Why Minimum wage legislation in Singapore isn't an unreasonable demand

[bic_cherry]

Why Minimum wage legislation in Singapore isn't an unreasonable demand.

From thread: ' If there is a minimum wage for service industry'
If we look at the top ranked countries with lowest (equitable) World Bank Gini, we would notice that just about all of them do not have across-board state-defined minimum wage sum. The 'minimum wage' are mostly actually contracts negotiated at periodic terms (eg annually) between workers and businesses of each industry. That is to say, these countries allow business and workers to work out cooperatively how much the industry (i.e. the consumers) are willing to pay for services/products rendered without killing the goose. Net effect - these may go down during bad times for industry. State-defined min wages seldom do in nominal dollars.

IMHO this is potentially a better approach than a state-mandated number (be it PAP, WP or SDP). Today endless criticisms about gahmen this number that number is wrong/stopid/brainless (choose your pick - unemployment figures, salary for tax or mean test, cost of building HDB, yada yada) yet we are now asking gahmen to dictate a min-wage number?

Hi TP, sometimes it is not about a number but a current state of affairs...
If Singapore was a place like Timbucktoo, where there were not even a democracy because the state was still a tribal village and people traded sea shells and caught their own fish, then there WOULDN'T BE A DEMAND AT ALL FOR MINIMUM WAGE.
Too bad, Singapore is a first world democracy/ first class political leadership etc etc according to PM Lee himself.
PM Lee might have made the comment so as to support his own wage (tagging it to the highest paid CEOs of the land) but that is too bad cos in National Service, we all learn that real leaders claim the allegiance of their men by showing first that they are trust worthy people who always put the welfare of the men before that of themselves.
So the PAP has for more than 5 years now, pegged its own salaries to the most successful/ most dishonest of entrepreneurs in the land (hose earning the most)- it is thus no fault of the people to demand a peg of some kind for their salaries.

To me, it would be more acceptable to the common man if the PAP salaries were pegged to some multiple. Of the median salary- 10x, 15x for PM, at least people can understand and be reassured that Singapore is not run on a GDP first policy (all MNC CEOs love GDP first policy)- but a median salary multiple should be more stable- and hopefully so.

So it is in the context of the PAP pegging their own salaries to stratospheric heights at the people have demanded pegs regarding the minimum wage- and in this regard, the people's demands are not unreasonable I think...

Turning the civil service (PA) into a political appendage/ politicizing the civil service...

(IMG URL)

(IMG URL)

(IMG URL)
Paying politicians first- and at unfathomable/ stratospheric levels too:

Higher cost of living moving forward, but what about a poverty line and minimum wage At least to afford to pay GST and other ancillary fees !!!???

 

[bic_cherry]

Determining the Prime Minister's salary moving forward- median is the way to go

Related more or less...
Ministers are paid enough not to be corrupt, but why aren't citizens paid enough not to be famished.

As follows:
Determining the Prime Minister's salary moving forward- multiple of median is the way to go.

Re thread: Why Minimum wage legislation in Singapore isn't an unreasonable demand
On record, PM and his MPs salaries can benchmark using top private sectors professions i.e. Doctors, Lawyers, Bankers etc...
while low income workers cannot have minimum wages.
Note:
Parliament should pass a law requiring PM and his MPs salaries to be benchmarked in multiple of minimum wage eg lets say 100 X of minimum wage and minimum wage is $20K pa = $ 2.2 million pa (i.e. 100 X $20K).
With such a law, PM Lee will have no choice.

Errr...
We all know that PAP will refuse to implement minimum wage as far as possible for 3 simple reasons:

1. To avoid giving unions like NTUC or others any leverage since once there is min wage law, unions can then ask to amend minimum wage levels, but if there isn't even any law, then PAP can tell union go fly kite, in Singapore, no such thing as minimum wage law, throw the book about workfare and drive union leader nuts, by the time unions get to their feet, election is over already.
2. Smaller point is that PAP has tagged their salaries to the CEOs, the more the workers earn, the less the CEOs can earn, so why allow workers to earn more when it will affect the politicians salary scale.
3. Of course, the 3rd reason commonly quoted is that PAP failed to upgrade Singaporeans from 'prostitutes'/ cheap labour to MNCs into creative people in great demand by SMCs and MNCs, so PAP knows that the true value of the Singapore worker is actually very low and any trouble caused to MNCs and they will all flock to Myanmar and China, so PAP is extremely afraid of upsetting MNCs, consequent to PAP's lying on its laurels, Singaporeans pay the price.

Thus for a start, should benchmark political salaries to median employment income, of all parameters, I feel median wage is most constant and reflective of the welfare of the people.
Pls note that the median employment income includes those who are unemployed or underemployed- this is necessary so that political leaders know that improving employment/ employability of citizens and PR will improve their own salary scales.

 

[jonieG]

Increasing minimum wage would have an impact to small businesses. Many retailers are against the idea, as they would be harmed by the increase. But, Costco's CEO would want to see the federal minimum wage increased to $10.10 an hour, which is higher than the $9 an hour President Obama requested in his State of the Union address. Here is the source: Raising the Minimum Wage.