Please help tutors thankyou ASAP!

Layla was hired as a domestic helper in Hongkong by the Tiger Services, Ltd., through its local agent. She executed a standard employment contract designed by the Philippine Overseas Workers Administration (POEA) for overseas Filipino workers. It provided for her employment for one year at a salary of US$1,000.00 a month. It was submitted to and approved by the POEA. However, when she arrived in Hongkong, she was asked to sign another contract by Tiger Services, Ltd. which reduced her salary to only US$600.00 a month. Having no other choice, Layla signed the contact but when she returned to the Philippines, she demanded payment of the salary differential of US$400.00 a month. Both Tiger Services, Ltd. and its local agent claimed that the second contract is valid under the laws of Hongkong, and therefore binding on Layla. Is their claim correct? Explain (4 pts)