- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
Given that the watch list is meant to be a counter measure against unfair hiring practices, its relatively anonymity seems incongruous with its desired objective. Surely the companies on that watch list would be more mindful of who they hire if they knew that the public were watching? Wouldn’t publicity ensure more compliance to avoid public backlash and bad press?
Secondly, why would publicising the names of the list frustrate the companies’ attempts to hire locals? If a particular company is known to be on the watch list, one would assume that they would be on the look out for local talent so as to get off the watch list. This would then send locals the message that they should apply for jobs within these companies as there are now spaces for them to fill. Again, the Minister’s logic appears fallacious.
At the end of the day, what is the point of having a watch list if no one knows who is on it? How can the public ensure accountability and transparency then?
GHUI
TOC
Secondly, why would publicising the names of the list frustrate the companies’ attempts to hire locals? If a particular company is known to be on the watch list, one would assume that they would be on the look out for local talent so as to get off the watch list. This would then send locals the message that they should apply for jobs within these companies as there are now spaces for them to fill. Again, the Minister’s logic appears fallacious.
At the end of the day, what is the point of having a watch list if no one knows who is on it? How can the public ensure accountability and transparency then?
GHUI
TOC