Maid who moonlighted on rest days fined along with unofficial employer

SINGAPORE: A woman hired a maid to do part-time cleaning, even though the helper's work pass allowed her to work only for her official employer.

Pido Erlinda Ocampo, a 53-year-old Filipino, carried out cleaning work for 64-year-old Singaporean Soh Oi Bek over a period of about four years.

The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) began investigating in December 2024 after receiving information about a possible breach of the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act.

Soh was fined S$7,000 (US$5,460) by a court on Monday (Aug 25), while Erlinda was given a fine of S$13,000. She faced more charges as she also worked for another illegal employer recommended to her by Soh.

THE CASE

The court heard that Soh was looking for a part-time helper for household chores in 2018. She was introduced to Erlinda by a friend of Erlinda's official employer.

Erlinda had held valid work passes as a maid for more than 30 years from 1994, working for a total of four official employers.

For almost two years, between April 2018 and February 2020, Erlinda carried out housekeeping at Soh's home, including sweeping and mopping the floor, cleaning the fan and ironing clothes. Each sessions lasted three to four hours and took place two to three times a month. She was paid about S$375 in cash every month.

Erlinda stopped working for Soh temporarily in February 2020 due to COVID-19 restrictions on the number of household visitors.

She resumed working for Soh from March 2022 to September 2024 after measures were eased.

At all times, Erlinda did not hold a valid work pass to work part-time for Soh.

Although Soh knew that Erlinda was employed by someone else as a foreign domestic worker, she hired Erlinda as she was "busy and needed someone trustworthy to help her clean her residence", the court heard.

SOH RECOMMENDS ERLINDA TO HER BOSS

Soh later recommended Erlinda's services to another person looking for a part-time helper, Pulak Prasad. Soh was part of Prasad's administrative staff at an unidentified workplace.

Between September 2019 and February 2020, Erlinda worked part-time for Prasad, vacuuming and mopping floors, changing bedsheets and cleaning cabinets. 

She did this for three to four hours once or twice a month, and was paid about S$450 per month if there was work to do.

When Prasad and his family travelled overseas for extended periods, Erlinda was not asked to provide her services. Erlinda also stopped working temporarily for Prasad because of COVID-19, but resumed between March 2022 and September 2024.

The prosecutor from the Ministry of Manpower said the mandatory minimum fine for Soh was S$5,000, but these are for cases with a very brief period of illegal employment, where the offenders have no previous convictions and no charges taken into consideration.

In Soh's case, the prosecutor said an uplift of S$2,000 to S$3,000 is justifiable due to the period of offending and a charge taken into consideration.

Soh's lawyer asked for the minimum fine, but the judge disagreed, noting the factors raised by the prosecution.

She added that the prosecution "has been quite kind" by compressing the offending period to count only the actual months worked by Erlinda and not the total span of years.

Erlinda tendered a written mitigation plea, which was not read out in open court.

The prosecution sought a fine of S$7,000 to S$8,000 for the one charge proceeded against Soh, and a total fine of about S$13,000 for the two charges proceeded against Erlinda.

Both women paid their fines in full.

For working as a part-time helper without a valid work pass, Erlinda could have been jailed for up to two years, fined up to S$20,000, or both.

For employing a foreign employee without a valid work pass, Soh could have been jailed for up to 12 months, fined between S$5,000 and S$30,000, or both.

CNA has asked MOM about whether any action was taken against Prasad.