A Survey Reveals Deep Disparities
A recent survey has cast a harsh light on South Korea’s ambitious pilot program to employ foreign domestic helpers, revealing significant disparities in wages and working conditions. The study, conducted by Professor Lee Mi-ae of Jeju National University and published in the Korea Association for Immigration Policy and Administration journal, found that foreign housekeepers were severely underpaid and subjected to work outside their agreed job scopes.
The survey focused on 21 Filipino housekeepers and two translators who participated in the program initiated by the Seoul Metropolitan Government in September 2024. The data painted a stark picture of financial hardship for the workers. Respondents reported receiving an average monthly wage of 1.92 million won during the first six months of the project. This figure represents less than half of the average monthly payment received by South Koreans in 2024, which stood at 3.74 million won.
The financial strain became even more apparent when deducting mandatory costs such as residential expenses and insurance payments. After these deductions, the net monthly wage for the foreign workers dropped to a mere 1.18 million won. This amount is barely enough to sustain a living in one of Asia’s most expensive cities, raising serious questions about the economic sustainability of the program for the laborers it was designed to employ.
Beyond the wage gap, the survey highlighted significant issues regarding the scope of work. Several respondents reported being asked to perform tasks that were not part of their initial agreements. These extra duties included washing dishes, caring for pets, and even tutoring children in English. These findings suggest a fundamental misunderstanding or miscommunication regarding the role these workers were intended to play in South Korean households.
Professor Lee Mi-ae, who led the research, emphasized the need for a systemic shift in how domestic labor is perceived. She argued that the economic value of housekeeping must be recognized to create a sustainable ecosystem for these services.
We must re-evaluate the value of child care, recognize the economic value of housekeeping labour, and foster a virtuous cycle of providing high quality housekeeping services and jobs.
The program was originally launched with 100 workers, mostly from Southeast Asia, to serve over 150 households in Seoul before concluding its initial phase in December. The initiative was designed to address a critical shortage of local workers willing to perform domestic chores and to support South Korean women in continuing their careers.
The Demographic Context and Policy Goals
South Korea’s decision to import foreign domestic labor stems from a desperate bid to tackle the world’s lowest birth rate, which dropped to 0.78 in 2023. The government views the burden of housework and child care as a primary factor deterring young women from having children and staying in the workforce. The pilot program, officially launched in September 2024, aimed to alleviate these pressures by bringing in trained caregivers from the Philippines.
The program prioritized dual-income married couples in their 20s to 40s, single-parent households, and multi-child families. According to the Prime Minister’s office, the goal was to ease the burden of domestic responsibilities, thereby encouraging family formation and career retention for mothers. The strategy was modeled after systems in Singapore and Hong Kong, where foreign domestic helpers are a staple of urban life.
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon had championed the initiative, arguing that South Korea was seeing the warning light of population extinction. He pointed to the success of foreign domestic worker schemes in other Asian hubs, noting that while such policies did not overturn low fertility trends, they helped slow the decline. However, the implementation of this policy has proven far more complex than simply importing labor from abroad.
Critics have long argued that relying on cheap foreign labor does not address the root causes of the demographic crisis. Sociology professor Lee Joo-hee of Ewha Womans University noted that bringing in foreign workers is unlikely to solve the demographic problem and that the focus should remain on improving conditions for domestic workers. She highlighted that there is a large pool of middle-aged Korean women who could fill these roles if the jobs offered full-time hours and benefits.
The government hoped that by using certified agencies and monitoring the program closely, they could avoid the pitfalls seen in other nations. However, the reality on the ground has suggested that the structural issues facing domestic workers are difficult to regulate away, even with strict oversight and pilot limitations.
Identity Confusion and Scope Creep
A central tension within the program has been the definition of the workers’ roles. The participants, mostly Filipinas with professional caregiver licenses and training, view themselves primarily as caregivers rather than traditional maids. This distinction has led to friction with employers who may expect a broader range of domestic services.
In interviews conducted before their arrival, participants like Mary and Belle emphasized that their primary duty was to care for expectant mothers or children. They understood that household chores were only to be performed if directly related to caregiving. For example, while they might wash a baby’s bottles or clean a play area, they expected that tasks like trash disposal, cooking for adults, or general organizing were not part of their contract.
However, the survey results and subsequent reports indicate that these boundaries were frequently blurred. Workers reported being asked to wash dishes for the entire family, tutor children in English, and look after pets. These tasks fall outside the strict definition of caregiving and impose additional physical and mental demands on the employees.
My main job is caregiving, and I understand that I will only assist with household chores related to caregiving when necessary.
The ambiguity of job descriptions was a concern even before the program began. Initial guidelines from the Ministry of Employment and Labor were vague, simply stating the work involved childcare and light housework without clearly defining the parameters. This lack of clarity has made it difficult for workers to refuse additional requests without fearing repercussions or job loss.
The language barrier further complicates these interactions. Workers are selected for their English and Korean proficiency, but specific cultural nuances regarding household expectations can lead to misunderstandings. When a worker feels compelled to perform extra duties to maintain good relations with their employer, it creates a dynamic where the agreed-upon labor standards are effectively eroded.
This scope creep mirrors issues seen in other regions with large populations of foreign domestic workers. Without strict enforcement of job descriptions, the role of a professional caregiver can quickly devolve into that of a general housekeeper, undervaluing their specific skills and training.
Financial Barriers and Accessibility
While the workers faced low wages, the employers also struggled with the high costs of the program, creating a paradox where the service was neither lucrative enough to attract workers nor affordable enough for the average family. South Korea is a signatory to international labor agreements requiring equal minimum wage rights for foreign workers, which drove the cost of the service up significantly.
The initial service fee was set at 13,940 won per hour, which included minimum wage, insurance, and other mandatory costs. By 2025, this rate had risen to 16,800 won per hour. For a household utilizing the service for 40 hours a week, the monthly cost amounted to approximately 2.92 million won. This is a substantial sum for the average South Korean household, where the average income for a four-person household is about 5.04 million won.
Consequently, the program became accessible primarily to the wealthy. City data revealed that 43 percent of applications came from just three of Seoul’s wealthiest districts: Gangnam, Seocho, and Songpa. This demographic skew undermines the program’s stated goal of supporting the general population of working parents and dual-income families. Instead, it functioned as a subsidy for the upper class, failing to address the needs of the middle-class families who arguably struggle most with the balance of work and childcare.
The high cost also sparked debate among citizens and politicians. Many residents felt that if the cost was similar to hiring a local, they would prefer a Korean worker due to cultural similarities. Others questioned the logic of importing labor when the wages were so high, arguing it defeated the purpose of the pilot.
At the same time, the high fees paid by employers did not necessarily translate to high take-home pay for the workers. A significant portion of the hourly fee went to the managing agencies, insurance, and housing costs. This discrepancy highlights the inefficiency in the current model, where the middlemen take a large cut, leaving the worker with a wage that is technically at the legal minimum but practically insufficient given the deductions.
Living Conditions and Rights Concerns
As the program progressed, reports emerged regarding the restrictive living conditions imposed on the workers. Initially, the workers were placed in shared living spaces and subjected to a 10pm curfew, which restricted them from leaving their accommodations at night. This rule drew criticism from labor advocates and the workers themselves, who argued that as adults, they should have the autonomy to manage their own free time.
The curfew issue came to a head when two domestic workers went missing, later being found in another city. In response to the feedback and the incident, the Seoul Metropolitan Government lifted the curfew in late 2024. Authorities also revised the pay system to allow workers to receive their wages twice a month instead of once, providing better cash flow for those sending remittances home.
Despite these adjustments, deeper concerns remain regarding the potential for abuse. Activists and experts have warned South Korea against repeating the mistakes of Hong Kong, where foreign domestic workers are required to live with their employers. A Filipina activist in Hong Kong, Shiela Tebia-Bonifacio, cautioned that such policies can lead to modern-day slavery, where workers are vulnerable to exploitation with no escape from their workplace.
In South Korea’s pilot, the workers live separately from their employers, which is a significant protective factor. However, there have been allegations of excessive working hours and authorities’ refusal to address complaints. Two workers were deported for leaving their posts, and they alleged severe exploitation, including excessive hours. While the ministry denied these claims, the allegations have fueled calls for stronger oversight.
Labor groups, including the Korea Confederation of Trade Unions, have demanded a pause and a full review of the program. They cite delayed wages, unclear job descriptions, and a lack of proper oversight as persistent issues that need resolution before any expansion is considered.
Political Uncertainty and Future Halt
The future of the foreign domestic worker program is now hanging in the balance due to political instability and a change in administration. The project gained support under former president Yoon Suk Yeol, but following his removal from office in April, the initiative has faced significant headwinds. His successor, Mr. Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party, assumed office in June 2025 and represents a political faction that has consistently raised concerns about the initiative.
The Ministry of Employment and Labor had pledged to finalize a long-term version of the program by mid-2025, but no concrete plan has been put forward. Vice-Labor Minister Kim Min-seok stated in June that it would not be easy to expand beyond the pilot program. The central government appears reluctant to approve a nationwide rollout, citing unresolved issues regarding cost and worker protection.
This political limbo has caused anxiety for the workers currently in the system. The program saw the number of workers drop from the initial 100 to 89 by March 2025 due to unapproved absences and voluntary departures. Despite a waitlist of about 500 households, the government has stalled on hiring replacements or renewing contracts for the initial cohort.
Seoul officials are pushing for expansion, arguing that the service is vital for families. City data suggests high satisfaction rates among users, with Mayor Oh Se-hoon claiming that about 95 percent of service users and over 70 percent of workers were satisfied. However, Seoul City Council member Ai Su Luu has labeled the program a policy failure, calling for its withdrawal during a recent council session.
The workers currently in Korea are expected to stay because their employment permits have been extended through early 2026. However, the lack of a clear path forward prevents new workers from entering and creates an atmosphere of uncertainty. Labor ministry officials have indicated that if the program ends, workers might be reassigned to other service jobs like hotels or restaurants, but the primary focus of caregiving support would be lost.
This stagnation reflects a broader societal indecision. While there is a clear need for domestic support to boost the birth rate and workforce participation, there is no consensus on how to pay for it or how to protect the dignity and rights of the laborers performing the work. The program is currently caught between economic necessity, social skepticism, and political transition.
The Bottom Line
South Korea’s experiment with foreign domestic helpers serves as a case study in the complexities of addressing demographic decline through labor migration. While the survey results expose serious flaws in wage structures and job definitions, they also offer a roadmap for necessary reforms. The debate continues on whether the program represents a step toward gender equality and family support or a potential avenue for labor exploitation.
- A survey revealed foreign housekeepers earned a net average of 1.18 million won, less than half the local average wage.
- Workers reported performing duties outside their contracts, such as pet care and English tutoring.
- High service fees of 16,800 won per hour made the program accessible mainly to wealthy Seoul districts.
- Political changes following the 2025 transition have stalled the expansion of the pilot program.
- Activists warn against adopting a live-in model similar to Hong Kong to prevent potential abuse.
