"很多香港人會罵，但是根本長遠來說，香港是應該取消外傭制度，用香港人（正常）的薪金僱用時薪僱員" “Many Hongkongers would scold me, but in the long run, the low-wage-foreign-domestic-helper system should be ended. Should pay a normal salary to hire hourly helper.”

最初不少人認同，當然也有人跑出來說沒有那個錢但有那個需要，他們都似乎沒看到「長遠」這兩個字就發火了。我再作出補充： At first, many agreed. Then as expected, some were extremely mad and said that they didn’t have the money therefore low-salary helper are necessary. They all seemed to get angry without seeing the phrase “in the long run”. Thus I added:

"你說到的是個別例子（有留言提到自己家裡有長期病患，安老院環境又差，所以一定要有工人），如果每次都以個別例子來反駁，就不會有討論了。這個問題是因為政府故意不使用資源幫助有需要本地家庭、故意引入極大量傭工，令家庭關係疏離、小朋友越來越多習慣被「待奉」失去自理能力，而事實香港僱用外傭的家庭也不是每個也有需要，只是因為「很便宜，很超值」才僱用。自己居住的地方也不夠，要外傭睡洗手間/厨房這些醜聞還不夠多嗎？97前也有外傭，但是數量遠比現在少，而且質素管理比較好，所以少很多虐兒、偷竊、以僱主名義借高利貸事件。現在事實是害了雙方社會。 至於外傭失業問題（因為有人提出外傭也會失業），其實是他們的國家需要處理的事。從根本就不該不停把自己國家的女性國民輸出外國做廉價勞工，讓她們寄錢回國，很多外傭的丈夫和兄弟都只等外傭寄回家的錢用而不上班，讓她們在外辛苦。我不認為所有家庭都不該僱用工人，但最少對別人好一些，不要開口閉咀就說「你不喜歡這工作大可以回鄉」，甚至像這案件中嚴重傷人。" “You are talking about exception. (As the previous comment said that he has a long-term patient home and the condition of the nursing home is poor, therefore he must have a helper), if people always use exception as an objection, there will be no discussion. The problem now is because the government is purposely not using any resources to help the families that in need, and to deliberately introduce large amount of foreign helpers, which alienates family relationships. Locals children are so used to be treated as ‘little masters’, many don’t know how to take care of themselves. The fact is, not every family in Hongkong needs to hire a full time helpers to stay home. Many hired them is because they are ‘so cheap’, but the reality is they don’t even have enough space for themselves and therefore no space at all for the helpers, end up let them sleep in the toilet or kitchen. There were also foreign helpers in the pre-1997 Hongkong, but far less. And because of better quality control there were fewer cases as in helpers steal/abused children/ loan shark in the name of the employer. The fact is that the system now has been harming both societies. As for the unemployment situation of the foreign helpers (Because some comments were pointing out those foreign helpers will lost their job), it is actually something that their countries need to fix as well. No country should ever keep exporting their female nationals to another country to be cheap labour (lower than the local’s minimum wage), let them send money home, and we often heard of many males from the helper’s country (husband/brothers) aren’t working and only wait for the salary from their wife/sisters, let the ladies suffer overseas. I am not saying family should NOT be hiring helpers, but they should be at least treated better. Don’t always say “If you don’t like it, just shut up and leave, go back to your own country, no one forced you to come here to work”; or worse, beat up the helper like in this news.”

這當然引來很多指控，最大的莫過於「我們夫婦也要工作，要人一整天照顧家中小孩老人的話本地人怎請得起，外傭二百元一天就有交易，哪裡找？」然而再一次，我的留言針對的並非所謂有需要家庭，而是社會制度長遠需要改善的論點。事實是政府需要在每區開設日間托兒中心及安老服務，並給予資助來解決雙職家庭問題。很多人說談何容易，那當然不容易了，所以才說是長遠要改善。問題是政府故意引入大量外傭，外傭的基本權利被僱主視為「過佳」，要僱用之餘又不能為他們供應正常的私人空間（空間連雜物房也不如的「睡房」，甚至睡在大櫃裡），而坦白說不少本地家庭都視外傭為外人/下人，要求分開吃飯（或到厨房站著吃），也有不少僱主要求沒收外傭護照。因為一些外傭的確有偷竊、以僱主名義借高利貸情況，僱主本身對他們一早已不信任，所以到底是請個外人回來待在家裡他們已不喜歡，但又希望有個人能以便宜價錢全職工作，待在家裡一整天/一星期六天處理家頭細務照顧老弱。如果換作請鐘點工人或是送去托兒中心，其他本來外傭做的家務都要自己做了，可以的話怎不會要一個？當然你可以說「一個願打、一個願捱」，我出說好的低價，你肯來工作，這麼好的條件誰又會想改變呢，所以所有家庭也需要一個廉價外傭。有些人也會說他們在香港得到的薪金比起印尼、菲律賓高，所以是「雙贏」，香港人是在幫他們「添生活」。這個論調是不是很似層相識？所以我的另一個留言： This, of course, has attracted many accusations. The most popular comment is “We are married couple and we both have to work. We need someone to take care of the children and elderly, how can we afford the minimum wage to hire a local helper? Where can I find one like the foreign domestic helper for 200 Hongkong dollar a day?” Once again, my comment was not aimed at the so-called families that in need, but the argument that the social system needs to be improved in the long run. The fact is that the government needs to open day-care centres and elderly services in each district, and provide subsidies to help the working parents families. Many people say that it is not easy, and course it is not easy, and thus I said that it is something needs to be improve in the long run. The problem is that the government deliberately introduces a large number of low paid foreign domestic helpers. The basic rights of foreign domestic helpers were seen as “privilege” by the employers, and they cannot provide the basic private area (the “bed room” is worse than a store room, or even let them sleep in a bigger cabinet!) and frankly, many local families treat foreign domestic helpers as low grade servants, they were asked to eat separately (or let the helper stand in the small kitchen space to finish their meal), many domestic helpers’ passport were asked to be confiscated, it is true that some foreign domestic helpers steal and borrow loan sharks in the name of their employers, therefore many employers do not trust the helpers in the very beginning. The bottom line is many employers do not like to have an outsider to stay home, but on the other hand they hope that someone can work full-time at an extreme low wage, stand by at home full day/6 days per week to take care of the houseworks and children or elderly. If it all changed to sending part-time worker or bring children to day care, the houseworks that has been taken care of by the domestic helpers will be done by the employers themselves. So why don’t get a helper? You can of course say no one force the helpers to accept such low wage and work overseas, and for the employer this is such ‘great value’, what is the reason to change the system then? Therefore every family needs a foreign helper. Some were saying the salary for the helpers are low in Hongkong but high compare to their countries, thus this is a win-win situation, Hongkongers are helping them instead of exploiting them. Isn’t it sounds familiar? And so my other comment:

“不少人說「他們在這裡賺得比自己家鄉多」、「又沒人強迫他，不喜歡就不要做了」，其實說的時候沒留意到自己乘人之危之餘還要自我感覺良好。從有問題的制度中找到一個比較折衷的方法不等於制度沒有問題」。" “Many people say, “Those helpers earn more here than in their home country,” and “No one is forcing them. Don’t do it if you don’t like it.” In fact, when they said they didn’t notice that they felt good about themselves, that they were taking advantage of the other’s situation. Finding a more compromised method from the problematic system does not mean that the system has no problems.”

有人把留言扭曲，說我才是因為歧視做家傭的工人，所以才會認為她們一定被欺負。啊，如果那你這麼尊重她們，為何又不認同該向她們付最低工資？你僱用她們而不是本地人最大原因是什麼？只因她們「便宜」。因為這個制度是可以讓你不付出最低工資。從一開始，我就「不是」說有需要的家庭「不該」在現在的情況下僱用外傭，因為政府的資助和配合還未存在，而最壞的是政府根本不打算幫助，所以僱用外傭這些對於不論僱主還是外傭本身的保障和責任都被外判到僱主自己身上。那些大呼小叫的人，根本在斷章取義看不明白就以為我在說「請外傭的一定是壞人」。現在的制度及沒有社會配套迫使人請外傭，即使覺得不對也要請個回家幫忙也沒法子。但如果有上述所取代的方法，似乎不少人仍然覺得可以用廉價外勞這個制度更好，不想改變，從而引伸到很多僱主本身根本沒有這個意識，覺得這個大量引入廉價外勞的制度完全沒有問題。說到底都是心態問題，這事實上的確是不公平。如果香港人爭取自由、人權、平等，為什麼卻可以認為這個制度長遠不需要改變呢？ Some people then twisted my comment, saying that I am the one who is discriminating against domestic workers, because I assumed that they must be bullied. Oh really? If you have so much respect to them, why don’t you offer to / agreed to pay them the minimum wage? To be honest, what is the biggest reason for you hire them instead of locals? Because they are ‘cheap’. Because this system allow you to pay them less than minimum wage. From the beginning, I never said that families in need “should not” hire foreign domestic helpers under the current circumstances. Due to the government subsidies or help yet to arranged, and the worst thing is that the government in fact have no intention to help, thus the whole foreign domestic helpers situation is no matter to employers or helpers are a passive option, and because the government let this happen on purpose, the rights and responsibilities for both the parties have been outsourcing to the employer his/her own. Those who complained about other pointing out the issue only take out part of the contents and zoom it in, therefore they jumped into the conclusion that those who pointed out the issue are accusing them that “to hire a foreign domestic helper must be a bad person.” Yes, the current system and lack of social support forces people to hire foreign domestic helpers. Even if they feel that it isn’t right, they have to do it. But what if given the choice? It looks like most of them would still want to have this ‘cheaper than minimum wage foreign domestic helper’. It shows that many employers do not awareness of the unfairness and feel that this system of introducing a large number of under paid foreign workers is totally fine. After all, it is a matter of mentality, which is indeed unfair. When Hongkongers strive for freedom, human rights, and equality, how can we think that this system does not need to be changed in the long run?

政府資助的問題也有很多討論，所以我也有這個留言： There are also many discussions on the issue of government funding, see my comment below:

"97(香港主權移交）後社會問題百出，基本上整個社會要重新啟動。很多民生問題也因政治而起，而政治上最大問題不是哪條條例出了問題、那個官員賣港，而是主權國是誰…” “After 1997 (the transfer of Hong Kong’s sovereignty), there were too many problems in society. Basically, the whole society need to be restarted. Livelihood issues are mainly caused by politics. The biggest problem in politics is not which regulation went wrong or which official have been selling Hong Kong out, but the Hong Kong’s sovereignty..”

所以現階段只能「討論」這個問題，但單單討論時提出不該繼續有（如此大量）廉價外傭的論點也不行，因為不少僱主從一開始根本不覺得這樣有問題。不少外國人也有批評香港的外傭制度，我也會解釋事實上社會未有資源幫助一些有需要家庭，但他們也會提到這種比最低薪金還少、24小時留在家的工人，人人也會說有需要吧？繼而談到大部份本地僱主甚至自稱「主人」，完全潛移默化覺得自己地位比外傭高，而外傭工作滿七年也不能像其他外國人一樣可以申請永久居留等，不少外國朋友直斥這是種族歧視、現代奴隸制。在外國人面前我盡量為香港僱主解釋，說這的確是不公平卻是雙方政府的協議，但事實是怎樣，各人聽了都自有判斷，尤其當香港僱主也覺得這樣沒有問題的時候 — 在現在的情況下，不少家庭的確沒法子要僱用廉價外傭，僱主可以說是半被動的，但認為這個制度完全沒問題的心態是主動的，這才是最有問題。有台灣朋友則提到台灣也有外傭，然而數量遠比香港少，台灣也有不少雙職家庭。當人人都說自己家庭有需要，那個標準是怎樣呢？在台灣，僱用外傭需要申請、計分，等待批核，不像香港隨便走進中介中心付錢就可以。 Therefore, at this stage, we can only “discuss” about the situation. However, it is not acceptable to simply point out that there should not be (such a large number of) cheap foreign domestic helpers, because many employers did not see it a problem from the beginning. Many foreigners have also criticized Hongkong’s foreign domestic helper situation. I had to explain to them that the society does not have the resources to help those families in need, but in their point of view, the domestic helpers received not even the minimum salary, stay at home 24 hours, 6 days a week, if there’s really such need in so many families? They are also not comfortable that about that most local employers even claim to be “Masters”. Unlike other foreigners, those low salary foreign domestic helpers cannot apply for permanent residence after working for seven years. Many foreign friends denounce this. They say this is racist, and is modern slavery. In front of foreigners, I tried to explain for the Hong Kong employers, that this is an unequal agreement between the two governments. However, everyone has their own judgement after listening to the explanation, especially when local employers feel that this is no problem as well — Under the current circumstances, many families can really only afford to hire those low wages foreign domestic helpers. Therefore you can say that the employers are only semi-passively contributing to this, but the mentality of thinking that the system is completely okay is proactive, and this is main problem. Some Taiwanese friends mentioned that Taiwan also has foreign domestic helpers, but the number is far less than Hong Kong. Taiwan also has many working parents families. When everyone says that their family are in need, then what is the standard? In Taiwan, if the family need to hire low wages foreign domestic helpers requires straight application and is relying the score system, and also need to wait for the approval. Unlike Hong Kong where you can just walk into an intermediary centre and pay for it.

如果說以上的論點是「不知民間疾苦」、「離地」，其實也只是被說中要點而胡亂標籤、人身攻擊，這是非常沒質素的討論。每次都說別人離地，然後知道我不是住在香港就把話題拉到我在外國生活，然而以上的觀點是我在香港居住時一早已有的。總不能每次聽到海外港僑談論香港的事時就說別人離地、離港了就閉嘴；但有事時就說國際線，說海外港僑要更關心香港。結論是廉價外傭制度長遠應該改變（正確來說是減少數量及增加外傭福利) 。現階段因為政府沒有投放資源去幫助有需要家庭，例如每區津貼甚至免費的公營日間托兒或是老人中心，所以現時僱用廉價外傭也是無可厚非，但不應視之為理所當然，長遠也會連累雙方社會。 Some would say the above arguments is because “your are in your ivory tower”. But this is just a random label and personal attacks when they do not have a better argument, it is a very poor quality discussion. Every time coming to similar issue, they would just say that other people are in their ivory tower, especially once they know that I am not living in Hong Kong now. However, the thoughts above was the thoughts I had long before I leave Hong Kong. You can’t always just say that overseas Hongkonger should just shut up every time when you hear something you disagreed, but at the same time when something happens in Hongkong, you complain that overseas Hongkongers are not helping enough to raise international awareness. My conclusion is, that the low wage foreign domestic helper system should be changed in the long run. (To put it correctly, is to set a quota to minimum and improve the welfare to those helpers) At this stage, because the government does not allocate resources to help families that in need, such as subsidies per district or even free public day-cares or elderly centres, it is understandable to hire low wage foreign domestic helpers from the current system, but it should not be taken for granted, and it is harming both societies long term.