JOBS DEBATE - Government vs Citizens Interpretation
-
In the debate concerning the employment of Foreigners at the expense of Singapore Citizens, is the Government reply missing the mark from the interpretations of Singaporeans on this issue ?
Are the arguments from both sides missing the issue central to this jobless situation, and hitting the main core at a tangent ?
While joblessness persist amongst many Singaporeans - most of whom have been retrenched as white collar workers in secretarial, administrative, clerical, sales and service, non-technical or mechanical - they are regularly lambasted by the Government for being choosy, refusing to lower expectations, and not being flexible to accept the reality of the situation.
Should the Singaporean Citizen be blamed for this "attitude" ?
The jobless amongst Singaporean are as mentioned mainly from the White Collar Sector, and are mainly from the larger Middle Income Group of the Singapore Population.
This is the group that the Singapore Government has created during the growth years, when Singapore Government convinced and sold the idea to Singaporeans of a SWISS Standard of Living.
This was the period when wages was forced higher, and CPF was progressively increased to satisfy LKY's goal of National Saving of 40% (with 20% each from the Employer's and Employee's contribution to the CPF); and also to create a general sense of wealth by also increasing the values of properties - both private and public housing.
Now that the jobless situation has affected most from the White Collar sector, the jobs that remain available are found in the Blue Collar Sector.
While most of the jobless are from the Middle Income, there are many jobs in the sector that are taken by the Lower Income and Lower Educated Singaporeans.
Is the Government now abandoning the goal of achieving the SWISS Standard of Living, and back tracking on the high wage policy of the past; and now selling a new idea of Lower Wages ?
When Singapore was embarking on this relentless drive to increase wealth - leading to concern of Singaporeans being Money Worshipping - Malaysia was derided for its own way of managing their economy.
After 20 years of taking different path in economic management, is Malaysia correct in keeping their property prices affordable, at wage levels that are commensurate with the Asian Life Style.
When selling the "Swiss Standard of Living" to Singaporeans, did the Singapore Government "forget" to consider the "Swiss Cost of Living" too ?
Switzerland has a firm grip on foreigners taking Citizenship in Switzerland and taking jobs away from Swiss Nationals, they certainly do not practise a free and open policy.
Will our Singapore Government not adopt this policy as well to protect Singapore Citizens ?
Read the following from the Straits Times of the speech in Parliament by the ACTING Minister of Manpower:
Government defends job open-door policy
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,204772,00.html? -
The referenced article from the Straits Times website will be withdrawn after 3 days, and available through subscriptions from the archives :
Govt defends jobs open-door policy
If foreigners were driven out, eventually firms would shut down and economy and Singaporeans would suffer, House is told
By Laurel Teo
ACTING Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen yesterday laid out the Government's policy on foreign workers and stressed that it was not being pursued at the expense of jobs for Singaporeans.
Like all other policies, its open-door approach to foreign workers is geared to the interests of Singaporeans, he told Parliament.
He took the House through on the Government's reasoning: If it were to drive out foreigners - as some had clamoured for - firms here would be discouraged from growing their business when they cannot get the workers they want.
Eventually, they will shut down or relocate. Their exit will only spell further trouble for the economy - and for Singaporeans.
'We cannot force companies to hire more Singaporeans by depriving them of foreign workers,' he said.
Such protectionist labour practices had worsened unemployment in other countries, he added, citing France and Germany as examples.
As he defended the case for foreign workers, he signalled the concern in Government that Singaporeans were getting unneccessarily distracted over how many jobs were going to foreigners.
The real issue right now, he said, should be on creating new jobs and his ministry was committing its 'full energy' on this front.
His statement marked yet another attempt by the Government to snuff out the controversy that erupted recently after two Nanyang Technological University economists said that three in four new jobs in the last five years went to foreigners.
The ministry rebutted the academics the following day, pointing out that the correct figure was one in 10 jobs. The dons had used the wrong data set, it said.
Yesterday, MPs went right to the heart of the controversy when they noted that while the figure was reassuring, it did not match with ground perceptions. Why were people still so troubled, asked eight MPs in various ways as they rose 12 times to grill Dr Ng.
MP S. Iswaran (West Coast GRC), for example, said: 'Unfortunately... the outcome of this whole episode is that it's created a perception in the minds of many Singaporeans that government data in the public domain may not be giving the full picture.'
Replying, Dr Ng said that while he could understand the emotions at a time of near-record high unemployment, the controversy over the ratios was an 'unnecessary distraction'.
He noted that between 1993 and 1997, when the economy was chugging full steam ahead, no one complained when 60 per cent of the 475,000 new jobs went to foreigners. Because then, there were three jobs for every Singaporean, who could afford to eschew many of the more undesirable jobs.
Thus, said Dr Ng: 'The ratio of foreign to local workers is unimportant when enough jobs are created.'
But the situation was reversed between 1998 and last year, when skilled workers from China and India entered the global market. And at the same time, the country was hit by the Asian financial crisis, Sept 11, and the Bali blasts.
The total number of jobs created fell to 102,000. Even though only one in 10 of these went to a foreigner, he conceded that it was cold comfort to Singaporeans, who saw new jobs for them halved - from 185,000 to 93,000 - over the two periods.
To create new jobs, he outlined four strategies: grow the economy through new investments, emphasise skills upgrading so that workers become competitive, free up the labour market, and coax Singaporeans to take up jobs they used to shun.
On how his ministry arrived at its figures, Dr Ng said no one had ever disputed their veracity. But if people still doubted them, there was little he could do to convince them, he said.
In a voice thick with emotion, he added: 'But I know what I can do. I can try to bring jobs back and this is what I will do.' -
i dun care who is rite or wrong. i have been searching for a job 4 6 mths and have no news. it is such a pain staking process as my hubby is shouldering all the expenses of the family and i have a 1 yr + kid to raise. All the bosses out there r fishing 4 cheap labours; employees who can handle more work, good experiences and less pay. wat abt those who just wanna find a decent job to meet their ends? And our government should even tax us more, and enjoy the scenario of ppl breaking down in misery. 
-
If you have recently graduated with a Degree, count yourself lucky to be even offered a job paying $1200, and even more lucky if paid $1500.
If you are mid-20's to late 30's, with or without Diploma or Degree, count yourself lukcy if you have been retrenched, and have been offered a job paying $2500 to $3000.
If you are past 40's but before mid-40's keep trying, and be prepared to be paid low and expected to work for more then 10 hours per day.
If you are into late 40's and definitely past 50's, be prepared to remain unemployed till 55 years, when you can withdraw your CPF and become a hawker.. -
..................... maybe i should commit sucide now?Originally posted by Atobe:If you have recently graduated with a Degree, count yourself lucky to be even offered a job paying $1200, and even more lucky if paid $1500.
If you are mid-20's to late 30's, with or without Diploma or Degree, count yourself lukcy if you have been retrenched, and have been offered a job paying $2500 to $3000.
If you are past 40's but before mid-40's keep trying, and be prepared to be paid low and expected to work for more then 10 hours per day.
If you are into late 40's and definitely past 50's, be prepared to remain unemployed till 55 years, when you can withdraw your CPF and become a hawker.. -
Fully agree with Atobe.....!
Have been staying for almost a year now at home...!!!! Have experienced the way management treating their staff...just like dogs...!
The worst part was even the lower paid job were given to foreigners than to Singaporeans????Look at all our SME , they have mostly foreigners working than local???
What are the government doing ????I know what I will be doing when the time comes...ha ha ha...in the meantime just sit at home and break my leg la.....ha ha ha ....! -
you know, foreign workers have a better working attitude than usOriginally posted by mboy69:Fully agree with Atobe.....!
Have been staying for almost a year now at home...!!!! Have experienced the way management treating their staff...just like dogs...!
The worst part was even the lower paid job were given to foreigners than to Singaporeans????Look at all our SME , they have mostly foreigners working than local???
What are the government doing ????I know what I will be doing when the time comes...ha ha ha...in the meantime just sit at home and break my leg la.....ha ha ha ....!
they work harder and longer hours but lower pay
somemore won't like us quit when not happy