- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
http://www.tremeritus.com/2015/08/21/lim-past-liberal-foreign-manpower-policy-not-a-mistake/
[h=2]Lim: Past liberal foreign manpower policy not a mistake[/h]
August 21st, 2015 |
Author: Editorial
Minister Lim Swee Say with his famous toothpick (Photo:
ST)
In an interview with TODAY earlier this week, Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say
said that the government will hold fast to its goal of having a two-thirds
Singaporean core in the economy, and this will be the structure of the country’s
workforce in the “medium to long term”.
He also emphasized that the tightening of Singapore’s foreign manpower was
not a reaction to past mistakes, but was rather a reflection that realities had
changed.
=> SGs should make the reality for the FAP change even further in the coming GE.
The inflow of foreign manpower was a hot topic during the 2011 General
Election, and Mr Lim identified the “determination to manage” the growth of the
foreign workforce here as the key shift in manpower policy since.
“It’s not so much because the policy of the past was a mistake but rather, we
are now having a new stage of growth and therefore we have to pursue a new
direction,” he said.
“Every country has to find the right balance … But on the whole, I would say
that we have managed the process a lot more effectively compared to some other
cities and countries. Through the manpower quota system, we have ensured foreign
manpower spread across all sectors and companies.”
However, it is noted that for foreign PMETs, that is, foreign EP holders,
there is no quota imposed in Singapore.
In the US, for example, the congress controlled their H-1B visa (equivalent
to Singapore’s EP) for foreigners tightly. The current US law limits to 65,000
the number of foreign nationals who may be issued a H-1B visa each fiscal year.
US laws also exempt up to 20,000 foreign nationals holding a master’s or higher
degree from US universities from the cap on H-1B visas. In addition, excluded
from the ceiling are all H-1B foreign workers who work at universities,
non-profit research facilities associated with universities, and government
research facilities. Universities can employ an unlimited number of foreign
workers as cap-exempt. This also means that contractors working at but not
directly employed by the institutions may be exempt from the cap as well. In
FY2010, 117,828 H-1B visas were issued by US government. In FY2012, it was
135,991 [Link].
In Singapore, for example, the figures given by the government for the number
of EP holders at the end of 2010 and 2011 were 142,000 and 176,000. That means,
there is an increase of 34,000 foreign EP holders in Singapore in 2011 [Link].
If we were to add in S-Pass holders, the increase in number of foreign PMETs in
2011 came to 49,000. That’s already almost half of what the whole of US issued
in FY2010.
Also, spouses of H-1B visa holder in US are not allowed to work at all. But
in Singapore, spouses of EP holders can work through obtaining a Dependant’s
Pass [Link].
Tightening of FT manpower not a threat to foreign
investors
Fearing that the current tightening of FT manpower policy would affect the
confidence of foreign investors, he assured that the move would not diminish
Singapore’s standing as a global city and if a balance is struck, foreign
investors would still find the country a good bet.
In fact, the Republic’s position as a talent hub would be enhanced, with
leading multinational companies trying to ”take advantage of every headcount
possible” to bring in the most qualified and experienced person, he said.
Mr Lim pointed out that all global cities have restrictions on imported
labour. “Not everybody from all over the world can just go to New York or
London, take up a job and settle down. Management of foreign manpower in many
global cities of the world, in fact, is a norm. So Singapore is no different
from anybody else,” he added.
In his interaction with representatives from multinational companies here, he
noted that many of them recognised “that one reason why they are here is that
they can tap on local talent”. “They do not see that this policy direction …
would limit their access to foreign manpower,” Mr Lim said.
He pointed out that having foreigners make up a third of the workforce would
offer companies “tremendous scope” to bring in global talent. “One third is not
a small percentage. In fact, in many countries, they are looking at much lower
than one third,” he said.
Mr Lim, essentially, was trying to appease the foreign companies and
investors, fearing that they would leave Singapore because of Singapore’s move
to tighten FT manpower.
[h=2]Lim: Past liberal foreign manpower policy not a mistake[/h]
August 21st, 2015 |
Author: Editorial
Minister Lim Swee Say with his famous toothpick (Photo:
ST)
In an interview with TODAY earlier this week, Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say
said that the government will hold fast to its goal of having a two-thirds
Singaporean core in the economy, and this will be the structure of the country’s
workforce in the “medium to long term”.
He also emphasized that the tightening of Singapore’s foreign manpower was
not a reaction to past mistakes, but was rather a reflection that realities had
changed.
=> SGs should make the reality for the FAP change even further in the coming GE.
The inflow of foreign manpower was a hot topic during the 2011 General
Election, and Mr Lim identified the “determination to manage” the growth of the
foreign workforce here as the key shift in manpower policy since.
“It’s not so much because the policy of the past was a mistake but rather, we
are now having a new stage of growth and therefore we have to pursue a new
direction,” he said.
“Every country has to find the right balance … But on the whole, I would say
that we have managed the process a lot more effectively compared to some other
cities and countries. Through the manpower quota system, we have ensured foreign
manpower spread across all sectors and companies.”
However, it is noted that for foreign PMETs, that is, foreign EP holders,
there is no quota imposed in Singapore.
In the US, for example, the congress controlled their H-1B visa (equivalent
to Singapore’s EP) for foreigners tightly. The current US law limits to 65,000
the number of foreign nationals who may be issued a H-1B visa each fiscal year.
US laws also exempt up to 20,000 foreign nationals holding a master’s or higher
degree from US universities from the cap on H-1B visas. In addition, excluded
from the ceiling are all H-1B foreign workers who work at universities,
non-profit research facilities associated with universities, and government
research facilities. Universities can employ an unlimited number of foreign
workers as cap-exempt. This also means that contractors working at but not
directly employed by the institutions may be exempt from the cap as well. In
FY2010, 117,828 H-1B visas were issued by US government. In FY2012, it was
135,991 [Link].
In Singapore, for example, the figures given by the government for the number
of EP holders at the end of 2010 and 2011 were 142,000 and 176,000. That means,
there is an increase of 34,000 foreign EP holders in Singapore in 2011 [Link].
If we were to add in S-Pass holders, the increase in number of foreign PMETs in
2011 came to 49,000. That’s already almost half of what the whole of US issued
in FY2010.
Also, spouses of H-1B visa holder in US are not allowed to work at all. But
in Singapore, spouses of EP holders can work through obtaining a Dependant’s
Pass [Link].
Tightening of FT manpower not a threat to foreign
investors
Fearing that the current tightening of FT manpower policy would affect the
confidence of foreign investors, he assured that the move would not diminish
Singapore’s standing as a global city and if a balance is struck, foreign
investors would still find the country a good bet.
In fact, the Republic’s position as a talent hub would be enhanced, with
leading multinational companies trying to ”take advantage of every headcount
possible” to bring in the most qualified and experienced person, he said.
Mr Lim pointed out that all global cities have restrictions on imported
labour. “Not everybody from all over the world can just go to New York or
London, take up a job and settle down. Management of foreign manpower in many
global cities of the world, in fact, is a norm. So Singapore is no different
from anybody else,” he added.
In his interaction with representatives from multinational companies here, he
noted that many of them recognised “that one reason why they are here is that
they can tap on local talent”. “They do not see that this policy direction …
would limit their access to foreign manpower,” Mr Lim said.
He pointed out that having foreigners make up a third of the workforce would
offer companies “tremendous scope” to bring in global talent. “One third is not
a small percentage. In fact, in many countries, they are looking at much lower
than one third,” he said.
Mr Lim, essentially, was trying to appease the foreign companies and
investors, fearing that they would leave Singapore because of Singapore’s move
to tighten FT manpower.
