Bridging the social gap between Singaporeans and foreign
workers through proactive cultural awareness
According to Goldin (2009), rapid
globalization has triggered a multiplicity of global issues that seem to plague
the world today. With growing labor needs in developed countries, the demand
for cheap and unskilled laborers from less developed countries continues to
rise (McKay, 2013). A cosmopolitan city like Singapore is one such
place that relies heavily on foreign workers to fill in the demand for
unskilled labor in the construction industry. However, the influx of foreign
workers appears to have caused problems for the local community. Media reports
on the unruliness of migrant workers and the lack of social integration seem to
resonate among Singaporeans and this has led to the growing animosity between
locals and foreign workers (Lim, 2013; Ng, 2010). Despite the government’s
efforts to encourage smooth integration, there is still much to be done to
alleviate the tension between the locals and foreign workers. For instance, the
state could proactively inculcate cultural awareness for both parties through
the use of education and mass media, narrowing the social divide.
The resentment between locals and foreign
workers can largely be attributed to the lack of cultural understanding between
the two. Despite the state actively promoting multiculturalism, this only
extends to the local community and fails to include the foreign workers at
large (Aricat, 2013). In fact, a large segment of the society shows little
understanding of foreign cultures, and tends to expect foreign workers to
conform to local norms instead of trying to foster mutual understanding. On the
other hand, foreign workers, who are mostly transient, are not motivated to
acculturate to the host society as they are mostly motivated by economic
benefits. Furthermore, the tendency for local residents to
portray a superiority-complex as well as to dually treat foreign workers by
“accepting them economically and excluding them psychologically” has led to the
marginalized social status of migrant workers (Gu, Zheng & Yi,
2007, p.2). This lack of acceptance of foreign workers could in turn lead to
them rejecting the host society, exacerbating the social divide. One fine
example would be the riot involving migrant workers that recently broke out in
Little India due to the death of their peer (Lim, 2013). Many have speculated
that the underlying cause of the riot was recourse to the oppression and unfair
treatment faced by foreign workers. Nevertheless, the media sensationalized the
incident, which fueled widespread criticisms from Singaporeans and intensified
the strained relationship between locals and foreign workers.
The Singapore government has employed
various strategies to counter the current divide by providing cultural
education for foreign workers. The Migrant Workers Centre (MWC) and NTUC
LearningHub jointly conducts a one-day course in the hope of empowering foreign
workers with knowledge of societal norms, which might enable these foreigners
to better assimilate into local society (Ng, 2010). However, not every migrant
worker is entitled to the one-day program as the hefty cost of the program
($82.50 per person) deters employers from signing up (Ng, 2010). Furthermore,
government efforts of social integration have been mainly focused on the
“functional type” of integration and little effort has been placed on social
and emotional needs (Saad, 2014). Thus, the
government has to play a more active role in enforcing more feasible means of
social integration for the foreign workers.
In order to create social cohesion among
Singaporeans and foreign workers, the state could also provide extensive
cultural education for both Singaporeans and foreign workers. As mentioned
earlier, it is not sufficient for workers to be integrated in a functional
manner. They should be taught the norms of the local community more in-depth
and such lessons should be available at an affordable rate. Singaporeans, on the
other hand, should be educated on the various cultures of foreign workers and
be taught to question individual undesirable behavior objectively without
condemning foreign workers as a whole. One way in which the state could
propagate cultural education to large masses of Singaporeans is through the
usage of mass media. Advertisements on media portals such as television, radio
and social media, which showcase the cultural values of migrant communities in
a creative manner, may enable Singaporeans to learn more about the migrant
communities. This may also aid in the debunking of stereotypes attributed to
foreign workers.
However, implementing such measures could
lead to possible backlash from both the migrant workers and Singaporeans.
Despite the efforts to culturally educate both groups, Singaporeans may still
be unwilling to accept the differences in cultures while the foreign workers,
being transient, may not be inclined to integrate with the society. Moreover,
using mass media to shed a positive view of foreign cultures may invite
criticisms as Singaporeans may misinterpret the state’s efforts as
"pro-foreigner".
Despite the limitations of implementing
such measures, doing nothing on the other hand could prove to be catastrophic
as it would be a matter a time before the issue boiled over. Hence, proactive
cultural education is an integral step that must be undertaken in order to
bridge the social divide.
References
Aricat, R. (2013). Indian migrant
workers rioting in Singapore: Revisiting acculturation paradigms. Economic & Political Weekly.
Gu, S., Zheng, L., & Yi, S.
(2007). Problems of rural migrant workers and policies in the new period of
urbanization. China Population,
Resources and Enviornment, 17(1):1-5.
McKay, S. L. (2013). Globalization,
localization and language attitudes: The case of “foreign workers” in
Singapore. Multilingual Education, 3(3).
