Advertisement
Advertisement
Ian Young
SCMP Columnist
The Hongcouver
by Ian Young
The Hongcouver
by Ian Young

Sexually abused by her Hong Kong employer, a Filipino helper finds justice in Canada

Vancouver tribunal awards C$55,000 after hearing how ‘typical’ HK stereotyping contributes to mistreatment of helpers

For Filipino domestic helper PN, her treatment at the hands of her Hong Kong employers descended into “virtual slavery”, according to an official adjudicator.

Denied her passport, she found herself trapped in a tiny apartment, sleeping on the couch, and under constant watch by her employers, who occupied the two bedrooms with their children. She was only allowed to eat with permission, was verbally and physically abused, and threatened with spurious police action for mistreating the family’s two children if she complained. She was underpaid, or not paid at all.

Worst, PN’s male employer would routinely have the then 28-year-old mother of two masturbate him with hand lotion when his wife was away or asleep.  Eventually, PN fled to a women’s shelter one day while taking out the garbage, leaving behind her confiscated passport, eyeglasses and all her possessions.

It’s a revolting tale. But cases of Hong Kong employers abusing foreign helpers are not exactly in short supply. What makes PN’s case an eye-opener is the fact the abuse was committed not in Hong Kong - but in the Vancouver satellite city of Richmond.

PN’s ordeal was outlined in a ruling this month by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, which awarded PN more than C$55,000 in back pay and damages in response to her complaint of discrimination.

PN arrived in Vancouver with her employers, identified only as FR and MR, when they emigrated to Canada with their two children in July 2013. The wife, MR, had PN sign a letter extending her Hong Kong contract to cover working in Canada, that outlined that she would receive the same HK$3,740 monthly salary she received in the SAR (in contravention of BC’s minimum wage).

READ: Indonesian helper who killed her 'abusive employer' is beheaded by Saudi authorities

The roughly worded contract included a warning that PN should not “make serious trouble”, adding that MR did not “want to see any unhappy things happen”. If PN changed her mind about working in Canada, she would be liable to pay HK $13,600 to cover her air ticket and visa fee, the contract said.

The family and PN moved into a small serviced suite in an airport hotel while the couple house-hunted in Richmond. PN’s abuse in Canada lasted about six weeks, until she fled the suite on August 18, 2013 (PN’s claims of longer-term abuse in Hong Kong were deemed outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction).

In her findings of fact, tribunal member Catherine McCreary was scathing towards FR – who has returned to Hong Kong with MR since PN lodged her complaint. McCreary said she had no doubt about PN’s veracity in describing the sexual assaults by FR, who represented himself and his wife at the March hearing via video link.

"This is particularly so after noting that FR did not cross-examine PN on her evidence about the sexual assaults and considering that, in FR’s testimony, he did not deny that he engaged in the sexual assault,” McCreary said, calling FR "arrogant" with a “sense of entitlement”.

“I thus have no difficulty finding that FR repeatedly sexually harassed PN. This harassment amounted to a significant affront to PN’s dignity and feelings of self-worth. It underscored her general powerlessness … she was unable to avoid it.”

Although FR believed PN only came to Vancouver in order to run away, McCreary noted that PN was not entitled to work in Canada, having arrived on a visitor’s visa that expired six weeks after she fled. It’s not clear whether PN remains in Canada.

Just as striking as PN’s abuse was an expert report submitted by Dr Anna Guevarra, director of Asian American Studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Outlining the prejudice faced by Filipino domestic workers, Guevarra said Hong Kong employers typically stereotype them as “morally suspect” due to their perceived financial desperation.

“As Filipino women, they are perceived to be ‘naturally inclined’ to perform this kind of domestic care work, even as they are ‘naturally’ or ‘culturally’ inclined to exhibit morally suspect behaviours,” said McCreary’s summary of Guevarra’s report.

Is this assessment of Hongkongers’ attitudes, proffered in an attempt to explain a case of abuse, fair?

It was only last week that Richmond police backtracked on an assessment that “cultural pressures” helped explain a grotesque case of child abuse  in which a Chinese aunt, Wei Wang, squeezed super glue into her infant nephew’s ears, because she was said to be jealous about the fact that she herself had two daughters but no son.

Yet Wang’s case was a singular crime by a disturbed individual. She had no accomplices, her family was appalled and the act was committed in secret. That a preference for sons exists among some Chinese is indisputable – but ascribing such a uniquely heinous act to “cultural pressures” makes little sense.

PN’s treatment, on the other hand, is only part of a sad and shameful history of mistreatment of foreign helpers by Hong Kong employers; both husband and his wife forced various indignities upon their employee; and certain aspects of PN’s dehumanisation occurred in public view.

McCreary noted that FR had called witnesses who dined with the family and PN to support his claim that he treated her like family. But “none of the witnesses knew her name”, McCreary wrote.

“They only knew her as the maid."

*
The Hongcouver blog is devoted to the hybrid culture of its namesake cities: Hong Kong and Vancouver. All story ideas and comments are welcome. Connect with me by email [email protected] or on Twitter, @ianjamesyoung70 .

 

Post