Migrant's Focus Magazine: Issue #2     Profile #1: Food for Thought (Or the Lack of It) When the Labor Export Program came in full swing during Marcos's time, the stories similar to that of Jocelyn P. Manuit became common fare. She wanted to help her poor parents and being second to the eldest of nine, she knew that she had responsibilities among her siblings who were still very young then. In1996, at the age of 23, she went to Taiwan to work as a domestic helper. On her two year contract, she paid a recruitment fee of P60,000 from her income for 7 months. After deductions, she then remitted what was left of her money to her family. She did not take any days off for two years and still did some part time job given by her employer. The money she earned from her part time was used for her day to day needs. She finished the contract with her employer and went for good with some savings on her pocket. While in the Philippines, she got married to her boyfriend of five years in 1998. Her husband was also a migrant worker from Taiwan. From her husband's savings, they had a house in Baguio City, where they are currently staying. She and her husband have no work in the Philippines. Her husband was a former miner in Baguio and worked as a steel fixer in Taiwan. With no job opportunities for both of them, she decided to apply again to Brunei but unfortunately she was victimized by illegal recruitment and her P70,000 went down the drain. But still, she searched for her luck. One night in June, in between the scheduled soap opera she was watching, her attention was caught by an advertisement. Domestic Helpers are needed in Hong Kong and recruitment fees will be made through salary deduction. There and then she decided that she will apply and informed her husband about her decision. He did not stop her. The following day she was one of many applicants queuing for an interview. She got her luck when the interviewee announced that she passed the interview and she was asked to have her medical examination. Immediately the following day she had her medical check up and submitted the documents to the agency. She paid P1,800 for the medical document. At the agency, she was asked to give P3,000 for processing her application and for payment of video and photographs of her. She was asked to wait for her "job order" to come. Few months later, the agency called her to inform that the "job order" arrived and she reported to the agency immediately. She paid P7,000 for the "job order". Sometimes in August, the agency called again to inform her that she had to sign a contract with her employer. She was very happy when she went to the agency and at the agency she filled up the form of the contract and affixed her signature. She paid P15,000 for the assurance that she got a contract but she would have to wait for her visa. It was almost the end of October when she received a call from the agency informing her that her visa arrived. She was excited when she arrived at the agency but to her surprise she was asked to pay P30,000 before her flight. She wondered why she was asked to pay. She thought all the while that payment will be only for P25,000 for cash (the total amount she had given to the agency already) and the rest will be in the form of salary deductions. But the agency insisted that she should have "cash out" of P30,000 or else, she will lose her job. Thinking that she has an opportunity in Hong Kong, she borrowed money from her sister-in-law and paid the P30,000. She arrived in Hong Kong in 02 November. It was a little bit cold but she didn't mind it. At 4:00 p.m. she was on the agency's office somewhere in Kowloon. At 7:00 p.m. she was at her new employer. She was happy to meet them, a Chinese couple with a nine year old son. She had her dinner at her employer's place. The following day, her employer cooked breakfast of two sausages and one egg, which was given to the child. She kept quiet but she was wondering why there was no breakfast for her. The whole family left her alone with no food . She worked very hard even though she felt hungry. Water made her survive. At night, her employer came with cooked food, and later gave her rationed food in a small bowl for her dinner. The following day, again her employer cooked two sausages and an egg for her son. Jocelyn did not expect anything for her breakfast and lunchthat day but still she worked very hard. At night, her employer cooked dinner and gave her rationed food in a small bowl. On her third day, she didn't have her breakfast again, and on her way bringing her ward to school, she met another Filipina and told her her condition. The Filipina gave her some bread. She was happy that she had her lunch. That night , she received a small bowl of food for her dinner. She got very hungry in the middle of her 3rd night . Water was not enough to give her energy. On her 4th day, she decided to cook rice (she was craving for rice) at early morning, around 6:00 a.m. Unfortunately her employer woke up and noticed that she was cooking rice. Her employer got very angry with her. She told Jocelyn that she was not in the Philippines nor in Taiwan, so she can not do whatever she wanted. She continued her work but at 3:00 p.m., she was informed that her employment contract was terminated. She was shattered. Was it because of cooking rice? But she was hungry. Imagine, no food was given her for breakfast and lunch for three days! Later, in the afternoon she was brought to the agency. The employer paid one month salary in lieu of notice and air ticket. And on the same day, the agency representative brought her to the airport so she can leave Hong Kong. She was confused while in the airport. She can not figure out how fast the events turned. With her remaining energy, she dared to ask for help to other Filipinas at the airport. One Filipina gave her HK$ 5 so she could use the phone to call for help. Instinct commanded her to call her aunt . Her aunt promised to rescue her soon. So, although her ticket was given to the airline counter, she decided not to leave HK. Her rescuer came and she was brought to a friend's flat. From her aunt's friend she was referred to the Mission for the Filipino Migrant Workers and Bethune House Shelter where she is now a resident. At the Bethune House, her case was reviewed. Some of the monetary responsibilities of the employer which were not given her were claimed in the Labor Department. She had received a temporary visa while the case is going on. She hopes that she can still work in Hong Kong. She did not know about the Conditions of Stay related to the Two-week Rule, an Immigration Rule that was implemented in 1987, that only gives her two weeks or 14 days to stay in Hong Kong upon the termination of the contract. This was carefully expalined to her then. With this rule, she will not be allowed to process her new application of employment if she fails to prove that the reason for the termination of her contract is due to any of the exemptions listed by the Immigration Department, that is: if the previous employer dies, if the previous employer left Hong Kong for good (transfer of residence of employer), if the previous employer becomes financially incapable of maintaining a foreign domestic help (can not pay domestic worker's salary anymore), and that there are violations in the contract and proof of ill-treatment by employer. Her employer violated Clause No. 05(b) of the Employment Contract, which states that...The employer shall provide the helper with suitable and furnished accommodation as per the attached Schedule of Accommodation and Domestic Duties and food free of charge. If no food is provided, a food allowance of HK$ _______ a month shall be paid to the Helper. Jocelyn knew that she was not given three square meals a day, the modest amount of food a person needs daily. But how to present this to the Immigration Department is another matter. She has to present proof that these events really took place. She needs to present evidence(s). How can she do this? She can tell them that her contract was terminated because she cooked rice. But will the Immigration officer accept her story? Definitely her employer can give one thousand and one reasons why the contract was terminated but will her employer tell the truth? Who will the Immigration Officer believe? She was stuck. But with a smile she tried to compose herself. She gave her story willingly and hoped for the best. There is a twist, though. Just few hours before this interview, she phoned her husband and learned that her mother had a heart attack upon learning what had happened to her. And Jocelyn made her decision. Her mother and her siblings need her presence. She decided she'll go back to the Philippines for good.... with no regrets. How about her debts? Don't worry, she thought, the lenders would understand her condition. For us at the Mission, we could only wish her all the luck, the most that we could do, and try to convince her to claim at the POEA (Philippine Overseas Employment Administration) the remaining sum of her two-year contract and the overcharging of fees imposed to her by the recruitment agency which practices illegal acts. Many, however, are discouraged to pursue this because of a long court battle. As for the infamous New Condition of Stay in Hong Kong, it is still there as a discriminatory "rule" but does not know, or refuses to know, its ill effects. It does not even know the names, the faces of the persons affected by its ruthlessness.     Search our site: advance search             Back to top           1995 - 2001 (c) copyright The Mission for Filipino Migrant Workers (HK) Society e-mail: mission@migrants.net website: http://www.migrants.net