SINGAPORE: A new employer’s question about food quickly turned into a broader debate about boundaries, kindness, and what it really means to employ a domestic helper in Singapore.
In a Facebook post shared in the Direct Hire Transfer Singapore Maid/Domestic Helper group, a self-described “Second time owner” wrote that their new helper left the house at 9 a.m. on her off day and returned by 4 pm. The employer admitted the situation felt “awkward” because they were “not expecting to provide her with meals on her day off,” adding that this had never happened with their previous helper.
The employer ended the post by asking: “Can anyone advise me whether we need to provide meals or how we should tackle this situation?”
“Please, don’t ration food…”
Several commenters zeroed in on the idea that even a single meal could be up for debate.
One asked: “Providing a meal to your helper on her day off is really worth discussing and is an issue? Can’t really believe one meal can be an issue for a helper who is living in your house day in, day out, helping you organise and assisting in running your house smoothly.”
The commenter then added a plea: “Please, don’t ration food.”
“She’s a helper, not a servant…”
Others tried to steer the conversation toward basic courtesy rather than obligation. One commenter advised employers to keep things simple: “She’s a helper, not a servant. So be polite, knock on her door, ask her if she would like to join for dinner.”
The commenter suggested treating a shared meal as “one simple gesture of saying ‘we appreciate your help’,” while also clarifying that days off remain unpaid.
“Some helpers just want to come home early to rest…”
Some employers in the group took a more neutral stance, pointing out that helpers often return early simply to rest. One commenter shared: “Some helpers just want to come home early to rest because the next day will be a busy day.”
One employer added that whether food is offered “depends on the employer” and framed it as a small, manageable issue rather than a conflict.
“You are an EMPLOYER, not an OWNER. She’s not your slave!”
One of the sharpest criticisms went beyond food, stressing that the words used matter more. Another commenter, who said they were also an employer, wrote: “You are an EMPLOYER, not an OWNER. She’s not your slave!”
While acknowledging that meals on days off are generally the helper’s responsibility, the commenter said the question itself came across poorly: “You come across as a stingy person for asking this question.”
What began as a practical query ended up exposing a deeper tension between legal obligations and everyday humanity, and between running a household efficiently and remembering that the person helping to do so also lives there.
