A few days ago another case of maid abuse was highlighted in the local news media, this time resulting in the death of the maid. It was reported that the maid ‘had bruises and scratch marks on her back, arms and forehead, both old and new’ (New Straits Time, June 7, 2011), suggesting that the poor woman had been enduring this abuse and mistreatment for sometime already before finally succumbing.
Some years ago the case involving the maid Nirmala had already elicited all kinds of responses from the public. Public anger and indignation was very much in evidence then, as was to be expected, On the other hand, there were also those who aired their frustrating experiences with their maids. Whereas some stopped at airing their frustrations and problems with maids, which by the way was already a widely known subject, there were still what seemed to be obtuse pleas on behalf of the employers who abuse their maids, i.e., that they can perhaps be partially forgiven or at least understood. This is worrying, i.e. the idea that there exist amongst us people who can, no matter how remotely and obtusely, find an excuse for the deliberate physical abuse of another living thing, let alone another human being.
Deliberate and conscious torture and physical abuse of another human being is not acceptable in civilised society, period. It does not matter whether it is an employer abusing a maid, a maid abusing her employer’s child, a parent abusing his/her own child, or a guard abusing a detainee in a lock-up/prison; there are no reasons, no explanations, and no pleas acceptable. The simple fact is that it is a barbaric act perpetuated by a cruel person, a criminal.
A criminal is a criminal, a murderer is a murderer, and when caught and proven guilty, should be subject to punishment consistent with the cruelty of the crime and the circumstances of its commission, as prescribed by the laws of the country.
Be that as it may, I believe that a person should not be punished before his/her conviction in a court of law. If we believe in the rule of law, then we should also believe that guilt and innocence should only be determined in a court of law after a trial. It may also be necessary to remind ourselves here, that trials in the courts of law are not meant to be mere formalities to endorse the verdict of the public or the media, (which are based on allegations that are as yet unproven and are arrived at without full knowledge of the total circumstances surrounding an alleged crime.) The courts examine all the evidences available, both against and in defence of the accused, and a fairer outcome is therefore more likely. Nobody in his right mind can believe that the courts are infallible; after all they comprise human beings and no human being is infallible. Nonetheless it is the nearest thing we have that can avoid the anarchy of vigilante justice and private vengeance.
A question was raised that particularly attracted my notice. Somebody raised the question of how far an employer can go in disciplining a maid. This is intriguing to me in that it may suggest a mindset that somehow regards maids as in some ways belonging to a sub-specie not quite equal to human beings, or one that sees the acquiring of maids as somewhat akin to buying a slave on the slave market. To such a mind therefore, a maid does not deserve the same kind of basic rights as other employees, like the drivers, the factory hands, the secretaries, the clerks, or for that matter the chief executives of private companies. Maybe the few thousands paid to the agent for bringing the maid into the country is being regarded as part of some kind of slave purchase arrangement.
The maid is an employee, like any other employees. They are not slaves or partial slaves. The fact that they stay in your house does not reduce them to the status of a slave. Likewise, the fact that they eat in your house does not mean that you own their person. These are all simply part of the employment terms and remuneration package they had to accept. Just ask them if they would not rather you give them food and accommodation allowances so that they can stay on their own. They are as human as your secretary or driver, or for that matter you yourself, and have all the same human needs and feelings, and they deserve the same basic rights. You can stop your secretary from using the office phone to call her boyfriend or boyfriends and from always bringing her boyfriend into the office when she is supposed to be working; but you have no right to stop her from having a boy friend or boy friends. Likewise you can stop your maid from using your house phone to call her boy friend and from bringing her boy friend into her work place, (i.e. your house); but you have no right to stop her from having a boy friend. And in most offices, they do allow time for coffee and such things as making personal phone calls (especially if it is with your own mobile phone), so long as the time consumed is not excessive. Maids should also have this same facility that you allow other employees and in turn, your employers allow you. And personally, I think that to require somebody to work continuously and be at your beck and call sixteen hours a day seven days a week is blatant slavery. Maids should be allowed reasonable periods of rest and some days off, which I am very sure most decent employers allow.
Now, on the question of disciplining your maids, the same disciplinary measures available to you in handling your drivers and secretaries are available to you in handling your maids. Likewise, these are also the same measures available to your employers should the need arise where you yourself needs disciplining. Try pulling your secretary’s ear because she is always making typing mistakes in your letters, or slapping your driver because he always forgets to fill your petrol and clean the car for the weekend; and see what happens. Alternatively try picturing your boss hitting your on the head with a file while calling you ‘stupid’; and try picturing your likely reaction. Human beings are human beings, and must all be allowed the same basic rights. They are all to be treated with the same kind of basic respect, whether the person concerned is a maid, a secretary, a driver, a manager, or whatever. And that respect includes respecting their religious beliefs by not expecting them to handle or eat what they are forbidden by their religion. If you cannot do that, do not hire them; ask your agent for one with a different religion. If none are available at the price you are prepared to pay, too bad.
The situation when a maid absconds with her employer’s money is no different from one where an office boy or even a manager disappears with company funds. Likewise, a maid absconding after an employer has paid for her passage is not unlike your child absconding and refusing to serve the Government after the Government has paid for his medical education. Laws govern the available recourse in all these cases, and resort to physical abuse is never an acceptable option. An important thing to remember is that every time you hire or enter into a contract, especially with a stranger, you are taking a risk. Secondly, no absolute foolproof protection from this type of risk is possible. Did you in the first place interview the one you hire or contracted with? Does she know exactly what to expect from you and what she has to give in return? Were you able to do a background check before hiring, especially in the case of a maid who is going to have a free rein in your home? At the end of the day you may still hire, for whatever reason, knowing full well the risks involved. Nonetheless, it remains that the deliberate mental or physical abuse of another human being, even a maid, can never even be remotely justified. Also, just as it is true that not all employers are monsters, it is also true that not all maids are out to swindle their employers.
Perhaps, given the gravity of the circumstances, all foreign maids should be presented at their respective embassies at least fortnightly by their employers, where their proper treatment by employers can be ascertained by the people at their embassies. There should also be the political will to review the system and process of hiring maids, such that an arrangement that benefits both maids and employers instead of just enriching the agents on both sides of the border, much like the slave trade in the days of old, can be developed. The current system smacks too much of the old slave trade.
By the way, I do have maids and have had one that absconded after we paid for her passage.
No comments:
Post a Comment