The Maid Dilemma

The Star, 26 June 2009, 7.58am
Jakarta stops export of maids immediately

JAKARTA: Indonesia has ordered employment agencies to stop sending its citizens to Malaysia to work as maids. Indonesian Manpower Minister Erman Suparno said the decision – effective today – would remain in place until safeguards are implemented in Malaysia.

We should sympathise with their plight. Some are treated so badly, even worse than animals.

But before we go all out to demonise and crucify Malaysian employers, let’s flip the coin and look on the other side.

What about the cases of abuse towards defenseless children and the old and infirm? I saw one video clip of a maid repeatedly kicking and stepping on a little girl.
There were reported cases of maid urinating in the employers’ food.
What about those who bring home their boyfriends? Some even got pregnant.
What about those maids who bring diseases (this is despite getting health clearance from Indonesian doctors).
They congregate and gossip instead of looking after the children at the playground.
There are maids who watches more TV than doing housework
Some don’t even know how to use simple electrical equipments (this is despite being “trained” in Indonesia).
What about the runaway maids?
What about the maid who runs away after stealing (robbing) from their employers?

The Indonesian authorities may not believe this, but there are maids who get to travel with their employers, visit interesting places, some overseas and stay in decent hotels.
There are maids who regularly gets presents and gifts, including (designer) hand me downs.
Some even get TV in their rooms.

The longer the ban, the better for us. We will survive, we’ll find alternative solution to the problem, worse comes to worse; one spouse will stop working and become the household manager. In adversity we’ll prevail.


I wonder why the Indonesian authorities are not banning the export of Indonesian criminals as well. We seem to have too many of them here.

English for Maths and Science

The Education Minister admitted that teaching maths and science in English has not improved the performance of the students in those subjects since the policy was implemented in 2003.

So, how now brown cow? Do we continue with the policy or revert to Bahasa Malaysia? IMHO, we should examine a few issues before we decide which language to choose.

The teachers
Do we have enough teachers proficient in scientific and mathematical English to effectively teach those subjects in English? I’m saying scientific and mathematical English because I feel the English used for those subjects tend to be technical in nature, it’s not the same as the English taught in your English literature class.

In what language were the teachers trained? If they were taught in English while at college or university, it would be unfair to make teach in Malay, vice versa. They would have to practically re-learn the subjects.

The students
Are the students proficient enough in English? Technical terms can be introduced and explained but if they have a poor command of English, how can we expect them to fully grasp the subject. They may not even understand the instructions let alone the teacher’s explanations.

So, how now brown cow?

Maybe what we should do is get the trainers properly trained. Make sure the teachers are able and capable of effectively delivering the subject in English. I’m sure we have many such teachers around but I’m also sure the numbers are quite small. Give a time frame, say five years for the teachers achieve competency. In the meantime, teach the subjects in English only in schools whose teachers (and students) are qualified to teach (and learn) in English. Gradually the number will increase and it will be done without putting anyone at a disadvantage. No, doubt two languages will be used to teach the subjects for at least the first ten years but eventually we will almost certainly get the desired result.

At the same time, the lower primary school students need to be given extra lessons (by qualified teachers) in English, especially those in the less urban areas where the command of English tend to be weaker.

I first studied economics in college and it was taught in English, I went on to study economics in an English university and my post graduate economics lectures were also delivered in English. I have never read a Malay economics text book. I was an economics lecturer for a brief period and I taught my students in English. I would have a tough time if was asked to teach economics in Malay, it would not be fair to my students. It would probably make them dumb and dumber.

Having said that, learning should be in any language, the idea is to obtain knowledge, what language is used to obtain the knowledge is of little relevance.

Learning English will not kill Bahasa Malaysia. Indiscriminately adopting English words into Bahasa Malaysia WILL kill the language. http://sam-bicara.blogspot.com/2009/01/whither-bahasa-melayu.html

What is a Malay?

Article 160 of the Federal Constitution defines Malay as a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language and conforms to Malay custom.

I have a question, or rather a hypothetical situation.

There is this person, born in Tanzania but a citizen of Malaysia and lives in Dungun, Terengganu. His father is of Persian decent and his mother, Chinese. His paternal grandfather is African and his maternal grandmother is Anglo-Saxon. He is a staunch Muslim, having been on the pilgrimage twice and does the umrah every Ramadhan. He has a Master’s degree in Malay literature and currently teaches Malay language to form 5 students at the local school. He is also the president and promoter of the Malay NGO Persatuan Adat Resam Tradisi Rumpun Melayu Sedunia (PARTRuMS).

In short, he professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language and conforms to Malay custom. But, is he Malay?

According to the Federal Constitution, he is as Malay as I am. Maybe even more Malay than I am.

Life is ...

Leaving the house in the morning, dressed in clothes that you bought by credit card, driving through the traffic in a car you are still paying for, putting in fuel that you cannot afford, all in order to get to the job you hate but need so badly so that you can pay for the clothes, car, fuel and the house that you leave empty the whole day, in order to live in it.

I got this from a colleague - kind of true for some of us, especially those trapped in the rat-race or trapped while trying to compete with the Joneses.

The Malay Dilemma?

Another one from the “dilemma” series!

It is often lamented (maybe not so publicly) that non-Malays have no chance whatsoever to head a Government Linked Company (GLC). This is often blamed on the NEP which is not entirely accurate because if not for the affirmative action, there won’t be that many GLCs in the first place, the large corporations would probably still be owned by the British.

Anyway, back to the dilemma, it is true that all of the CEOs of the GLCs are Malays/Bumiputeras and it is also true that their position is attributed to the NEP (and its successors), via institutions such as PNB, EPF, Khazanah, MoF Inc. which acts as drivers of the policy. While it is true and beyond argument that Malays/Bumiputeras are the only types that head the GLCs it is also true that no Malays/Bumiputeras are heading the other equally large and diversified corporations which does not fall under the GLC ambit such as YTL, KLK, SP Setia, Hong Leong, IOI, Rimbunan Hijau, Lion, Berjaya, Tan Chong etc.

So, this lack of “opportunities” for the different races occurs on both sides of the fence, the GLCs and so called non-GLCs and therefore no one should be complaining. I however feel the choice of corporate leadership should not be based on ethnicity but instead on quality. Trust me, quality Malay/Bumiputera managers and leaders do exist and some are where they are not so much because of skin colour but also based on merit.

All we need is trust and respect for each other. Being of different race, religion or even political belief should not be a basis for distrust. Let’s be trusting of each other and rid ourselves of the unnecessary prejudices. Maybe then we can move forward to greater heights.

Ironies

I enjoyed this interesting article by James Chin (JC) in The Malaysian Insider; it really shows that we are full of contradictions, some to the point of absurdity.

Irony 1 according to JC – We are told communism is bad, they are evil, their past leaders cannot set foot in our country BUT our leaders visit the largest communist country in the world, forging political and business alliances with them … irony?

Irony 2 – Some quarters are against teaching certain subjects in English but upon closer inspection these people who objects to teaching in English were themselves educated in English, graduating from English medium institutions in English speaking countries.
To make the irony even more ironic, UiTM which is exclusively for Bumiputeras teaches in English while UKM, which is open to all races (subject to a quota of course), teaches in Malay.

The truth they say is stranger than fiction but the observations made by James Chin is a fact, a sad fact.

The Toll-gate Dilemma

Almost all the highways in Malaysia are privately owned. Projek Lebuhraya Utara Selatan (PLUS) owns the most highways (NSE, NKVE, FHR2, Elite, SPDH, BKE, Linkedua), other owners include Litrak (LDP); Prolintas (AKLEH, GCE); MTD (Karak, ECE); IJM (Lekas, Besraya, NPE); Kesturi (DUKE); SDE Holdings (SPGDE) and Silk Holdings (SILK)

Road users pay to use the highway and in return we expect a pleasant journey on well maintained roads, safe and clean rest facilities with decent and reasonably priced food outlets and rapid emergency response. I have little or no complaints on the services, they have been quite satisfactory.

However, I feel that all the highway operators should consider discriminatory pricing. No, I’m NOT suggesting that Bumiputeras get a 30% discount. I would suggest that discounts be given to users during peak periods. This is because we pay for convenience and during peak periods (school breaks, public holidays, Aidil Fitri, CNY, weekday mornings and evenings) we get very inconvenienced when on the highway. There is a long queue to use the toilet; you are unable to get parking at rest areas, driving faster than 60km/h is impossible due to the heavy traffic and worst of all is the queue to pay toll which can stretch for kilometres.

So, given all that, why can’t those bunch listed in the first para give us poor road users 50-60% discount during the peak periods, after all the traffic volume will surely compensate for the reduced price.

The Environmental Dilemma

Wrong to treat orang utans like human babies, say activists
Bukit Merah (near Taiping), Perak: An orang utan sanctuary where baby apes wear nappies, sleep in cots and are cared for by nurses dressed in masks and starched uniforms has drawn the wrath of environmentalists.
Tourists snap photos as they file past large windows looking onto a facility billed as the world’s only rehabilitation and preservation facility for the endangered primates.
Behind the glass, adorable baby orang utans like two-month-old Tuah lie swaddled in nursery sheets and cling to baby rattles.
But the care lavished on the animals, which are fed every two hours by a staff of seven nurses on duty round the clock, is lost on environmentalists who say this is no way to treat wild animals facing the threat of extinction.
A 2007 assessment by the United Nations Environment Programme warned that orang utans would be virtually eliminated in the wild within two decades if current deforestation trends continue.
Managers of the 14ha Island, which is part of a resort hotel development, say they aim to return the animals to their natural jungle habitat, but so far none have been released. The centre’s veterinarian defended the facility, situated in this tourist town, which opened in 2000 and now houses 25 orang utans.
(The Star 1 June 2009)

Despite the name, orang utans should not be treated like orangs. Animals should be left to be what they are, fending for themselves without human interference. Even when there is a need for human assistance to ensure survival of the animal species, it should be done in a manner that does not make the animals less animal. Some animal species by nature are hunters (Tigers for example). But once they get used to being fed fresh warm meat without having to hunt for it, they become lazy and in the end become less of a tiger.

So, stop molly cuddling the animals and let them be themselves.

On another note, it was noted that if current deforestation trends continue, the (wild) orang utan population will be eliminated within the next 20 years. That’s the thing with forests, we need them to complement our lives, i.e. we need wood to build houses, schools, hospitals, factories, furniture; we need land for farming and to breed livestock; we need space for the ever increasing population but cutting down trees (indiscriminately) for these purposes will cause other environmental issues. The rate of human growth outstrips the rate of reforestation.

So, how do we go about finding a balance between cutting down trees and meeting our needs? Do we say stop building new houses? But then the new families need a roof over their heads, where are they going to stay? Stop making furniture? Stop using fireplaces? Where are we going to rear the cattle? And we need land to plant vegetables.

It’s about time everyone; governments, industries, universities, Greenpeace, the UN and you and me to get together and come up with a win-win solution.

And no, limiting one person to one chair per lifetime is not a solution.