by Hashane Perera

Overview

Mr. Alvaro Gil-Robles’ insight aptly captures the plight of foreign domestic workers (FDWs) who may become victims in the shadow of the Cyprus problem: ‘…a possible switch in status from legality to illegality [happens] simply at the employer’s whim.’ With this in mind, the majority of those who migrate to the Republic of Cyprus are women, working primarily as live-in domestic workers. These FDWs are mainly from countries like Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and the Philippines. Given their substantial presence, discussions surrounding social and cultural challenges, stemming from the Cyprus problem, sometimes center on FDWs. The concerning conditions of FDWs in Cyprus are a result of institutional and social components linked to the frozen conflict, such as related policy gaps and nationalistic sentiments.

The reality for FDWs in the Republic of Cyprus (RoC)

According to the Robles report, the two primary weaknesses of the immigration system in Cyprus are the absence of a significant immigration strategy in areas of employment, as well as lack of measures for integrating migrants into the Cypriot community. Nationalist feelings and the longstanding perception of Turks as the ‘other’ by Greek Cypriots-viewed as invaders of their island, have contributed to a broader tendency to label individuals who do not align with the national identity as outsiders. This mindset often pushes negative cultural stereotypes onto other Eastern Asian communities, such as Sri Lankan and Filipino migrants. Combined with inadequate policies addressing the welfare of FDWs and the persistence of racist attitudes, these create a complex web of challenges for FDWs in Cyprus. For instance, at one point, the Cypriot press published several racist headlines targeting FDWs, referring to them as a ‘cancer’ and a ‘plague.’ Similarly, one account describes the situation of a Sri Lankan lady who was paid little money to work for four families from 7am till 10pm. However, the focus of concern by the SEK trade union representative was directed towards the job denial of three Cypriot cleaners.

The stigmatization surrounding FDWs is also evident in the administrative framework governing their employment. While the Ministry of Labor and Social Insurance oversees foreign workers in Cyprus, FDWs exceptionally fall under the Civil Registry and Migration Department of the Ministry of Interior. Despite the Council of Ministers’ 2010 announcement of plans to transfer responsibility for FDWs to the Ministry of Labor, no action has been taken to implement this decision, even years later. This results in an absence in regulating FDW working conditions. In particular, inspectors employed by the Minister of Labor could conduct unexpected inspections and impose sanctions in the majority of industries, but they cannot investigate the working conditions of domestic workers without a court order. In 1991, the Ministry of Labor introduced a standard employed contract for FDWs which remained largely unchanged until a revised contract was issued in 2019. Arguments, however, indicate that several gaps remain unfilled in this contract, leading to issues including unclear working hours and breaks, no provisions for overtime compensation, insufficient complaint procedures, ambiguous outcomes during disputes, and the involvement of police.

The Domino Effect of Inadequate Policies

Dr Hadjigeorgiou’s study highlights two key issues with the employment contract for FDWs: their lack of understanding of their rights upon entering the contract and their inability to effectively assert those rights even when they are aware of them. A notable illustration of this mistreatment can be seen in a study involving 15 female FDWs in Cyprus. It found that 11 out of 15 participants reported sexual harassment in their workplace. The majority of the women were reluctant to report their assault because they feared losing their jobs and visas. In several cases, when the women confided in other women in the employer’s home about their abuse, and the latter would normalize the violence. Given the insufficient proof, several women who reported their abuse to authorities were mocked or threatened with deportation or imprisonment. In a similar vein, Cyprus’s visa regulations place women under the control of their employers since the bank guarantees that the employer will pay for the worker’s repatriation expenses, which will only be reimbursed if the workers return home or are officially released for other jobs. If none of the above-mentioned take place, they are considered undocumented and the deposit is lost. Joyce, a participant in the study from the Philippines, stated that she was threatened to pay the guarantee herself if she wanted to be released. Consequently, many FDWs struggle to understand the contracts they sign due to language barriers, as English is not their first language. Some workers do not recall signing a contract, while others report never having signed one at all. In addition to receiving unequal treatment and being denied work privileges in the RoC, the law also infringes on FDWs’ personal rights by restricting their access to family reunification. Under the RoC law, holders of FDW visas are automatically barred from obtaining permanent residency, effectively denying them the right to reunite with their families, even after working in the country for over five years. The only opportunity for FDWs to see their families is at their own expense.

Conclusion

To conclude, the majority of FDWs face exploitative working conditions, including long hours, low pay, and various forms of abuse in which the authority provides no relief. The unresolved Cyprus problem contributes to institutional neglect and the normalization of nationalist policies that have created an environment to marginalize and exploit migrant workers. The absence of a cohesive immigration policy, insufficient integration measures, contractual ambiguities, and lack of protection effectively silences their voices. It is important to acknowledge that many of these women are mothers who had to leave their families behind. Therefore, it highlights the urgent need for reform in policy gaps and addressing systemic flaws to afford the protection they need.