It started with an anonymous complaint from a member of the public about migrant worker cleaners in their estate giving money to their manager.
Within days, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) deployed about 20 investigation officers to interview more than 30 workers and arrested the manager, Derrick Ho Chiak Hock.
Ho, the former operations manager of conservancy firm Lian Cheng Contracting, had collected $396,440 from 57 Bangladeshi workers from 2014 to 2020 for the renewal of their work permits.
All the workers have since got back their money.
Ho, 55, was sentenced to 24 weeks’ jail on Nov 14, 2024, after admitting to offences under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act.
Mr Adrian Quek, divisional director of MOM’s Foreign Manpower Management Division (FMMD), said this was one of the largest cases of kickbacks the ministry had investigated to date.
MOM told The Straits Times that from 2021 to 2023, about 70 employers were caught annually for kickback offences.
About 30 per cent of them were charged in court, while the rest received warnings or composition fines.
On Jan 26, Ms Felicia Lim, FMMD’s assistant director of investigation and the lead investigator in Ho’s case, told ST how the case unravelled.
Ms Lim said the November 2020 complaint mentioned the names of two affected workers.
To avoid alerting Ho, MOM investigators drove the workers from their workplace to the MOM Services Centre in Bendemeer Road for interviews after 10pm.
Initially, the workers were worried that Ho would find out they had spoken to the authorities.
Ms Lim said: “We assured them that if their claims were valid, we will take to task the people who are culpable.”
On Nov 19, 2020, officers went to Nee Soon East and Pasir Ris-Punggol estates – where Ho was operations manager – and spoke to all the estate cleaners under his charge.
Ho and the foreign supervisors who collected the kickbacks were arrested, and confessed during questioning.
Investigation officers raided Ho’s home the same day.
One of their strongest pieces of evidence was a photo of a bundle of cash in one of the foreign supervisors’ mobile phones.
That same bundle was found atop a pile of cash – totalling $326,305 – stashed in Ho’s safe.
Ms Lim said: “I was happy the cash was still intact, but I was also shocked at such a huge amount he was keeping at home.”
Investigators also found log sheets detailing the amounts he had collected over the years from the 57 workers.
During the raid, Ho asked for his handcuffs to be obscured from his wife’s view. His hands were behind his back. So Ms Lim handed him a jacket to cover the restraints.
Officers spoke to the company’s director and workers in other estates to confirm that they were not involved.
Ho and his former colleague Rakibul had started the scheme in 2014.
They collected $1,500 for a one-year work pass renewal and $3,000 for a two-year renewal.
Ho took a cut of $1,000 and $2,000, respectively, while Rakibul kept the rest.
Wiped out savings
Mr Rahman Lutfor, 37, then an estate cleaner with Nee Soon East Town Council, gave Ho $6,000 over four years.
He wiped out his savings and borrowed money from colleagues.
He had wanted to build a larger house in Bangladesh for his wife and two sons, aged 10 and 12.
Despite knowing that kickbacks were illegal, Mr Rahman was afraid to defy Ho.
Speaking through an interpreter, Mr Rahman said: “I was scared that if I said I didn’t want to pay, I would be sent home and lose my job.”
Mr Rahman used his monthly salary of $1,200 to repay debtors and cut his monthly expenditure from $300 to $200.
He added: “When I saw something I wanted to eat, (I would think I) don’t need to eat, save money.”
Another worker, Mr Hanif Mohammed, who gave Ho $5,600 over four years, did not know kickbacks were illegal.
He said Ho claimed it was their company’s policy and even offered him a “discount” as an experienced worker.
Mr Hanif, who draws a monthly salary of $1,200, paid Ho $2,000 for a two-year renewal instead of $3,000.
The married man with a son, seven, and daughter, two, did not tell his family about it, adding: “If I lose money or fall sick here, my family will feel tense.”
Ms Lim said Ho was remorseful and made full restitution through his lawyers before he was jailed.
The workers smiled when talking about getting their money back.
Mr Rahman, now a lorry driver at a construction firm, said he could finally start saving for his new home.
He said: “When we gave this money, we never expected to get it back.”
Fewer cases
Mr Ethan Guo, executive director of local charity Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2), said migrant workers are vulnerable to exploitation as they are often laden with debt after paying to secure a job in Singapore.
Mr Guo said: “They have sold their land, pawned their wife’s jewellery… Everyone along the chain knows the workers have a lot at stake, and they will do whatever it takes to keep their jobs.”
TWC2 saw seven kickback cases in 2019, and 11 in 2020.
It now handles about two cases per year, but Mr Guo said the drop may be due to workers not speaking up for fear of losing their jobs after the Covid-19 pandemic.
Mr Michael Lim, executive director of NTUC’s Migrant Workers’ Centre, said the centre has observed fewer kickback cases over the past five years.
Mr Lim said this was due to measures such as MOM requiring employers to issue detailed payslips.
MOM said it educates migrant workers on kickbacks and how to report such cases, and assures them that they can change jobs if their claims are valid.
The ministry also uses data analytics to identify unusual patterns in hiring practices to detect kickback cases.
Mr Guo said most workers tell TWC2 they chose to work in Singapore as they believed it has good laws, and they did not expect to be exploited.
He added that if kickbacks become rampant, workers may avoid working here, while companies who need to keep their supply chain clean may not invest in Singapore.
He said: “We keep assuming we will have a constant flow of cheap labour into Singapore. That is not always going to be the case. We need to stop taking these workers for granted.”
This article was first published in The Straits Times. Permission required for reproduction.
