- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
- Messages
- 22
- Points
- 0
When TOC’s Interim Chief Editor, Ravi Philemon, asked me
to write something on the report “NTUC FairPrice to raise
$1 million for low-income workers” (Yahoo News, Jun 22).,
my first instinct was to take out my TI Business Analyst
financial calculator.
$6 a month help?
According to the report, the NTUC-U Care Fund campaign
is part of Fund’s $10 million fund-raising target for 2011.It
went on to state:
“So far, $8.3 million has been raised. The Fund, which
helps over 100,000 workers annually, aims to help 130,000
people this year."
I divided 130,000 people by the NTUC U-Care Fund’s $10
million, and got $77.
Does this mean that on the average, each of the 130,000
union members helped may only get about $6 a month
($77 divided by 12 months)?
Pay $10 get $6?
Since NTUC union dues are $117 per annum, does it mean
that a needy union member had to pay about $10 a month
to get $6 back?
As NTUC has about 580,000 members, it collects about $68
million in fees alone in a year.
How many of NTUC’s 12 social enterprise subsidiaries are
making profits or losses?
GST increase?
Since the last time GST was raised from 5 to 7 per cent
with the reason that it was to help the poor, why it that
NTUC, and organisations like the South-West Community
Development Council (CDC) had to raise $500,000 to set up
a new fund to help residents that need help in areas which
are not covered by the existing help schemes, like
Comcare, CDC Community Care Fund, etc?
Pro-worker, pro-citizen?
Since NTUC said recently that it wants to be more pro-
worker and pro-citizen, I would like to make the following
suggestions or ask some questions:-
Whilst it is good to help needy union members, NTUC
should focus more on raising the pay of workers. With the
real median wage increase per annum at about only 1.1
per cent over the last 10 years or so, many Singaporean
workers, particulaly the lower-income may be struggling to
make ends meet.
This is perhaps also reflected in the Department of
Statistics’ (DOS) $374 per capita household income of the
bottom decile of employed resident households.
The hourly rate is now only about $5 for most retail sector
jobs. Why have we been silent on the issue of labour
statistics such as unemployment, jobs, etc, not being
broken down into Singaporeans and permanent residents?
Why do we allow labour policies that put Singaporeans at
a distinct disadvantage vis-avis foreign workers – no
employer CPF contribution, maternity leave, National
Service reservist leave, etc, for foreigners?
Why do we allow a Re-employment Act which allows
employers to offer any terms and conditions due to
reasonable factors like job scope, performance, etc, other
than age?
Why do we allow employers to pay just $4,500 to $10,000
to workers who are not offered re-employment at age 62?
What are we doing to protect workers who may already be
dismissed even before they reach 62?
Why do we not have an Equal Opportunity Employment
Commission, to protect workers from discrimination, like
other countries, such as Hong Kong?
Why do we not protect Singaporean as well as Migrant
Workers, by signing and ractifying all labolur and workers’
rights International Conventions?
Why do we not support a Minimum Wage, when workers
are being paid a little as $600 a month?
Why were we silent when the Workmen’s Injury Act was
changed, limiting employers’ liability for medical expenses
from industrial accidents to only $25,000?
Why have we not taken up the issue of public hospitals not
giving any subsidy for industrial accident patients?
Lastly, how can we have a labour policy which requires
employers to insure their foreign workers for $15,000 of
medical expenses, but nothing for Singaporeans and PRs?
to write something on the report “NTUC FairPrice to raise
$1 million for low-income workers” (Yahoo News, Jun 22).,
my first instinct was to take out my TI Business Analyst
financial calculator.
$6 a month help?
According to the report, the NTUC-U Care Fund campaign
is part of Fund’s $10 million fund-raising target for 2011.It
went on to state:
“So far, $8.3 million has been raised. The Fund, which
helps over 100,000 workers annually, aims to help 130,000
people this year."
I divided 130,000 people by the NTUC U-Care Fund’s $10
million, and got $77.
Does this mean that on the average, each of the 130,000
union members helped may only get about $6 a month
($77 divided by 12 months)?
Pay $10 get $6?
Since NTUC union dues are $117 per annum, does it mean
that a needy union member had to pay about $10 a month
to get $6 back?
As NTUC has about 580,000 members, it collects about $68
million in fees alone in a year.
How many of NTUC’s 12 social enterprise subsidiaries are
making profits or losses?
GST increase?
Since the last time GST was raised from 5 to 7 per cent
with the reason that it was to help the poor, why it that
NTUC, and organisations like the South-West Community
Development Council (CDC) had to raise $500,000 to set up
a new fund to help residents that need help in areas which
are not covered by the existing help schemes, like
Comcare, CDC Community Care Fund, etc?
Pro-worker, pro-citizen?
Since NTUC said recently that it wants to be more pro-
worker and pro-citizen, I would like to make the following
suggestions or ask some questions:-
Whilst it is good to help needy union members, NTUC
should focus more on raising the pay of workers. With the
real median wage increase per annum at about only 1.1
per cent over the last 10 years or so, many Singaporean
workers, particulaly the lower-income may be struggling to
make ends meet.
This is perhaps also reflected in the Department of
Statistics’ (DOS) $374 per capita household income of the
bottom decile of employed resident households.
The hourly rate is now only about $5 for most retail sector
jobs. Why have we been silent on the issue of labour
statistics such as unemployment, jobs, etc, not being
broken down into Singaporeans and permanent residents?
Why do we allow labour policies that put Singaporeans at
a distinct disadvantage vis-avis foreign workers – no
employer CPF contribution, maternity leave, National
Service reservist leave, etc, for foreigners?
Why do we allow a Re-employment Act which allows
employers to offer any terms and conditions due to
reasonable factors like job scope, performance, etc, other
than age?
Why do we allow employers to pay just $4,500 to $10,000
to workers who are not offered re-employment at age 62?
What are we doing to protect workers who may already be
dismissed even before they reach 62?
Why do we not have an Equal Opportunity Employment
Commission, to protect workers from discrimination, like
other countries, such as Hong Kong?
Why do we not protect Singaporean as well as Migrant
Workers, by signing and ractifying all labolur and workers’
rights International Conventions?
Why do we not support a Minimum Wage, when workers
are being paid a little as $600 a month?
Why were we silent when the Workmen’s Injury Act was
changed, limiting employers’ liability for medical expenses
from industrial accidents to only $25,000?
Why have we not taken up the issue of public hospitals not
giving any subsidy for industrial accident patients?
Lastly, how can we have a labour policy which requires
employers to insure their foreign workers for $15,000 of
medical expenses, but nothing for Singaporeans and PRs?
