Recruitment Costs Brief: Hong Kong -...

RESEARCH REPORT

Recruitment Costs – Hong Kong, April 2016 of 16

Recruitment Costs Brief: Hong Kong

David Dickinson

April 2016

Foreign Domestic Workers (FDW) make up by far the majority of semi-skilled foreign workers

in Hong Kong. FDW and employment agencies are respectively regulated under the

Employment Ordinance (Cap. 57) and the Employment Agency Regulations (Cap. 57A)

("EAR"). Agents must be licenced, and can only accept fees of up to 10% of the FDW’s first

month of salary, though other “costs” are passed to some FDW, sometimes illegally. There

are no controls on amounts paid to origin country agents (even if in excess of their legal

limits), or the participation of HK agents in arrangements for FDWs to make such payments

when working in Hong Kong. In recent years there has been considerable publicity and

research surrounding the prevalence of high placement fees and NGOs, unions and

advocates have been calling for reforms in this area. Recently the Hong Kong Government

announced reforms in the areas of education and collaboration with FDWs’ countries of

origin and released a Draft Code of Practice for agents. No regulatory changes are proposed.

Background

Hong Kong has a total population of about 7.3 million (mid-2015) and a labour force of about 3.9 million

(August 2015). Like Singapore, Hong Kong imports low-wage foreign “guest” workers, though most work

as domestic workers. Relatively few semi-skilled and unskilled foreign guest workers are employed by

industry.

RESEARCH REPORT


The external supply of labour in Hong Kong occurs in several ways. The Immigration Department1,2 of the

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government (HKSARG) administers a range of visas and entry

permits for foreigners to work, establish or join in a business, and take up residence. Here are described

two schemes for lesser skilled groups who are the primary focus of this Brief. Other Schemes for

professional and high-net worth individuals and their families are summarised in Attachment 1.

Migrant Employee Schemes.

1. The Supplementary Labour Scheme (SLS) handles applications for the recruitment of labour at

technician level or below. It is administered by the Labour Department and allows employers with

genuine difficulties in finding suitable employees locally to bring in workers from outside the

HKSAR. Under the scheme the terms of employment need to be comparable to those in the local

market and the employer must be capable of providing suitable accommodation, and guarantee

maintenance and repatriation upon termination of contract. The numbers employed under this

scheme have been relatively few, with 2,415 approvals in 2012, due in part to strong resistance

from unions, though the Government rolled out measures to enhance the Scheme in 2014 for public

sector works projects due to acute labour shortages in the construction industry.

2. Foreign Domestic Workers (FDWs) As of the end of 2013 there were 321,000 foreign domestic

workers employed in HKSAR3, of which 98% were from the Philippines or Indonesia. The Scheme is

a long-standing one that has been in place since the 1970s. The FDW population is by far the largest

“low-skilled” foreign worker population group, in HKSAR, excluding migrants from mainland China.

1 Immigration Department. (2015, 29 Sept.). “Hong Kong the Facts”, Sept 2015.

http://www.gov.hk/en/about/abouthk/factsheets/docs/immigration.pdf 2Immigration Department. (2015, 29 Sept.). “Immigration Guidelines for Entry to the Hong Kong Special

Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China”.

http://www.immd.gov.hk/eng/services/visas/immigration-entry-guideline.html 3 Hong Kong Annual Digest of Statistics, 2014. Table 2.12 Numbers of Foreign Domestic Helpers, Page 43.

RESEARCH REPORT


Legislation and Policies Covering Placement Fees

Hong Kong

According to some academic NGO studies4,5 Hong Kong offers some of the best terms and conditions for

FDWs. Employment is based on Standard-form contracts and is subject to a number of minimum terms

and conditions. FDWs are entitled to a rest day of 24 hours’ duration in every seven day period, statutory

holidays, leave, adequate food or a food allowance, the cost of travel to the place of origin upon

termination of the contract and limits on the deductions that can lawfully be made from a salary.

There is a minimum wage known as the 'Minimum Allowable Wage” or MAW which stipulates that foreign

domestic workers in Hong Kong must be paid at least at this level. The MAW is periodically adjusted and

was HK$4,210 per month as at 1 October 2015.

As in Singapore there are rules prohibiting working in commercial or domestic premises other than the

employer’s residence. Each contract is for a two-year period and without any probationary period. Early

termination of the contract is possible at the initiative of either party and with a month's notice.

While agencies6 may charge commissions to the incoming FDW, they must not exceed 10% of the first

month's wages received after being successfully placed in a job. Most expenses or costs such as visa

applications cannot be passed to the FDW7 and must be borne by the employer8.

The Employment Agencies Administration (EAA) of the Labour Department is responsible for regulating

the operation of agents through licensing, regular and surprise inspections, complaints investigation and

prosecution to ensure that they are operating in compliance with the law.

4 Tan, Carol G. S. 2014. “How Dewi Became a Litigant: Migrant Domestic Workers as Litigants in Hong Kong”,

Southeast Asia Research Centre, City University of Hong Kong, Working Paper No. 151, April 2014. 5 Varia, Nisha, 2007. “Globalization Comes Home: Protecting Migrant Domestic Workers’ Rights”, Human Rights

Watch, pages 3 & 8. 6 Hong Kong Labour Department Website. “Employment Agency Regulations” Accessed 3 October 2015.

http://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/legislat/content2.htm 7 There is some lack of clarity in this area. For example the payment of training fees in the Philippines. The

Mission for Migrant Workers has argued that this should be shouldered by the employer in Hong Kong while the

Labor Department in the Philippines contends that this should be shouldered by the worker/applicant. 8 See links to Hong Kong labour Department for recommendations to employers:

http://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/wcp/FDHguide.pdf

http://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/wcp/Important_FDH_Eng.pdf

http://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/wcp/FDHguide.pdf

RESEARCH REPORT


If the employee has a complaint against an agency they may approach the Employment Agencies

Administration (EAA) unit of the Labour Department.

Laws within major countries of origin

With 51.3% of FDWs from the Philippines and 46.4% from Indonesia in 2013, legislation covering

recruitment agencies and fees in these countries is most relevant to Hong Kong.

Philippines: The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) is the main government agency

supervising recruitment agencies in the Philippines. The POEA regulates placement fees for foreign

workers to a maximum of one month of salary excluding documentation costs. However, no placement

fees should be charged for overseas Filipino workers hired as domestic workers, caregivers and seafarers.

Fees must be borne by the employer. However, this excludes other costs such as medical checks9.

Indonesia: Under a decree (KEP.186/PPTK/VII/2008) dated 10 July 2008 of the Director General for

Training and Placement of Manpower10, the cost structure for placement of IDW to Hong Kong was set at

Rp. 15,550,000 at a fixed exchange rate of HK$1 to Rp. 1,000, or HK$15,550. This includes training fees,

service fees and other expenses for processing a worker’s visa to Hong Kong. The fee was lowered to

HK$13,436 under Ministerial Decree No. 98/2012.

Bilateral/Mutual agreements on International Conventions

With regard to the Philippines and Indonesia there were no bilateral agreements related to recruitment

regulations to protect FDWs from excessive fees.

Also the Hong Kong government has not adopted the ILO Convention No. 189 (Decent Work for Domestic

Workers) to make the laws and practices consistent with international standards. The Philippine

government ratified this Convention in 2012, and thus is obligated to implement its provisions, including

its stipulation on “no recruitment fees.” The mutual or bilateral adoption of the Convention would

strengthen commitments and legal channels to protect domestic workers.

9 Documentation costs are chargeable to the worker which cover the obtaining of personal documentation

(passports, birth certificates), medical costs, and skills testing. These costs must be documented. Any other costs

must be approved by POEA prior to imposition. 10 Amnesty International, 2013, “Exploited for Profit, Failed by Governments Indonesian Migrant Domestic

Workers trafficked to Hong Kong. Page 25 and Appendix 3.

RESEARCH REPORT


Issues associated with Recruitment Fees Identified in Research and Media

Reports

There is considerable evidence that FDW’s in Hong Kong commonly pay recruitment fees well above levels

prescribed under law in both Hong Kong and origin countries. We quote two recent studies:

1. Report on the Recruitment Practices and Problems Experienced by Filipino Domestic Workers in

Hong Kong11

This study was based on a 2012 survey of more than 1,500 Filipino FDWs coordinated by several

labour organisations. It concluded that the total average recruitment cost paid by the workers

surveyed was HK$15,378. This was broken up as follows:

Hong Kong Agencies: HK$8,123

Philippine Agency: HK$14,178

Other charges: HK$1,305

Around 90% of survey respondents paid more than the limit for Hong Kong agencies which is set

at 10% of the first month salary. The fees payable to agencies in the Philippines are obviously above

the current no-fee regulation introduced by POEA in 2006 and even though some of the

interviewees had migrated to Hong Kong earlier when fees were permitted (up to one month’s

salary between 2002 and 2006), the averages are still well in excess of those mandated by law.

The Reports conclusions were blunt. “… recruitment costs collected by agencies in Hong Kong and

the Philippines are excessive and illegal”… “blatant, widespread and persistent violations of

recruitment laws in Hong Kong and the Philippines”12.

11 Alliance of Progressive Labor – Hong Kong, Progressive Labor Union of Domestic Workers in Hong Kong,

Labor Education & Research Network, Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions & Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

“Licence to Exploit. A Report on the Recruitment Practices and Problems Experienced by Filipino Domestic

Workers in Hong Kong”. 2013. 12 Ibid, Executive Summary, page x.

RESEARCH REPORT


2. Amnesty International “Policies Relating to Foreign Domestic Helpers and Regulation of

Employment Agencies”13

This study formed the basis of a submission to Hong Kong Legislative Council’s Panel on Manpower

in 2013. It was based on interviews of 97 Indonesian domestic workers in Hong Kong in 2012 and

2013. While the survey was not large, the results were similar to others. Most interviewees had

passed the majority of their salaries to agencies, normally a monthly repayment of HK$3,000

(US$387) for the initial seven months of their contract. This totalled HK$21,000 (US$2,709), which

also exceeded the statutory limits in Hong Kong and Indonesia.

According to Amnesty, serious indebtedness due to excessive recruitment fees is common among

Indonesian domestic workers in HK. These debts often force workers to accept exploitation and

abuse in the workplace. Several migrant domestic workers also told Amnesty that they were

reluctant to change employers because doing so would incur further fees to their agencies.

Recruitment agencies in Indonesia work closely with placement agencies in Hong Kong to ensure that their

fees are fully repaid. As these fees routinely exceed the legal maximum that agencies are allowed to

charge in both countries the agencies circumvent laws by collecting payment through a variety of third

party schemes. For example, the agencies make an agreement with the employer to deduct a portion of

the migrant domestic worker’s salary and then to coerce the worker to sign a piece of paper stating that

they had received their full salary in line with the Minimum Allowable Wage (MAW). Furthermore, some

interviewees were paid below the MAW but signed documents falsely acknowledging receipt of the MAW.

Other practices include compelling applicants to sign documents acknowledging receipt for a “loan” and

to instruct their employer to transfer most of the monthly salary to a finance company. A survey of 930

Indonesian workers in Hong Kong by the Indonesian Migrant Workers Union in 2011 found that 34 per

cent of Indonesian migrant domestic workers were asked to sign such loan agreements. Loans and

repayment arrangements are often poorly documented to ensure no clear paper trails.

Other studies and reports highlight “work-arounds” for agencies in Hong Kong. For example, they

sometimes pass on fees for medical checks, insurance, visas and airline tickets which are meant to be

13 Submission by Amnesty International, “Intermediary charges for foreign domestic helpers”, Agenda Item iv,

Panel on Manpower Meeting, Tuesday 18 June 2013 Legislative Council Paper No. CB(2)1386/12-13(01).

RESEARCH REPORT


covered by employers. In countries of origin, fees can be charged for training (Philippines & Indonesia),

but maximums are frequently exceeded14.

Effectiveness of Current Policies

Given the extent of survey and anecdotal evidence that overcharging is very widespread, there is little

evidence that the efforts by Government are effective in dissuading abuse. A July 2015 Hong Kong Free

Press (HKFP) article15 reported that only four prosecutions of agencies16 were brought by the Labour

Department in 2014 despite 170 complaints being made to its Employment Agencies Administration (EAA)

group. In the year 2015 up until June, there had been three convictions. When questions were raised at a

Legislative Council meeting the Secretary for Labour and Welfare pointed out various reasons as to why

prosecutions did not proceed including matters unrelated to the Ordinance, lack of evidence and whether

the victim was willing to attend hearings17.

Agencies are licenced annually by the Labour Department. If they do not comply with the requirements

of the law they are liable to prosecution and fines of up to HK$50,000 (approx. US$6,500) and possible

revocation of licence. The relatively low fine is cited as a minimal deterrent.

Even though the EAA does conduct random inspections of agencies, oversight is largely dependent on

complaints raised by individual FDWs. According to Amnesty, this avenue is not effective as it can leave

FDWs without an income for substantial periods and may fail to reimburse them the full amounts they

are entitled to. Faced with a costly process that offers no guarantee of success, many are understandably

reluctant to access these redress mechanisms. This, and the disguised nature of the fees, such as via loans,

led Amnesty and others to conclude that the agencies operate with relative impunity.

14 HK Helpers Campaign, “Comments of Policies relating to foreign domestic helpers and regulation of

employment Agencies”, Tabled to the HK Legislative Council 10 February 2014, Paper No. CB(2)894/13-14(02).

Page 5. 15 Hong Kong Free Press (HKFP), 10 July 2015. “Government fails to prosecute employment agencies exploiting

domestic helpers”.

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/07/10/government-fails-to-prosecute-employment-agencies-exploiting-

domestic-helpers/ 16 Only one of the convictions was specifically for overcharging. 17 HKFP, 10 July 2015 “Government fails to prosecute employment agencies exploiting domestic helpers”,

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/07/10/government-fails-to-prosecute-employment-agencies-exploiting-

domestic-helpers/#

RESEARCH REPORT


In the face of a highly publicised case of FDW abuse in 2014 (Erwiana Sulistyaningsih) many Hong Kong

NGOs and charities have called for regulatory reforms18. As recently as June 2015, the Legislative Council

Panel on Manpower19 expressed concern that some FDWs (particularly from Indonesia) incurred large

debts in order to meet fees and commissions charged by intermediaries in their home countries. The

Administration responded that while HK has no legal requirement that FDWs use agents in HK, such

requirements are imposed by countries of origin. For instance, the Philippines does not allow direct hiring

for first-time FDWs, while the Indonesian Government only allows hiring through accredited agencies.

Notwithstanding the lack of jurisdiction over the overseas operations of agencies, the HK Administration

indicated that through its regular contacts with the relevant Consular Generals, it had brought to their

attention concerns about "bonded labour" and urged them to draw the problem to the attention of their

respective governments so as to tackle the issue at source.

With regard to the strengthening of the regulation of agencies in HK, Panel on Manpower members

suggested that a more stringent licensing scheme for agents should be adopted together with a code of

practice for their operations. They suggested reference to the Singaporean experience of regulating

agents under a licensing scheme with a demerit points system.

Improvements/Solutions Offered by NGO’s and others

Amnesty International’s 18 June 2013 submission20 to the HKSAR Legislative Council Panel on Manpower

argued that even though Hong Kong has comprehensive labour laws and protections, at present the

authorities are failing in their efforts to adequately protect migrant domestic workers. There is also a lack

of robust cooperation mechanisms between the Hong Kong authorities and governments in countries of

origin and solutions must overcome the dual jurisdictional nature of the problem.

They pointed to a need for pro‐active monitoring, investigation and prosecution of agencies and loan

companies. They recommended solutions that the Hong Kong SAR government should consider in

particular in regards to migrant domestic workers from Indonesia:

18 For example. SCMP, Wednesday, 19 August, 2015, “Make Hong Kong a safe place for domestic helpers,

lawmaker urges, ahead of talks with Philippine and Indonesian officials”. 19 HKSAR Legislative Council Secretariat, Panel on Manpower, 16 June 2015, “Employment of Foreign Domestic

Helpers”, Background Brief. LC Paper No. CB(2)1683/14-15(06). 20 Submission by Amnesty International, “Intermediary charges for foreign domestic helpers”, Agenda Item iv,

Panel on Manpower Meeting, Tuesday 18 June 2013 Legislative Council Paper No. CB(2)1386/12-13(01).

RESEARCH REPORT


1.1 Bilateral cooperation by the Hong Kong and Indonesian authorities that acknowledges the dual

jurisdictional nature of migration and the need for agreement on an overall maximum recruitment

fee per individual no matter where that fee is incurred or repaid. Maximum fees should be decided

based on tripartite (Government, recruitment association and trade union) consultation to ensure

that they are reasonable both in maximum amount and length of repayment schedule so as not to

leave the worker without enough money to live on.

1.2 Government regulation and oversight of repayment scheme for migrant domestic workers,

including repayment schedules and interest rates that do not increase debt and thus vulnerability

to exploitation. These schemes should be government administered, robustly monitored and fully

transparent.

1.3 Proactive investigation jointly by Hong Kong and Indonesian authorities on how placement

agencies are operating, and investigation of credible accusations by migrant domestic workers and

members of civil society of illegal, excessive fees and underpayment. Investigation should not be

solely reliant on workers having to file individual complaints at the Labour Department and

Tribunal. Those found to be complicit or actively involved in the trafficking of migrant domestic

workers for labour exploitation and forced labour should face adequate punishment that reflects

the serious nature of the crime.

As a matter of urgency, ratification of the ILO Convention 189 Concerning Decent Work for

Domestic Workers, and prior to such ratification, incorporating its provisions into domestic law and

implementing it in policy and practice.

Other recommendations (some similar or focusing on elements of the above) made by researchers and

groups representing FDWs in Hong Kong include:

2.1 Strengthen the recruitment regulatory functions of the concerned government agencies in Hong

Kong (EAA) and other countries, e.g. Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA). For

example, the EAA should operate on the premise that there are malpractices occurring among HK

agencies and investigate practices21. This might also include lowering the evidentiary requirements

for complaints to sworn and notarized affidavits to make it easier for FDW to bring actions.

21 Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants (APMM), December 2014, “Invisible Chains: A Study on Agency-Related

Debt Bondage Among Foreign Domestic Workers in Hong Kong”, page 42.

RESEARCH REPORT


2.2 Tighten and make more explicit definitions for placement/agency fees to prevent agencies in

Hong Kong, Indonesia and the Philippines from easily circumventing their respective rules22. Ensure

full transparency/documentation of fees prior to the worker making commitments. Without clear

documentation and records the ability to prosecute errant agents is difficult in Hong Kong.

2.3 Improve cooperation23 among FDW organizations and trade unions in Hong Kong and donor

countries so that collective monitoring, action, policy and other strategies can be more effectively

undertaken. For instance, create a Task Force where FDW groups and trade unions are brought

together to address these recruitment problems.

2.4 Recognize FDW groups and trade unions not only as “dialogue partners” but as legal

representatives24 or advocates for DWs in filing complaints and seeking redress from unscrupulous

agencies. The extent of involvement by charities, unions and other NGOs in supporting DWs also

suggests Government channels and resourcing are not adequate.

2.5 Remove the downside risks to the DW in reporting: Introduce measures to help DWs overcome

their reluctance to report errant agents due to the personal and economic risks of possible job loss,

recriminations, and periods without income while cases are assessed.

2.6 Visible and Accessible Government support: Ensure the relevant Government agencies are open

on days domestic workers are able to visit. Ensure sufficient publicity and circulation of

employment rules and information.

2.7 Punitive measures to reflect the personal and family impacts of malpractices on FDWs: Impose

stiffer penalties on errant agencies. The present maximum fine of HK$50,000 is not a sufficient

deterrent. Licence revocation could be mandatory on successful prosecution and/or a bond system

similar to Singapore could be introduced to dissuade errant behaviour.

2.8 Encourage direct hire channels: Create, enhance and strengthen “direct hire” channels for FDWs25

– i.e. not using recruitment agencies or third party intermediaries, whether individuals or groups –

22 Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants (APMM), December 2014, “Invisible Chains: A Study on Agency-Related

Debt Bondage Among Foreign Domestic Workers in Hong Kong”, pages 44 to 46. 23 Alliance of Progressive Labor – Hong Kong, Progressive Labor Union of Domestic Workers in Hong Kong,

Labor Education & Research Network, Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions & Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

“Licence to Exploit. A Report on the Recruitment Practices and Problems Experienced by Filipino Domestic

Workers in Hong Kong”, 2013, Page 14 24 Ibid. Page 14 25 Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants (APMM), December 2014, “Invisible Chains: A Study on Agency-Related

Debt Bondage Among Foreign Domestic Workers in Hong Kong”, pages 43 & 44.

RESEARCH REPORT


so that recruitment agencies do not monopolize or create cartels that exploit the recruitment

process, especially in countries of origin. This would require changes in those countries’ laws which

prescribe the use of agents. The widespread adoption of smartphone technology in countries of

origin could help facilitate direct hire channels.

2.9 Naming, to Shame and Praise: Maintain and make more accessible a listing of Hong Kong and

country of origin licenced agents. This should include punished or blacklisted agencies as well as

agents with positive records or practices. Agencies with good track records might be given

additional accreditations.

2.10 Ensuring money lenders comply with regulations26: Licensed local money lenders target HK’s

domestic workers and practices often breach the Money Lenders Ordinance (Cap 163). Oversight

and regulation could be significantly improved.

Efforts by the HKSAR Administration and Department of Labour to Address Issues

Possibly in reaction to submissions by NGOs and unions, together with several highly publicised cases of

FDW abuse in the last 3 years, the HKSAR government has recently announced measures to enhance

protection27 of FDW.

Enhancing FDWs’ awareness of their rights: Since 2014, LD has stepped up its promotional and

educational efforts to enhance FDWs’ awareness about their employment rights and benefits.

Strengthening collaboration with Governments of FDWs’ Countries of Origin: Since 2014 the LD has

increased collaboration with FDW countries of origin. An inter-departmental regular liaison mechanism

with both the Indonesian and Philippines CG has been set up respectively since 2014 involving relevant

law-enforcement agencies 28 . This (amongst other things) is used to discuss matters and exchange

information about problematic employment agencies and coordinate promotional efforts.

26 HK Helpers Campaign, “Comments of Policies relating to foreign domestic helpers and regulation of

employment Agencies”, Tabled to the HK Legislative Council 10 February 2014, Paper No. CB(2)894/13-14(02).

Page 6. 27 HKSAR Legislative Council Panel on Manpower, 16 June 2015, “Enhanced Protection for Foreign Domestic

Helpers” LC Paper No. CB(2)1683/14-15(05). 28 Ibid Page 3. and Labour Department Press Release June 24, 2014:

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201406/24/P201406240875.htm

RESEARCH REPORT


According to the HK Labour Department, this inter-departmental liaison mechanism has been useful and

effective in exchanging views, coordinating efforts on systemic issues, and tackling individual cases

relating to FDWs. For example they point to their participation in briefings for newly-arrived FDWs and at

major social/cultural events organised by the Indonesian and Philippine CGs.

Strengthening the regulation of Employment Agencies: Even though there have been no changes in

regulations over the last two years, the Labour Department points to actions to strengthen the monitoring

of EAs by increasing manpower to allow more frequent inspections, and the adoption a “no tolerance”

approach to cases of overcharging of FDWs by employment agencies.

The Government issued a Draft Code of Practice29 for employment agents in April 2016, which aims to

improve professionalism across the industry. While the code is not legally binding, it sets out minimum

standards for agencies and guidelines for conduct which if not followed could lead to the revocation of

licences. As at May 2016 the Draft was in public consultation.

**** END ****

Thanks are due to colleagues at the Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants for reading through the draft of this

report.

29 SCMP, Wednesday, 20 April, 2016, “Hong Kong government issues draft code of conduct for domestic helper

agencies”.

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/education-community/article/1937133/hong-kong-government-issues-draft-

code-conduct

RESEARCH REPORT


References

Alliance of Progressive Labor – Hong Kong, (2013), “Licence to Exploit. A Report on the Recruitment

Practices and Problems Experienced by Filipino Domestic Workers in Hong Kong”, Progressive Labor

Union of Domestic Workers in Hong Kong, Labor Education & Research Network, Norweigian

Confederation of Trade Unions & Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

Amnesty International (2013), “Intermediary charges for foreign domestic helpers”, Agenda Item iv, Panel

on Manpower Meeting, 18 June 2013 Legislative Council Paper No. CB(2)1386/12-13(01).

Amnesty International, 2013, “Exploited for Profit, Failed by Governments. Indonesian Migrant Domestic

Workers trafficked to Hong Kong.

Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants, (December 2014), “Invisible Chains: A Study on Agency-Related Debt

Bondage Among Foreign Domestic Workers in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong Free Press 10 July 2015 “Government fails to prosecute employment agencies exploiting

domestic helpers”,

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/07/10/government-fails-to-prosecute-employment-agencies-

exploiting-domestic-helpers/#

Hong Kong Helpers Campaign (2014), “Comments of Policies relating to foreign domestic helpers and

regulation of employment Agencies”, Tabled to the HK Legislative Council 10 February 2014, Paper No.

CB(2)894/13-14(02).

Hong Kong Annual Digest of Statistics, (2014), Table 2.12 Numbers of Foreign Domestic Helpers, Page 43.

Hong Kong Helpers Campaign, “Comments of Policies relating to foreign domestic helpers and regulation

of employment Agencies”, Tabled to the HK Legislative Council 10 February 2014, Paper No. CB(2)894/13-

14(02). Page 6.

Hong Kong SAR Immigration Department. (accessed 29 Sept. 2015). “Hong Kong the Facts”, Sept 2015.

http://www.gov.hk/en/about/abouthk/factsheets/docs/immigration.pdf

Hong Kong SAR Immigration Department. (accessed 29 Sept. 2015). “Immigration Guidelines for Entry

to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China”.

http://www.immd.gov.hk/eng/services/visas/immigration-entry-guideline.html

RESEARCH REPORT


Hong Kong SAR Labour Department Website. (3 October 2015) “Employment Agency Regulations”.

http://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/legislat/content2.htm

Hong Kong SAR Legislative Council Secretariat, Panel on Manpower, (16 June 2015), “Employment of

Foreign Domestic Helpers”, Background Brief. LC Paper No. CB(2)1683/14-15(06).

Hong Kong SAR Legislative Council Panel on Manpower, (16 June 2015), “Enhanced Protection for Foreign

Domestic Helpers” LC Paper No. CB(2)1683/14-15(05).

South China Morning Post, (19 August 2015), “Make Hong Kong a safe place for domestic helpers,

lawmaker urges, ahead of talks with Philippine and Indonesian officials”

Tan Carol G. S., (April 2014), “How Dewi Became a Litigant: Migrant Domestic Workers as Litigants in Hong

Kong”, Southeast Asia Research Centre, City University of Hong Kong, Working Paper No. 151.

Varia, Nisha, (2007) “Globalization Comes Home: Protecting Migrant Domestic Workers’ Rights”, Human

Rights Watch.

RESEARCH REPORT


Attachment 1

Skilled/Professional Employment & Investment-linked Schemes

1. General Employment Policy (GEP): Overseas professionals who possess skills not readily available

in Hong Kong, or who are in a position to make substantial contributions to the economy, may apply to

work here under the General Employment Policy (GEP). Applicants must have a confirmed offer of

employment, the remuneration package of which must be broadly commensurate with the prevailing

market rate of Hong Kong. In 2014, 31,676 overseas professionals were admitted under the GEP.

2. Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals: was implemented in 2003 with

assessment criteria in line with those under the GEP. The objective of this scheme is to attract qualified

Mainland talent and professionals to work in Hong Kong in order to meet local manpower needs and

enhance Hong Kong's competitiveness. The scheme has no sectoral restrictions and allows intra-company

transfer of senior managers and professionals. As at the end of 2014, 74,456 Mainland talents and

professionals were admitted under the scheme.

3. Quality Migrant Admission Scheme: Implemented in 2006 the scheme is quota based and

operated on a points-based system. It seeks to attract highly skilled or talented persons from the Mainland

and overseas to settle in Hong Kong. Successful applicants are not required to secure an offer of local

employment before taking up residence in Hong Kong. As at the end of 2014, a total of 3,097 applicants

were allocated quotas.

4. Immigration Arrangements for Non-local Graduates Scheme was launched in 2008 to

complement the policy initiative to develop Hong Kong as a regional education hub. Persons from outside

the HKSAR who have obtained a degree or higher qualification in a full-time and locally-accredited local

programme in Hong Kong (non-local graduates) may apply to stay/return and work in Hong Kong under

the arrangement. Successful applicants may be granted 12 months’ stay on time limitation without other

conditions of stay. They are free to take up and change employment during their permitted stay without

the need to seek prior approval from the Immigration Department. As at the end of 2014, 41,194 non-

local graduates had been approved.

Investment Related Scheme

5. Capital Investment Entrant Scheme was started in 2003 with the objective to facilitate the entry

for residence of. persons who make capital investments in Hong Kong but would not be engaged in the

running of any business here. Entrants under this scheme are allowed to make their choice of investments

amongst permissible investment assets without the need to establish or join in a business. The investment

RESEARCH REPORT


threshold under this scheme has been raised from HK$6.5 million to HK$10 million with effect from

October 14, 2010. As at the end of 2014, 41,802 entrant applications were received of which, 27 997

applications were approved.

Other Immigration Schemes

One Way Permit Scheme: This was created in the 1980s to allow families (which were split between the

mainland, HK and Macau to reunite in an orderly fashion, and stem illegal entrants. The one-way permit

scheme is administered by the exit and entry administration offices of the mainland Public Security

Bureau. About 40,500 mainlanders settled in HKSAR in 2014 under the scheme. The selection of migrants

is under the control of the Public Security Bureau.

Second Generation of Chinese Hong Kong Permanent Residents

Persons who are the second generation of emigrated Chinese Hong Kong permanent residents from

overseas may apply to return to work in the HKSAR under the Scheme.

Recruitment Costs Brief: Hong Kong -...

Documents

Transcript of Recruitment Costs Brief: Hong Kong -...