- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE id=msgUN cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD id=msgUNsubj vAlign=top>
Coffee Shop Talk - The Face of Pro-Family </TD><TD id=msgunetc noWrap align=right>
Subscribe </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=msgtable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="96%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msg vAlign=top><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgbfr1 width="1%"> </TD><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgF noWrap align=right width="1%">From: </TD><TD class=msgFname noWrap width="68%">AngelLead <NOBR></NOBR> </TD><TD class=msgDate noWrap align=right width="30%">Dec-5 1:56 am </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT noWrap align=right width="1%" height=20>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname noWrap width="68%">ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right> (1 of 2) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%" rowSpan=4> </TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>15212.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>I had the opportunity to lunch with a group of high-powered male Singaporean business executives in Hong Kong a few months back and amongst them a high-level Singapore government official. Many amongst the group are running public-listed companies and renown MNCs.
I’m not sure how the conversation around the table evolved but we eventually talked about the new pro-family scheme implemented by the government (which was introduced during that period in time).
One of the items in the scheme that draw attention to the luncheon was the 16-week maternity leave that the government was putting in place. I heard comments like:
“If you hire 3 of them, you lose one whole year!” (this comment drew much laughter)
(drawing from the above comment) “… or you’ll go bankrupt!”
“How do we do business like this?”
“Don’t hire women.”
I was shocked by the insensitive talk that went around the table. It was also interesting that the government official who represents the country and government did not utter a word of protest or suggestion otherwise.
Is this what “pro-family” is about? And to think that we live in an equal opportunity society. Obviously, these concepts are mocked upon when a group of “macho” men get together.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
I’m not sure how the conversation around the table evolved but we eventually talked about the new pro-family scheme implemented by the government (which was introduced during that period in time).
One of the items in the scheme that draw attention to the luncheon was the 16-week maternity leave that the government was putting in place. I heard comments like:
“If you hire 3 of them, you lose one whole year!” (this comment drew much laughter)
(drawing from the above comment) “… or you’ll go bankrupt!”
“How do we do business like this?”
“Don’t hire women.”
I was shocked by the insensitive talk that went around the table. It was also interesting that the government official who represents the country and government did not utter a word of protest or suggestion otherwise.
Is this what “pro-family” is about? And to think that we live in an equal opportunity society. Obviously, these concepts are mocked upon when a group of “macho” men get together.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
