MOM: 96.5% of aged 62+ offered re-employment for 12 months or less

[Confuseous]

According to the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) Retirement and Re-employment Practices, 2011 report [Link], “Nearly nine in ten (89%) private establishments offering re-employment indicated 12 months as the minimum duration of the re-employment contracts. 7.7% offered re-employment contracts of less than a year, while a small minority of 3.0% and 0.5% reported giving longer contracts of 24 and 36 months respectively”.

What this means is that only 3.5% of those offered re-employment were offered for longer than 12 months. Most may have to go through the uncertainty of being offered an extension after 12 months or less, as the case may be.

A re-employment act which in a sense, subjects most workers (96.5%) to just a one-year or less re-employment, may leave much to be desired from the perspective of job security from the workers’ point of view.

- http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/07/20/funny-survey-on-re-employment/

 

[halsey02]

LIP SERVICE... but the government have one approaching 90 and have the certainty of employment till his next life! but are you a member??

 

[laksaboy]

Aged 62+ offered re-employment for 12 months or less?

That is not something to brag about.

Why are 60+ year old folks still working?

 

[Leckmichamarsch]

According to the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) Retirement and Re-employment Practices, 2011 report [Link], “Nearly nine in ten (89%) private establishments offering re-employment indicated 12 months as the minimum duration of the re-employment contracts. 7.7% offered re-employment contracts of less than a year, while a small minority of 3.0% and 0.5% reported giving longer contracts of 24 and 36 months respectively”.

What this means is that only 3.5% of those offered re-employment were offered for longer than 12 months. Most may have to go through the uncertainty of being offered an extension after 12 months or less, as the case may be.

A re-employment act which in a sense, subjects most workers (96.5%) to just a one-year or less re-employment, may leave much to be desired from the perspective of job security from the workers’ point of view.

- http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/07/20/funny-survey-on-re-employment/

Bullshit!

My aunt was denied re-employment when her Stat Board employers purposely use tough benchmark to deny her re employment. Her work performance will easily get her re-hired hands down and without pay cuts if she were in private sector. Bloody Govt. playing games in this matter.

The job denied to my aunt was filled up by an Indonesian FT who still needs schooling before her diploma qualifies her for that job.......... how do you like this state of affair? Citizens get bashed while FTs having a nice time at their expense. Long live PAP............. really? Remember Japan former ruling party?

Dun believe what MOM says as I found out that they move behind the scene; ingratiate with HR directors (you scratch my back...... & I will scratch yours...). In short you may trust your mum but NOT MOM!!!

 

[halsey02]

Aged 62+ offered re-employment for 12 months or less?

That is not something to brag about.

Why are 60+ year old folks still working?

Why is a 89 going to 90 year old still working and collecting fat pay? that is why the 60+ year old folks must work, to contribute to this 90 year old & another two older 'dead woods'...

 

[Unrepented]

Wayang, put up a handful of cases, and poster boys and girls. A friend's neighbour got retrenched from a bank, this retrenched lady was in her early 50s, according to her, she asked govt agencies for help, no luck. Still unemployed for a year and half now.

 

[Cestbon]

Aged 62+ offered re-employment for 12 months or less?

That is not something to brag about.

Why are 60+ year old folks still working?

Why talk about 62 year old re-employement. Should ask why Sinkie still cannot afford to retired after 60!
Another spin syory by gov.
Before 1990 many retired on age 50~55. Now slave until RIP.

 

[Equalisation]

Kanina. CPF cannot take out at 55, most must work until 65 to get monthly allowance !!! Total absurdity to say the least given the fact that the money in CPF are all ours to begin with !!

 

[bushtucker]

what kind of jobs are they given? jobs with salary of $1000 or less?

 

[I_Hate_Pappies]

Aged 62+ offered re-employment for 12 months or less?

That is not something to brag about.

Why are 60+ year old folks still working?

Why talk about 62 year old re-employement. Should ask why Sinkie still cannot afford to retired after 60!
Another spin syory by gov.
Before 1990 many retired on age 50~55. Now slave until RIP.

And we are still having so many gong cheebye voting them on Election Day.

 

[Equalisation]

what kind of jobs are they given? jobs with salary of $1000 or less?

Agree. I am currently working at a hawker center clearing tables and earning $600 per month. Even this kind of job, I also face competition from foreigners. What the fxxk is happening?:o

 

[Cruxx]

Agree. I am currently working at a hawker center clearing tables and earning $600 per month. Even this kind of job, I also face competition from foreigners. What the fxxk is happening?:o

You could clear tables twice as fast as you currently do but your pay will always be at the whims and fancies of your boss. Only brainwashed sinkies think income is determined by productivity or how hard a person works.

 

[Leckmichamarsch]

According to the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) Retirement and Re-employment Practices, 2011 report [Link], “Nearly nine in ten (89%) private establishments offering re-employment indicated 12 months as the minimum duration of the re-employment contracts. 7.7% offered re-employment contracts of less than a year, while a small minority of 3.0% and 0.5% reported giving longer contracts of 24 and 36 months respectively”.

What this means is that only 3.5% of those offered re-employment were offered for longer than 12 months. Most may have to go through the uncertainty of being offered an extension after 12 months or less, as the case may be.

A re-employment act which in a sense, subjects most workers (96.5%) to just a one-year or less re-employment, may leave much to be desired from the perspective of job security from the workers’ point of view.

- http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/07/20/funny-survey-on-re-employment/

Another cleaver skewed reporting of the truth on the ground. A bunch of lies by the clueless gahmen!

While it may be true in the private sector (conned big time by SNEF n NTUC + tripartitism...), the picture in Ministries and Statutory Boards are totally different. To start with, Public Service Division which decides for ministries n stat boards, issued very tough criteria for re-hire like work performance must be "C" or better for 3 years running; new pay can be cut as much as 40% along with holiday & medical benefits cuts plus other disincentives SPH n gahmen are too shameful to publicise.... All these bloody criteria drive the public sector employers such as Singapore Polytechnic to hire FTs to replace Singaporeans denied of re-employment. MOM is aware, so are all HR directors - are they covert agents for FT?

This cuntry has gone to the dogs & gahmen is still blind or pretending not to see.......

 

[Leckmichamarsch]

Agree. I am currently working at a hawker center clearing tables and earning $600 per month. Even this kind of job, I also face competition from foreigners. What the fxxk is happening?:o

Gahmen says you shud be thankful that you have a job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!