Category Archives: Migration policy in Cambodia

Migrants still lacking access to justice: ILO

Cambodians who leave the country for work overseas still often lack effective access to the country’s justice system when they have problems with recruitment agencies, despite some recent improvements, a new report from the International Labour Organization says.

Despite the creation of a complaints process that has managed to resolve the largest number of complaints in Cambodia – about 500 in the 18-month period ending in May 2015 – the report says that migrant workers are continuing to suffer from exploitative practices from recruiters and have limited access to legal redress.

“In countries of origin, only blatant violations of migrants’ rights are typically rectified, such as collecting recruitment and documentation fees for nonexistent jobs,” the report says. “Other forms of abuse that are known to be widespread, including overcharging migrant workers on recruitment fees and misrepresenting the terms of employment, continue to go unchallenged.”

In Cambodia, in particular, it says, there is often a gap between compensation sought and compensation received when issues arise and are prosecuted, as well as an “insufficient capacity” at offices handling complaints and a “lack of resources at diplomatic missions”.

A representative figure in the report shows the most frequently received complaints in Cambodia. ILO

It says most complaints in Cambodia concern delays in deployments to jobs, or the job not materialising at all, passports not being given to workers, disputes over compensation, missing persons (some of which relate to disappearances in the Thai fishing industry and Malay domestic work sector) and nonpayment or underpayment of wages.

Mom Sokchar, programme manager at Legal Support for Children and Women, said that a lack of knowledge concerning the mechanisms and the small number of offices dealing with complaints often prevented migrant workers from filing complaints in the first place.

Another major concern, he said, was the lack of assistance abroad.

“In some countries there are thousands of migrant workers. The embassy does not have enough staff to work on the cases,” Sokchar said.

Kao Poeun, project coordinator of Informal Democratic Economy Association, said yesterday that the Cambodian Embassy in Malaysia had proved unhelpful in many cases when migrant workers had reached out to seek help.

“Sometimes we complained . . . but the embassy just says they have too few staff,” Poeun said. “Sometimes there is simply no response when we contact them via phone, WhatsApp, email.”

“If workers run to the embassy, there’s a response. But if it’s in relation to a rights complaint, I have not seen any response yet.”

Migrant workers wait at Poipet’s international border checkpoint in 2014 before crossing into Thailand. Photo by Hong Menea.

Veth Vorn, ILO national project coordinator for Cambodia, said cases of mistreatment of migrant workers could be reduced if criminal charges were imposed on recruiters who breached the law, instead of only administrative sanctions and compensations for workers.

Spokespeople for the ministries of labour and foreign affairs could not be reached yesterday.

However, the Foreign Affairs Ministry said in a press release last week that claims that Cambodia’s foreign embassies had failed to assist migrant workers had “no ground to stand on”.

By: Leonie Kijewski, The Phnom Penh Post

Published on: 31 July 2017

The Phnom Penh Post reports on MMN’s report, “Safe from the Start: The Roles of Countries of Origin in Protecting Migrants”

Migrant worker protections ‘lacking’, reports find

Cambodian migrant workers who were deported by Thai authorities are processed at the Poipet Transit Centre earlier this month in Banteay Meanchey province. Photo credit: Sahiba Chawdhary

Cambodia lacks effective mechanisms to protect its citizens working both as legal and undocumented migrants abroad, where such workers also face insufficient protection from the countries that receive them, according to two new reports published last week.

The reports come at a time of major crackdowns on undocumented migrants in the region. Thousands of Cambodians have returned home after Thailand passed new laws imposing strict punishments on undocumented workers and their employers, while Malaysia has arrested thousands of workers since July 1 in a campaign against undocumented migrants.

Mekong Migration Network’s (MMN) report Safe from the Start – The Roles of Countries of Origin in Protecting Migrants found in interviews with Cambodian migrant workers that the Kingdom needs to better regulate its recruitment agencies, reduce costs and time for legal migration channels, provide better overseas assistance and establish effective complaint mechanisms. They also recommend strengthening predeparture training.

Reiko Harima, MMN regional coordinator, said in an email that “the most urgent tasks for Cambodia are to improve overseas assistance, and also to negotiate with Thailand to improve conditions for migrant workers”.

“[Migrants] reported to MMN that when they have approached embassies for help, they were not given assistance,” she said. What’s more, she added, “Cambodian migrants leaving Thailand experience difficulty securing the social security benefits that they are entitled to, as there is no practical mechanism for the transfer of money.”

In a push to document migrant workers in Thailand, Cambodia’s Labour Ministry in a statement yesterday clarified the procedure: Thai employers have to register their undocumented Cambodian workers by August 7 at one of the 97 newly established offices in Thailand, where Cambodians workers then have to present themselves between August 8 and September 9. Until December 31, workers “must not change the employer or locations, or resign without permission”.

Ministry spokesperson Heng Sour in a Facebook video on Sunday said the procedure benefited the workers, who would “get the salary based on the law of Thailand, get health and life insurance during the work and get the National Social Security from the Thai government”.

But Moeun Tola, director of labour rights group Central, yesterday said that this was insufficient. “It’s not effective enough yet, since some employers prefer hiring undocumented workers instead of documented ones,” he said.

However, Cambodia doesn’t bear sole responsibility for protecting its migrants, according to a report titled Towards a Comprehensive National Policy on Labour Migration for Malaysia.

The Migrant Workers Right to Redress Coalition expressed concern regarding recruitment processes – which they say have to be formalised and regulated better – and a number of other issues facing migrant workers, including Cambodians, in Malaysia.

“[There] is no comprehensive national policy on labour migration, to ensure . . . that abuses against workers, social dislocation, profiteering, human trafficking and modern day slavery are rooted out and stopped,” it reads.

Adrian Pereira, a coordinator for the North-South Initiative who was involved in the drafting of the paper, said in a message that the most urgent concern was that agreements between Cambodia and Malaysia and workers’ contracts should “guarantee basic rights of workers at all stages of recruitment to employment to return”. “Only when rights [are] in black and white can we ensure [they are] materialised and not based on ‘good will’ of any party.”

These rights include decent salaries, working hours, vacation days and more, he said.

Tan Heang-Lee, communications’ officer at Women’s Aid Organisation Malaysia, said that women were particularly vulnerable. “There must be greater recognition of domestic work as work, and of domestic workers as employees,” she said. “Migrant domestic workers are excluded from many of the protections and provisions of the Employment Act.”

 

By: Leonie Kijewski and Soth Koemsoeun, The Phnom Penh Post

Published on: Tuesday, 25 July 2017

Link to article: http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/migrant-worker-protections-lacking-reports-find

Deportation, exploitation and death at the Thai border

Vendors block the Poipet International Border Checkpoint last month by dumping nearly 1,000 kilograms of fish in the street in protest against a Thai tariff increase. Photo supplied

It had only been a few days since the latest crackdown on Cambodian migrants working in Thailand – more than 1,000 illegal workers were sent back in only three days in early March before attention once again turned to this slow burning international conflict.

A few months before, thousands more suffered a similar fate. Moreover, these were the lucky ones. According to a Ministry of Interior report, in 2016 “Thai soldiers shot dead two and injured seven Cambodian citizens who illegally crossed the border, and arrested 293 people, including 45 females”, with a spate of violence in December of last year prompting emergency talks between top leaders to discuss a border that remains “a killing machine” according to human rights groups.

Nevertheless, the issue runs far deeper than the disproportionate responses of a handful of border police. The key dissonance is not between Thai and Cambodian authorities’ view of their mutual border, but between the official view of the Thai-Cambodian migration system and the perspective of those who use it.

Though they appear to debate and discuss their shared issues, both sides persist in a consensus that criminalises much of the everyday movement taking place between their two countries, rather than recognising it for the informal, but systematic and bilaterally cooperative institution that it is.

Indeed, the Thai-Cambodian cross-border economy is vital to both sides. Immigrant workers have been estimated to contribute about 1 percent of real GDP growth to the Thai economy and the figure is almost certainly growing as the volume of migration continues to expand. At the same time, the flows of money sent back by workers in Thailand have become intimately intertwined with the Cambodian rural economy.

The labour-sharing systems that sustained rural villages in more isolated times have increasingly given way, in this era of high and rising environmental risk, to faster, more capital intensive farming methods that require income from beyond the household.

The mutual reliance of these neighbouring economies reveals a fundamental disjuncture between the economics and politics of the Thai-Cambodian border. On the one hand, it is a deeply co-dependent and thriving cross-border economy; on the other, two separate sovereign states separated by an invisible but deadly border.

These realities one official, one actual are mutually exclusive, but those who pay the price for their discordance are not planners and logicians, but ordinary Cambodians, pressed by circumstances into joining an old and well-established system of international mobility.

Far from the clarity of the thick black lines that divides the two nations in theory, the border separating Cambodia and Thailand is a living entity, defined more by personal relationships, networks and tradition than legality. Indeed, legality is itself a relative concept here. Although vast numbers of Cambodians living on the east side of the border cross regularly to participate in agricultural, construction, or factory labour, a recent study – forthcoming in the Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography – has found that only 3.6 percent of current or former migrants possessed a full set of documentation for work abroad.

By the clearly defined letter of international law, then, more than 19 out of 20 migrants to Thailand from some areas of Cambodia are working as illegal immigrants. However, to view the situation thusly would be to grossly misrepresent the situation.

Whilst around half of the remainder possess no documentation, a further 40 percent possess a “bat”, a temporary work permit facilitating employment of foreign nationals subject to a stringent set of conditions including regular renewal, weekly reports to local police authorities and of course the ability to present a valid passport.

The long hours and limited freedoms characteristic of most forms of migrant labour makes fulfilling any let alone all of these conditions impossible. Very few possess both a visa and a work permit and even among those who do, even fewer renew it regularly or submit to the burdensome registration conditions of which many are unaware.

However, that so many Cambodians spend hundreds of dollars processing various combinations of documents either through official or, far more commonly, unofficial means should not be dismissed as ignorance. Along the Cambodian border, as in many parts of the world, borders simply look different to those who use them. Official channels are not only prohibitively expensive and often distrusted, but also physically and institutionally distant. Informal ones, by contrast, usually in the form of brokers and middlemen, are human, accessible and offer solutions in simple terms.

Rather than the scattered outposts of government administration in far western Cambodia, or its central base hundreds of kilometres away in Phnom Penh, it is these people a vast network of drivers, salesmen, managers and employers of both Thai and Cambodian origin that are the face of authority for most of those who use the border.

Consequently, for those who participate in the informal economy of cross-border migration, it is not the government that sets the rules of documentation, but the known, trusted and – crucially – physically present broker who stands in front of them. If he or she says, as brokers are wont to do, that “with documents you can go everywhere freely, but without them you will be always looking around, always fearful”, then a migrant has little choice but to believe them.

Furthermore, while the narratives of documentation offered by brokers may not tally with the legal reality, this does not make them untrue. In the Thai-Cambodian migration system, as in many others, the people who use brokers to cross a border remain within their influence on either side.

Repayment plans for documents are arranged and employers are selected even before leaving the village in most cases. Similarly, brokers offer protection from authorities on both sides, although the extent depends on the cost of the service provided: the more you pay, the safer you are.

Those who choose the basic package of brokerage run the greatest level of risk – “running all night through the forest” or “hiding in the back of a truck” to escape the authorities. And it is this group the poorest farmers, the deepest in debt –whose wages will be both lower and docked more punitively to pay for the cost of their trip. Indeed, there is a hierarchy of prices for work in different industries. As migrants themselves explained:

‘[I]f you want work in construction it will cost you 3,000 baht [$92], but if you want to work in a garment factory, it may be 4,000 baht [$123]’ (Returned Migrant 13, Svay, 14/08/2014).

In this way, both the migration process itself and employment on the Thai side reflect the entrenched financial inequalities of life in Western Cambodia. Subtle variations in rural livelihoods create uneven opportunities across the border and these differences in working conditions in turn reinforce inequalities at home. Poverty on one side of the border means poverty on the other as the ever present flows of people linking the two countries keep migrants and their households constantly and dynamically linked together – but for both sides migration means life.

For those who use it, then, this vast migration system is a cohesive, living organism; it is the border – impotent and dead atop a thriving economic entity that is the unnatural element. Cambodians do not migrate illegally because they wish to, but because illegal migration is practically the only course of action on offer. The much vaunted One Stop Service Centres set up in the wake of the 2014 exodus are only a small part of the solution. While they help to streamline the complex process of obtaining documentation, it is only documentation that they offer, without the linkages to employers, transportation, or guidance that are vital to a successful migration.

For the poorest households that are the primary source of undocumented migration from Cambodia, it is these services that matter more than any other. Even if they can obtain documents, most potential migrants cannot cross a border speculatively looking for work, nor can they afford the chance of failure given the investment of time and resources that any migration requires. Consequently, “guarantees” of work however dubious are invariably preferable to the uncertainties of legality. Nevertheless, the tradeoff for choosing the only economic pathway available to many worse-off Cambodians is the risk of exploitation, deportation and death.

This everyday injustice emerges not from the brutality of police patrols but from the highest levels of international policy: where legal frameworks reflect the two countries’ economic inter-linkages so poorly, conflict is inevitable. As long as both sides fail to acknowledge the reality that they are vital to each other’s ongoing economic health, the convenient political myth of mutual isolation will continue to see Cambodians disadvantaged, exploited and killed.

Rectifying this means first recognising that the Thai-Cambodian border is not a natural national edifice punctured by opportunistic criminals, but a largely arbitrary division of a longstanding system of mobility sustained by a shared history and culture of mobile livelihoods.

As long as accessible migration services – in the form of documents, but also linkages to employers, and affordable and practical transportation – continue to be the sole preserve of “criminal” agents, then it will continue to be the poorest Cambodians who are criminalised and made to run the starkest risk to their lives and livelihoods. It is time for these two states to give back something to the embattled migrants that link and enrich them.

Dr Laurie Parsons has been an academic researcher of Cambodian mobile livelihoods since 2008, conducting large-scale projects for Transparency International, Plan International, Save the Children, CARE International, ActionAid, the IDRC and the Royal University of Phnom Penh among others.

 

By: Dr Laurie Parsons, The Phnom Penh Post

Published On: 29 March 2017

Legal immigration has downside, too: report

A new report in the journal Migration Studies casts doubt on whether legal emigration is a boon for development in Cambodia, and whether it benefits the Kingdom’s workers.

Experts have long noted that emigration tends to increase as a country develops. In the case of Cambodia, migration shot up over the past decade alongside economic growth. An estimated 1 million Cambodians were based overseas in 2013, the majority in Thailand.

Meanwhile, there is considerable optimism that overseas migration helps boost development and reduce poverty, the study’s author notes. Along with this optimism is an assumption that legal migration is always preferable.

But research by Maryann Bylander, of Lewis and Clark University, shows that legal migration is usually only available to workers who are already better off in relative terms, a fact that minimises migration’s ability to reduce poverty.

Increasing barriers to irregular migration might make it difficult for poor Cambodians to seek opportunities, Bylander determined.

“Scholars and policy-makers who stress the importance of creating opportunities for regular, legal, migration may be advocating for opportunities that are inherently less accessible to those currently engaging in migration,” she wrote. “Increased moves to manage/regulate migration may unwittingly constrain mobility options for the poor.”

After examining data on workers moving to Thailand and Malaysia, Bylander noted that Cambodians migrating to Thailand are often from marginalised households, and usually emigrate without documents. Meanwhile, those heading to Malaysia generally have the economic and social capital to pay recruiters, and opt to obtain the necessary permits.

While the latter may seem preferable, that isn’t always the case, Bylander writes. For example, legal migration isn’t always safer. Legal status can sometimes bind workers to unscrupulous employers, leaving them vulnerable to abuse.

In Malaysia, where the majority of Cambodian migrants are women employed as domestic workers, numerous cases of abuse and exploitation have been documented.

But according to William Conklin, of NGO Solidarity Center, both irregular and regular migrants face a surfeit of obstacles. “To be able to afford to be sent to Malaysia requires money; you need to pay recruiters.

“So those workers are accruing debt,” he noted. “But if they are working in a construction site in Thailand, are . . . international standards being adhered to? In both countries, workers are at risk.

 

By: Cristina Maza, The Phnom Penh Post

Published on: 13 February 2017

 

Undocumented Cambodians to get legal status in Thailand

PHNOM PENH – Undocumented Cambodians who received migrant worker status cards after crossing illegally into Thailand are being advised to contact the embassy in Bangkok, which will help them legalise their position so they can get work.

Many Cambodians now find themselves in a grey area after having been issued with what are known as pink cards by Thai authorities. These give them migrant worker status, but are not enough to allow them to get a legal job, according to the Khmer Times.

The situation arose after the military coup in 2014, when large numbers of foreign workers were expelled.

Many Cambodians crossed back into Thailand illegally. Thai authorities created the pink cards as a way of normalising their presence, however the workers were left in employment limbo.

Cambodian and Thai government officials met to resolve the problem and a Cambodian government committee was set up to legalise the 231,626 undocumented Cambodian workers.

A ministry statement said on Tuesday: “The committee is ready to offer documents to workers following legal procedures required by Thai law.”

Heng Sour, a spokesman for the Ministry of Labour, said the undocumented workers were among one million Cambodians working in Thailand.

He confirmed that the undocumented workers had received migrant worker status cards from Thai authorities after they crossed illegally into Thailand to seek employment.

Cambodia’s Labour Ministry said undocumented workers should apply for travel documents from the embassy in Bangkok.

Workers need to pay 950 baht for the travel documents. These should be taken, along with 500 baht  and the pink card, to the Thai Immigration Department to apply for work permits.

 

By: Khmer Times, Bangkok Post

Published on: 26 January 2017

Back to Top