<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Work pass lies: Jail sought for bosses
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>MOM wants more than fine to send strong signal to employers that such fraud won't be tolerated </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Ben Nadarajan
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>
The sentencing of Tong (above), another restaurateur, has been postponed pending the outcome of the Manpower Ministry's appeal in Ms Tan's case.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE Manpower Ministry (MOM) is getting tough on employers who lie about their employees' status to save on paying the worker's levy or to get around employment quotas.
Most previous offenders have only been fined. But for the first time last month, MOM prosecutor Zuraidah Mahat pressed for a jail term for Celine Tan Bee Thin, owner of Lai Lai Seafood Restaurant in Upper Aljunied Road.
<TABLE width=200 align=left valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD class=padr8><!-- Vodcast --><!-- Background Story --><STYLE type=text/css> #related .quote {background-color:#E7F7FF; padding:8px;margin:0px 0px 5px 0px;} #related .quote .headline {font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:10px;font-weight:bold; border-bottom:3px double #007BFF; color:#036; text-transform:uppercase; padding-bottom:5px;} #related .quote .text {font-size:11px;color:#036;padding:5px 0px;} </STYLE>Immigration Act penalties
UNDER the Immigration Act, making a false statement in order to obtain an entry permit into Singapore is punishable with a fine of up to $4,000 or a jail term of up to 12 months or both. And under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, making a false statement to the Controller or any employment inspector can bring on a fine of up to $15,000 or a jail term of up to 12 months or both.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Ms Tan had already been found guilty of lying to the authorities to get employment passes for five China chefs. She claimed they were being paid a salary of $2,510 - to meet the minimum salary requirement for an employment pass - when in fact she was paying them only $1,000 each.
District Judge Jasbendar Kaur did not jail her, but fined her $16,000 instead.
The prosecution has since appealed, but no date has yet been fixed for the High Court hearing.
Three weeks later, MOM prosecutor Deyna Chan again pushed for a custodial sentence against another seafood restaurateur - this time, one who illegally obtained an S-pass, also for a China chef.
District Judge Lee Poh Choo postponed sentencing Tong Suan Toon, 56, to await the outcome of the appeal in Ms Tan's case.
Tong, who owns Heng Ler Seafood Restaurant in Havelock Road, faked the qualifications and exaggerated the pay of his chef to get him in on an S-pass. He is represented by lawyer Chia Boon Teck.
Employers declare higher salaries for the foreigners they hire because of what they stand to save in levies they have to pay the Government: the levy for hiring an S-pass holder is $50; no levy needs to be paid for hiring an employment pass holder.
If these employers declare their hires as work permit holders - a category for semi-skilled and unskilled workers - they would need to pay between $200 and over $400 for each worker.
S-passes are meant for mid-level skilled workers drawing at least $1,800 a month, while employment passes are for professionals earning above $2,500 and holding relevant qualifications.
The number of employers caught for fraudulently applying for S-passes or employment passes when their foreign hires actually only qualify for work permits has shot up in recent times.
In the first nine months of last year, 52 employers were caught, almost double the 27 cases in 2006. These are MOM's most recent figures.
Ms Zuraidah, the MOM prosecutor in Ms Tan's case, argued when asking for a custodial sentence for Ms Tan that a deterrent sentence was needed to send a strong signal that this fraud would not be tolerated.
Given the sheer number of applications for work papers MOM receives, such offences were difficult to detect, she said. 'The number of known cases of such false declarations in applications submitted to MOM only represents a small proportion of the actual number of false declarations being made.' [email protected]
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>MOM wants more than fine to send strong signal to employers that such fraud won't be tolerated </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Ben Nadarajan
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
The sentencing of Tong (above), another restaurateur, has been postponed pending the outcome of the Manpower Ministry's appeal in Ms Tan's case.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE Manpower Ministry (MOM) is getting tough on employers who lie about their employees' status to save on paying the worker's levy or to get around employment quotas.
Most previous offenders have only been fined. But for the first time last month, MOM prosecutor Zuraidah Mahat pressed for a jail term for Celine Tan Bee Thin, owner of Lai Lai Seafood Restaurant in Upper Aljunied Road.
<TABLE width=200 align=left valign="top"><TBODY><TR><TD class=padr8><!-- Vodcast --><!-- Background Story --><STYLE type=text/css> #related .quote {background-color:#E7F7FF; padding:8px;margin:0px 0px 5px 0px;} #related .quote .headline {font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:10px;font-weight:bold; border-bottom:3px double #007BFF; color:#036; text-transform:uppercase; padding-bottom:5px;} #related .quote .text {font-size:11px;color:#036;padding:5px 0px;} </STYLE>Immigration Act penalties
UNDER the Immigration Act, making a false statement in order to obtain an entry permit into Singapore is punishable with a fine of up to $4,000 or a jail term of up to 12 months or both. And under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, making a false statement to the Controller or any employment inspector can bring on a fine of up to $15,000 or a jail term of up to 12 months or both.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Ms Tan had already been found guilty of lying to the authorities to get employment passes for five China chefs. She claimed they were being paid a salary of $2,510 - to meet the minimum salary requirement for an employment pass - when in fact she was paying them only $1,000 each.
District Judge Jasbendar Kaur did not jail her, but fined her $16,000 instead.
The prosecution has since appealed, but no date has yet been fixed for the High Court hearing.
Three weeks later, MOM prosecutor Deyna Chan again pushed for a custodial sentence against another seafood restaurateur - this time, one who illegally obtained an S-pass, also for a China chef.
District Judge Lee Poh Choo postponed sentencing Tong Suan Toon, 56, to await the outcome of the appeal in Ms Tan's case.
Tong, who owns Heng Ler Seafood Restaurant in Havelock Road, faked the qualifications and exaggerated the pay of his chef to get him in on an S-pass. He is represented by lawyer Chia Boon Teck.
Employers declare higher salaries for the foreigners they hire because of what they stand to save in levies they have to pay the Government: the levy for hiring an S-pass holder is $50; no levy needs to be paid for hiring an employment pass holder.
If these employers declare their hires as work permit holders - a category for semi-skilled and unskilled workers - they would need to pay between $200 and over $400 for each worker.
S-passes are meant for mid-level skilled workers drawing at least $1,800 a month, while employment passes are for professionals earning above $2,500 and holding relevant qualifications.
The number of employers caught for fraudulently applying for S-passes or employment passes when their foreign hires actually only qualify for work permits has shot up in recent times.
In the first nine months of last year, 52 employers were caught, almost double the 27 cases in 2006. These are MOM's most recent figures.
Ms Zuraidah, the MOM prosecutor in Ms Tan's case, argued when asking for a custodial sentence for Ms Tan that a deterrent sentence was needed to send a strong signal that this fraud would not be tolerated.
Given the sheer number of applications for work papers MOM receives, such offences were difficult to detect, she said. 'The number of known cases of such false declarations in applications submitted to MOM only represents a small proportion of the actual number of false declarations being made.' [email protected]
