http://www.tremeritus.com/2015/09/25/overqualified-underemployed-–-exacerbated-by-lawlessness/
[h=2]Overqualified, underemployed – exacerbated by lawlessness[/h]
September 25th, 2015 |
Author: Contributions
Picture Credit : Transitioning.Org
Dear Editor,
I am a concerned mother who is deeply worried about the future of my
children.
The threat of unscrupulous and discriminatory employment practices that
favours foreigners over locals can be felt across the nation, from low wage
earners to top-salaried professionals. While the government has stepped up
efforts to help the displaced workers, the initiatives may be too passive and
too little to fully address the root of the problems.
It is widely reported that Singapore PMEs had been squeezed out of employment
due to an influx of cheaper but not necessary more qualified foreigners.
Professionals holding top key positions in MNCs are also facing similar threats
of whimsical dismissals, except, they are more likely to be replaced by more
expensive expatriates, who are not necessarily more superior, in terms of
qualifications, competency and experience.
This is a worrisome trend, and can do more harm than good to our economic and
social development.
During my research to gain clearer insights of protection against
unreasonable dismissals, I was shock to learn that PMEs earning more than $4,500
a month are not covered under the general provisions of the Employment Act,
including redress against unfair dismissal, paid sick leave etc. Is this
reasonable?
Perhaps, you and your readers help verify some of my findings, which I had
posted in “UP for PME” Facebook page (NTUC) earlier (denoted in italic font)
If true, can please help explain how to ensure prejudice against Singapore
job applicants can be removed; and Singapore core in the workplace can be
successfully established when
It seems impertinent to assume private operators will have the innate sense
of morality to contribute to the building of our “National Excellence” without
“direct suasion”; It would be naive to assume the ubiquitous practice of
favouritism, nepotism and cronyism in the workplace can be deterred without
clear regulations and punishment; and lastly, PMEs are not “the doyens of the
workforce” and neither do they command so much bargaining power that they do not
need any protections against unscrupulous employment practices.
Hence, it is critical for the incumbent to review and amend our outdated law
for the modern economy. Not only should EA be extended to all PMEs, we also need
to implement a set of clear authoritative standards, to install discipline &
ensure accountability to prevent and combat exploitation.
But policy makers may deem the call for greater protection for our workers
and defense against discriminatory employment practices as Protectionism; a
GREAT SATAN, that jeopardises free market mechanism, and curbs economic growth.
But is their fear valid?
Perhaps, our policy makers have over-rated the value of foreign talents and
over-estimated their contribution, while under-estimating the threats of unfair
competition from abroad. Perhaps, they should re-examine the implications of the
following observations:
When our high skilled workers are driven into low skilled jobs such as taxi
drivers, security guards, freelancers, contract workers & etc, it causes
much grievances and financial hardship on families. On the national level, our
own valuable human resources is forced to go into “idle”; leading to lower
efficiency; and causes our economy to operate below its optimal level. Hence, we
are worst off in the long run, for failure to provide adequate protection for
our workers to fend off unfair competition that jeopardises efficient
distribution of resources and undermines productivity.
If you believe in empowering our future, please stand up for more protection
for our PMEs. Please say NO to unscrupulous, discriminatory employment practices
against our PMEs. Let us help restore confidence in our core values based on
meritocracy, justice and equality.
May the door to success is opened for our young, once again.
Thank
you.
Irene
*
Submitted by TRE reader.
[h=2]Overqualified, underemployed – exacerbated by lawlessness[/h]
September 25th, 2015 |
Author: Contributions
Picture Credit : Transitioning.Org
Dear Editor,
I am a concerned mother who is deeply worried about the future of my
children.
The threat of unscrupulous and discriminatory employment practices that
favours foreigners over locals can be felt across the nation, from low wage
earners to top-salaried professionals. While the government has stepped up
efforts to help the displaced workers, the initiatives may be too passive and
too little to fully address the root of the problems.
It is widely reported that Singapore PMEs had been squeezed out of employment
due to an influx of cheaper but not necessary more qualified foreigners.
Professionals holding top key positions in MNCs are also facing similar threats
of whimsical dismissals, except, they are more likely to be replaced by more
expensive expatriates, who are not necessarily more superior, in terms of
qualifications, competency and experience.
This is a worrisome trend, and can do more harm than good to our economic and
social development.
During my research to gain clearer insights of protection against
unreasonable dismissals, I was shock to learn that PMEs earning more than $4,500
a month are not covered under the general provisions of the Employment Act,
including redress against unfair dismissal, paid sick leave etc. Is this
reasonable?
Perhaps, you and your readers help verify some of my findings, which I had
posted in “UP for PME” Facebook page (NTUC) earlier (denoted in italic font)
- Is it true PMEs earning above $4500/month are excluded from the basic floor
rights under the Employment Act (Part IV), which covers rest days, hours of
work, overtime, annual leave, retrenchment and retirement benefits, annual wage
supplement and variable payments?”?
- Is it true Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) compliance is not
mandatory?
- Is it true less than 6% of total 77,000 registered companies have pledged to
comply to FCF guidelines, though FCF was introduced 2 years ago?
Is it true
the cost of compliance is higher than the cost of non-compliance?
- Is it true “moral suasion” approach can be immoral & hence, rarely used
in isolation to resolve economic problems in the real world?
If true, can please help explain how to ensure prejudice against Singapore
job applicants can be removed; and Singapore core in the workplace can be
successfully established when
- Most PMEs basic rights to fair employment is not recognised and protected by
law
- Discriminatory employment practices against SG applicants is legal and not
prohibited by law
- Employers have no legal obligation NOT to subscribe to unscrupulous
employment practices; no clear punishment for delinquency; and no proper channel
of redress for victims of abuse.
It seems impertinent to assume private operators will have the innate sense
of morality to contribute to the building of our “National Excellence” without
“direct suasion”; It would be naive to assume the ubiquitous practice of
favouritism, nepotism and cronyism in the workplace can be deterred without
clear regulations and punishment; and lastly, PMEs are not “the doyens of the
workforce” and neither do they command so much bargaining power that they do not
need any protections against unscrupulous employment practices.
Hence, it is critical for the incumbent to review and amend our outdated law
for the modern economy. Not only should EA be extended to all PMEs, we also need
to implement a set of clear authoritative standards, to install discipline &
ensure accountability to prevent and combat exploitation.
But policy makers may deem the call for greater protection for our workers
and defense against discriminatory employment practices as Protectionism; a
GREAT SATAN, that jeopardises free market mechanism, and curbs economic growth.
But is their fear valid?
Perhaps, our policy makers have over-rated the value of foreign talents and
over-estimated their contribution, while under-estimating the threats of unfair
competition from abroad. Perhaps, they should re-examine the implications of the
following observations:
- Foreign PMEs may be cheaper but not necessary more superior.
- Unqualified Foreign PMEs are unfairly remunerated with better salary.
- Foreign PMEs do not help create more job opportunities, instead, they lower
morale and reduce productivity.
When our high skilled workers are driven into low skilled jobs such as taxi
drivers, security guards, freelancers, contract workers & etc, it causes
much grievances and financial hardship on families. On the national level, our
own valuable human resources is forced to go into “idle”; leading to lower
efficiency; and causes our economy to operate below its optimal level. Hence, we
are worst off in the long run, for failure to provide adequate protection for
our workers to fend off unfair competition that jeopardises efficient
distribution of resources and undermines productivity.
If you believe in empowering our future, please stand up for more protection
for our PMEs. Please say NO to unscrupulous, discriminatory employment practices
against our PMEs. Let us help restore confidence in our core values based on
meritocracy, justice and equality.
May the door to success is opened for our young, once again.
Thank
you.
Irene
*
Submitted by TRE reader.
