
Understanding Vulnerabilities and Agency: Migrant Domestic Workers from Minority Source Countries in Hong Kong
The need for this research into Migrant Domestic Workers (MDWs) originating from minority source countries, arose due to the distinct challenges and barriers that this particular community faces. There are 367,971 MDWs in Hong Kong, the majority of whom stem from the Philippines (55.16%) and Indonesia (42.28%). As of December 2024, there were only 1,763 Thai (0.48%), 1,099 Sri Lankan (0.3%), 578 Bangladeshi (0.16%) and 5,982 (1.63%) ‘other’ nationalities working as MDWs in Hong Kong1.
Whilst the Migrant Domestic Worker’s journey has been extensively studied and documented in Hong Kong, the emphasis has overwhelmingly been on Filipino and Indonesian groups. There are numerous reports and research studies looking at the experiences of Migrant domestic workers in Hong Kong. This report will not reiterate those here, however, please see STOP’s (2023) research A Pathways to Justice or A Road to Nowhere if you would like to explore that topic further. Populations stemming from minority source countries are under-researched and often overlooked, and as such, specific needs and gaps are not taken into consideration. This hampers efforts to promote evidence-led recommendations based on the specific challenges faced by the community.
This research entails an examination of the additional difficulties MDWs from minority source countries face in accessing and processing recruitment opportunities, undertaking their employment, and attempting to access support and redress should they experience exploitation. To understand the experiences faced by minority Migrant Domestic Workers (mMDWs), as opposed to migrant populations from larger exporting countries such as the Philippines and Indonesia, STOP conducted surveys with 36 mMDWs and conducted interviews with stakeholders who work to support Migrant Domestic Workers in Hong Kong.
These stakeholders work at, or are involved in, NGOs, employment agencies, church communities, and Unions, in particular ones who provide services and support to minority groups, such as Sri Lankan, Thai, Nepali, Kenyan and other source countries. Excerpts from the interviews conducted are interspersed throughout this report.
Migrant Workers from Minority Source Countries are hard to identify and target, for the precise reasons that exacerbate their vulnerability. Unlike the Filipino and Indonesian MDW communities, they have no centralised hub where they can be located and approached, their ability to understand English and Cantonese is limited, and many are not given a rest day on Sunday when other MDWs congregate. As such, finding, explaining, and being able to undertake the research on their vulnerabilities was impacted by their vulnerabilities. A consequence of this is that the mMDWs who took part in this research were already aware of, and receiving support from, NGOs, Unions and churches, and as such are not fully representative of the experiences and information gaps as compared to the wider population of MDWs from minority source countries. However, their responses, coupled with the interview with stakeholder organisations, illuminate the vulnerabilities of the cohort as a whole.