- Joined
- Nov 17, 2012
- Messages
- 293
- Points
- 28
Pay doubled to just $1,000?
I refer to the article “Pay doubled for airport trolley staff” (Straits Times, Aug 14).
Only 240 workers helped?
It states that “The 240 airport trolley handlers had their monthly pay bumped up from about $580 to as much as $1,000, depending on their work attendance and performance.
Well done! Union movement?
The recent moves are part of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) progressive wage model, which sets out a career ladder with pay standards for low-wage workers in various sectors. Currently, about a fifth of 6,000 outsourced contract workers under airport operator Changi Airport Group are on the NTUC’s wage scheme.”
If you thought being a cleaner was bad enough?
Before reading the above, I believe most Singaporeans may have the impression that cleaners were the lowest paid workers at a median gross wage of just over $800 last year.
Now, we have the revelation that airport trolley handlers (6,000 of them) were paid only about $580.
Caring worldwide award winning employers?
Who owns Changi Airport Group (CAG) – I believe its Temasek, after Parliament approved the transfer of the ownership of Changi airport to CAG for over $3 billion.
Pride or shame?
Reading the news recently, don’t you get the impression that the union movement is so proud of the fact that they are helping low-wage workers.
But I feel really ashamed that Changi airport, the pride of our nation because it has won so many awards in the past, including the best airport in the world, pays such slave wages for God knows how long! And to think that it is actually owned indirectly by the Government, through Temasek makes it even more shameful!
Corporate Social Responsibility?
What’s the point of setting aside $1 billion or more in the Temasek Foundation to fund charitable work and promote good social causes, particularly in ASEAN, when we treat our elderly Singaporean workers (“These workers who are mostly in their 50s to 70s”) with such disdain and disrespect?
So many earn less than $1,000?
Our union movement ought to be even more shamed to trumpet such grandiose achievements of helping a few hundred low-wage workers here (240 trolley handlers) or a few thousand cleaners there, when there are about 294,364 or about 17 per cent local workers earning less than $1,000, according to Roy Ngerng of thehearttruths, citing statistics from the CPF Board’s 2011 annual report.
Union movement fighting for workers: Really?
How long will it take before our union movement really fights for the rights of the hundreds of thousands of low-wage Singaporeans to get a decent pay?
As much as $1,000?
And what does “from about $580 to as much as $1,000, depending on their work attendance and performance” mean? That some of the 240 trolley handlers earn less than $1,000 even after the much hooha about helping them to have their “pay doubled”? – A big deal to blow our own trumpet!
What about the rest of the 6,000 trolley handlers?
And also as to “about a fifth of 6,000 outsourced contract workers under airport operator Changi Airport Group are on the NTUC’s wage scheme” – what about the other four-fifths (4,800) trolley handlers (still earning the miserable $580?)?
Disappearing statistics?
In this connection, in the same day’s Straits Times Forum (“Bring back data on income levels“, Tan Boon Khai wrote “THE recently released 2013 Yearbook Of Statistics no longer provides a table on active Central Provident Fund members by wage level.
This table had been published for as long as I can remember, and was a fabulous source of information for anyone wishing to track how various categories of Singaporean incomes have changed over time.
Citizens have a right to know how the various income groups in their society are faring. I hope this data can be brought back.”
Is this another case of Singaporeans are supposed to only read the “right” things (statistics)?
Social mobility, equality, fair & just society?
In the same day’s Straits Times, there were two articles “Taking steps to raise social mobility in S’pore” and “Ensuring true equality of opportunities”. You see – you can have news reports practically everyday about how hard we are trying or doing to make Singapore a (more) “fair and just society” – but, the stark reality of the statistics continues to haunt our national conscience (if indeed we have one). Arguably, our so called National Conversation may arguably by quite pointless and futile, as long as we lack what I call a national conscience.
Oh! So much more help for the needy?
In the same day’s newspaper, there were another two articles “Social service now nearer to those who need it” and “Convenience for needy residents”. Don’t we realise the (obvious) hypocrisy of it all – when we have media reports almost everyday about how much we are doing to help some needy here, some needy there, raising some funds here and there – when the root cause of the problem may be that there are simply too many Singaporeans being paid too little to survive!
Growth for what, for whom? So many earning less than $1,500?
In the same day’s Straits Times, there was an article “Why Singapore growth beat regional trend”. What’s the point of harping on good economic growth, when there were 458,617 or 26 per cent of Singaporeans earning less than $1,500 (Thanks to Roy Ngerng’s article cited above)?
A shame?
Its not just Uniquely Singapore, but Uniquely Ashamed – and to rub it in (for our fellow low-wage Singaporeans) – we have the cheek to be celebrating 48 years of attaining First World Nation status on our 48th National Day!
Perhaps what we really need is a national apology from the Government to the hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans who have or are still struggling because of our flawed economic and social policies over the years.
Majulah Singapura.
Leong Sze Hian
http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/08/16/%E2%80%9Cstate-of-the-union%E2%80%9D-1-day%E2%80%99s-newspaper/
I refer to the article “Pay doubled for airport trolley staff” (Straits Times, Aug 14).
Only 240 workers helped?
It states that “The 240 airport trolley handlers had their monthly pay bumped up from about $580 to as much as $1,000, depending on their work attendance and performance.
Well done! Union movement?
The recent moves are part of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) progressive wage model, which sets out a career ladder with pay standards for low-wage workers in various sectors. Currently, about a fifth of 6,000 outsourced contract workers under airport operator Changi Airport Group are on the NTUC’s wage scheme.”
If you thought being a cleaner was bad enough?
Before reading the above, I believe most Singaporeans may have the impression that cleaners were the lowest paid workers at a median gross wage of just over $800 last year.
Now, we have the revelation that airport trolley handlers (6,000 of them) were paid only about $580.
Caring worldwide award winning employers?
Who owns Changi Airport Group (CAG) – I believe its Temasek, after Parliament approved the transfer of the ownership of Changi airport to CAG for over $3 billion.
Pride or shame?
Reading the news recently, don’t you get the impression that the union movement is so proud of the fact that they are helping low-wage workers.
But I feel really ashamed that Changi airport, the pride of our nation because it has won so many awards in the past, including the best airport in the world, pays such slave wages for God knows how long! And to think that it is actually owned indirectly by the Government, through Temasek makes it even more shameful!
Corporate Social Responsibility?
What’s the point of setting aside $1 billion or more in the Temasek Foundation to fund charitable work and promote good social causes, particularly in ASEAN, when we treat our elderly Singaporean workers (“These workers who are mostly in their 50s to 70s”) with such disdain and disrespect?
So many earn less than $1,000?
Our union movement ought to be even more shamed to trumpet such grandiose achievements of helping a few hundred low-wage workers here (240 trolley handlers) or a few thousand cleaners there, when there are about 294,364 or about 17 per cent local workers earning less than $1,000, according to Roy Ngerng of thehearttruths, citing statistics from the CPF Board’s 2011 annual report.
Union movement fighting for workers: Really?
How long will it take before our union movement really fights for the rights of the hundreds of thousands of low-wage Singaporeans to get a decent pay?
As much as $1,000?
And what does “from about $580 to as much as $1,000, depending on their work attendance and performance” mean? That some of the 240 trolley handlers earn less than $1,000 even after the much hooha about helping them to have their “pay doubled”? – A big deal to blow our own trumpet!
What about the rest of the 6,000 trolley handlers?
And also as to “about a fifth of 6,000 outsourced contract workers under airport operator Changi Airport Group are on the NTUC’s wage scheme” – what about the other four-fifths (4,800) trolley handlers (still earning the miserable $580?)?
Disappearing statistics?
In this connection, in the same day’s Straits Times Forum (“Bring back data on income levels“, Tan Boon Khai wrote “THE recently released 2013 Yearbook Of Statistics no longer provides a table on active Central Provident Fund members by wage level.
This table had been published for as long as I can remember, and was a fabulous source of information for anyone wishing to track how various categories of Singaporean incomes have changed over time.
Citizens have a right to know how the various income groups in their society are faring. I hope this data can be brought back.”
Is this another case of Singaporeans are supposed to only read the “right” things (statistics)?
Social mobility, equality, fair & just society?
In the same day’s Straits Times, there were two articles “Taking steps to raise social mobility in S’pore” and “Ensuring true equality of opportunities”. You see – you can have news reports practically everyday about how hard we are trying or doing to make Singapore a (more) “fair and just society” – but, the stark reality of the statistics continues to haunt our national conscience (if indeed we have one). Arguably, our so called National Conversation may arguably by quite pointless and futile, as long as we lack what I call a national conscience.
Oh! So much more help for the needy?
In the same day’s newspaper, there were another two articles “Social service now nearer to those who need it” and “Convenience for needy residents”. Don’t we realise the (obvious) hypocrisy of it all – when we have media reports almost everyday about how much we are doing to help some needy here, some needy there, raising some funds here and there – when the root cause of the problem may be that there are simply too many Singaporeans being paid too little to survive!
Growth for what, for whom? So many earning less than $1,500?
In the same day’s Straits Times, there was an article “Why Singapore growth beat regional trend”. What’s the point of harping on good economic growth, when there were 458,617 or 26 per cent of Singaporeans earning less than $1,500 (Thanks to Roy Ngerng’s article cited above)?
A shame?
Its not just Uniquely Singapore, but Uniquely Ashamed – and to rub it in (for our fellow low-wage Singaporeans) – we have the cheek to be celebrating 48 years of attaining First World Nation status on our 48th National Day!
Perhaps what we really need is a national apology from the Government to the hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans who have or are still struggling because of our flawed economic and social policies over the years.
Majulah Singapura.
Leong Sze Hian
http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/08/16/%E2%80%9Cstate-of-the-union%E2%80%9D-1-day%E2%80%99s-newspaper/
