MOM charges MD for foreign worker housing offences

A managing director in Singapore faces 21 charges for helping to house workers in overcrowded premises

MOM charges MD for foreign worker housing offences

MOM has charged a managing director for abetting an employer to house foreign workers in overcrowded private residential premises.

Zhou Fengxing faces 21 charges under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA). If convicted, she could be fined up to $10,000, jailed for up to 12 months or both for each charge.

Zhou’s company, Sino Star Enterprise Pte Ltd, arranges accommodation for foreign workers and students. The firm also faces the same number of charges.

The case was uncovered as part of MOM’s enforcement efforts against offences related to foreign worker housing. Investigations revealed that Sino Star was the master tenant of a residential apartment that housed a total of 21 foreign workers.

From March to July 2015, Zhou had given consent to Sino Star to sublet the unit to an employer. The unit exceeded the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) occupancy cap of eight people at the time.

The unit was found with illegal partitions and in a state of overcrowding. This resulted in extremely unsanitary conditions which compromised the well-being of the workers.

“Following MOM’s inspections conducted at the said residential unit, we ordered the employer to promptly relocate all affected workers,” MOM said in a statement. “All the workers were moved out to a purpose-built dormitory within two weeks from the date the directive was issued.”

On top of penalties imposed by the court, MOM may also bar errant employers from employing foreign workers.

The URA has also charged Zhou and Sino Star for changing the use of three private residential units to workers’ dormitories without planning permission as well as abetment.

The accused parties face three charges from URA under the Planning Act and two charges of abetting the unauthorised change of use of private residential units. If convicted, they could be fined up to $200,000 per charge.

The case has been adjourned to 24 April 2018.

 

 

Recent articles & video

Hong Kong agrees to annual review of statutory minimum wage with new formula

Can you terminate an employee based on HIV status?

'There is a local culture and there is corporate culture'

Remote digital jobs to surge to 92 million by 2030: WEF

Most Read Articles

Director cries wrongful dismissal after pregnancy announcement

Gen AI meant to 'amplify human strengths,' not replace them, says expert

Some BOS employees reportedly fired for medical benefits misuse