“We also deserve help during the pandemic”: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on foreign domestic workers in Hong Kong

  1. Ingrid D. Lui
  2. Nimisha Vandan
  3. Sara E. Davies
  4. Sophie Harman
  5. Rosemary Morgan
  6. Julia Smith
  7. Clare Wenham
  8. Karen Ann Grépin

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses particular challenges for migrant workers around the world. This study explores the unique experiences of foreign domestic workers (FDWs) in Hong Kong, and how COVID-19 impacted their health and economic wellbeing. Interviews with FDWs ( n = 15) and key informants ( n = 3) were conducted between May and August 2020. FDWs reported a dual-country experience of the pandemic, where they expressed concerns about local transmission risks as well as worries about their family members in their home country. Changes to their current work situation included how their employers treated them, as well as their employment status. FDWs also cited blind spots in the Hong Kong policy response that also affected their experience of the pandemic, including a lack of support from the Hong Kong government. Additional support is needed to mitigate the particularly negative effects of the pandemic on FDWs.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.04.21252889: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Each interview was audio-recorded with verbal consent from each participant, and notes were taken during each interview.
    IRB: Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Hong Kong.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    4.1 Limitations: This study has several important limitations. FDWs were recruited as part of a larger project on gender and thus had not been the sole focus of the study, so our interview guide was not tailored specific to the concerns of FDWs. The views expressed by FDW participants in this study may not fully represent the experiences of all FDWs working in Hong Kong or generalize to the pandemic experiences of FDWs in other countries. Participants were recruited through social media adverts, so those who chose to respond many have had a vested interest in sharing their experiences and opinions on this topic. As all interviews were conducted in English, this may have limited the amount of information participants were able to share as non-native speakers and excluded those who could not speak the language. Future research is needed that is specifically catered to the experiences of FDWs, including comparisons with FDWs in other countries. Given this, future studies should also recruit larger and more robust sample sizes to increase generalizability of study findings. Since there were many suggestions for change that came up during our interviews, future research could consult with FDW collectives who have perhaps attempted to gain recognition from the government to explore how the COVID-19 pandemic may be used as a basis to claim greater recognition and rights for FDWs. Given the ever-evolving nature of this pandemic, future studies will be needed that can measure what has...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.04.21252889v1 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1016/j.jmh.2021.100037