SINGAPORE: A Facebook post that cut straight to the point, aimed at domestic helpers in Singapore, has stirred strong reactions online from both helpers and employers alike before disappearing from public view.
Shared in the Direct Hire Transfer Singapore Maid/Domestic Helper group, the post was in response to the recurring complaints about employers not providing enough food or sharing premium groceries, especially after a recent incident when a maid asked, ‘Why employers can afford to travel, spending thousands, but can’t afford to buy helper’s food, complaining it’s expensive?’
The post in the Facebook group has since been deleted, likely after backlash. But its direct and rather insensitive message was: food beyond basic meals is a privilege, not a right.
“You are here for a job!”
Addressing “all domestic helpers” in Singapore, the employer opened with a firm tone: “This is a straightforward reminder, so there is no misunderstanding.”
The post stressed the employer-employee relationship, drawing a clear line between work and lifestyle. “You are here for a job! Your workplace happens to be your employer’s home, but that does not mean you are automatically part of their lifestyle.”
While employers are required to provide meals, this particular employer emphasised limits to that obligation: “Employers must provide proper meals, and they do. Basic meals are guaranteed. Beyond that, nothing else is owed.”
“Premium items (expensive food) are not something you should expect…”
The strongest reaction online appeared to centre on how the post framed premium food. According to the employer, what they choose to buy with their own money is strictly a personal matter.
“If your employer buys expensive food for themselves, that is their personal choice and their own hard-earned money.”
The post went further, stating that higher-end items should not be assumed to be part of the job package. “Premium items (expensive food) are not part of your employment benefits. If they choose to share, that is generosity, not something YOU should expect.”
“Your role is to work, not to assume access to everything your employer buys for themselves!”
The post ended by reinforcing the household’s hierarchy and expectations. “Please keep this clear: your role is to work, not to assume access to everything your employer buys for themselves!”
The employer then concluded with a call for boundaries to maintain harmony. “Respecting boundaries keeps the working relationship smooth for everyone.”
Why such posts are likely to trigger a backlash
The timing and tone play a big role in any backlash. Domestic helper food provisions have long been a sensitive issue in Singapore, with previous cases of insufficient meals and poor care coming to light. The post’s strident tone, against that backdrop, seemed to many like a dressing-down rather than an explanation.
Its removal indicates that the reaction was swift. But even if only for a moment, the post encapsulated the ongoing tension between employer and helper relationships, one caught in the crosshairs of legal duties, personal expectations, and power dynamics deep within private homes.
