Three in four new jobs going to foreigners
By Anna Teo
31 July 2003
Business Times Singapore
Ex-NWC chief urges review of foreign worker policy and flexiwage system
(SINGAPORE) Former National Wages Council chairman Lim Chong Yah yesterday called for a review of Singapore's flexible wages system, saying it does not seem to have averted retrenchments in a recession.
Professor Lim also said use of the Central Provident Fund as a cost-cutting tool should not be abandoned, so as to help save jobs. And noting that three out of four new jobs created here now go to foreigners, he said Singapore's foreign worker policy should be reviewed.
'Review it (to see) whether we can fine-tune it or adjust it, but it's good to have a further look at it, otherwise you can have economic rebound with very little impact on the unemployment situation,' he told journalists.
Prof Lim, who is director of Nanyang Business School's SABRE Centre at Nanyang Technological University, was chairing a news conference to announce its latest bi-annual forecast for the Singapore economy.
The forecasts see the economy rebounding by year-end to grow 1.3 per cent this year, and near 5 per cent in 2004 - but with no immediate attendant recovery on the job front.
While the labour market typically lags the economy in a recovery, NTU economists Chen Kang and Tan Khee Giap also found marked changes in Singapore's employment mix over the past 10 years that do not bode too well for local job seekers.
Between 1992 and 1997, when total employment rose by 250,000, four out of every five jobs created went to Singaporeans or permanent residents.
Over the next five-year period to 2002, only 187,000 new jobs were created. And of these, only 25 per cent were taken by local resident workers.
Forced in the difficult economic climate to be competitive, employers had to seek ways to cut costs. 'One way is to hire more foreign workers,' said Assoc Prof Tan, head of the Asean Economies Monitoring Unit at Nanyang Business School.
Said Prof Lim: 'If the trend continues, your economic rebound will not have much impact on employment opportunities available for Singapore residents.'
Turning to the flexible wages system, the man who chaired the NWC for almost three decades - from its inception in 1972 until 2001 - yesterday questioned its efficacy.
Given the spate of lay-offs in recent years, 'does it mean that our flexible wage system has not been working well?' Prof Lim asked. 'I think we should have a look at it, whether in implementation do we follow it that closely.'
The tripartite understanding was to axe workers only as the last resort, when across-the-board wage cuts and all else have failed, he pointed out.
'Is there a need to abide by our tripartite commitment - that if there is a recession, our priority is to see whether wage cuts should be given top preference, and if wage cuts fail, only must we resort to retrenchment. But if there are other long-term reasons for retrenchment, that's a different story, we are talking of short-term changes. My suggestion is - it's worth looking at the efficacy and effectiveness of a flexible wage system.'
The concern is to not 'enlarge the pool of unemployed during a recession', Prof Lim added. Employers may have the prerogative to axe workers, 'but even retrenchments must be within agreed limits, agreed practices, and agreed norms'.
And - against arguments that the CPF is too blunt and indiscriminating a cost-cutting tool, apart from its objectives as a retirement nest-egg - Prof Lim advocated retaining it as a 'macro anti-recession instrument'.
'We seem to have abandoned using CPF as a weapon to fight against recession, and I think we should not. We should keep that,' he said.
The NTU economists' forecasts see employment continuing to shrink through the present Q3, for nine quarters in total since Q3 2001. The duration of the job market slump surpasses the four-quarter decline during the 1998-1999 downturn and compares with the contraction in the mid-1980s recession, said Assoc Prof Chen, head of the school's Econometric Monitoring Unit. The profile of jobless Singaporeans also shows a rise in the number of older (above 40 years) and less educated blue-collar workers, and a growing trend of young, educated white-collar people.
The NTU economists advocate 'very proactive' job-matching services for the older group in particular. The upcoming new statutory board to promote continuing education and training should also serve as a 'one-stop job-matching agency' and maintain a centralised national register for all Singaporean job seekers, they propose.
It should keep a comprehensive database containing information like the job seekers' age, skill set, educational background, financial status, housing, jobless duration, frequency of job change and declined job offers. This would be important for any study of Singapore's 'potential rising long-term unemployment'.
New jobs in the future will come mainly from the services. Said Assoc Prof Chen: 'We can expect that the manufacturing sector will not be a major player in the job market. The services industries will take the major task of providing jobs.'
Prof Lim chipped in: 'Manufacturing sector as a net job creator is history.'.
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
NTU economists urge review of Singapore's foreign worker policy
NTU economists urge review of Singapore's foreign worker policy
30 July 2003
Channelnewsasia
Three out of four new jobs in Singapore were taken up by foreigners in the last five years, say economists at the Nanyang Technological University.
This contrasts with the previous five years when just one of five new jobs went to foreigners.
So, the economists are calling for a fine-tuning or adjustment to Singapore's foreign worker policy.
And adding to the gloom, the economists have slashed Singapore's economic growth forecast for this year to 1.3 percent, down from their earlier prediction of 3.3 percent.
Professor Lim Chong Yah, director of NTU's SABRE Centre, Nanyang Business School, said: "Out of four jobs created, only one job went to a Singapore resident, three jobs went to the intake of foreign workers. If this trend continues, and you forecast into the future, your economic rebound would have not much impact on employment opportunities available for Singapore residents. Therefore, I should say we should review this policy of dependence on foreign workers, review it to see whether we can fine-tune or adjust it."
To ease unemployment, the Nanyang Business School thinks the recently set up Statutory Board for Workers Retraining should be given the additional role as a one-stop job-matching agency.
Dr Tan Khee Giap, head of NTU's Asean Economies Monitoring, Nanyang Business School, said: "The number of non-resident workforce is very large, runs over 700,000......the unemployment is only less than 90,000, then something is very wrong, why can't we match that? If only we can cover some of this 30,000, the problem would be mitigated.....it's very urgent that we don't see unemployment as a short term issue."
Dr Tan and fellow researcher Chen Kang forecast that the Singapore economy will probably expand 1.3 percent this year.
They earlier predicted economic growth to be 3.3 percent, but this is no longer realistic given the impact of SARS.
For year 2004, they expect the Singapore economy to grow 4.9 percent.
30 July 2003
Channelnewsasia
Three out of four new jobs in Singapore were taken up by foreigners in the last five years, say economists at the Nanyang Technological University.
This contrasts with the previous five years when just one of five new jobs went to foreigners.
So, the economists are calling for a fine-tuning or adjustment to Singapore's foreign worker policy.
And adding to the gloom, the economists have slashed Singapore's economic growth forecast for this year to 1.3 percent, down from their earlier prediction of 3.3 percent.
Professor Lim Chong Yah, director of NTU's SABRE Centre, Nanyang Business School, said: "Out of four jobs created, only one job went to a Singapore resident, three jobs went to the intake of foreign workers. If this trend continues, and you forecast into the future, your economic rebound would have not much impact on employment opportunities available for Singapore residents. Therefore, I should say we should review this policy of dependence on foreign workers, review it to see whether we can fine-tune or adjust it."
To ease unemployment, the Nanyang Business School thinks the recently set up Statutory Board for Workers Retraining should be given the additional role as a one-stop job-matching agency.
Dr Tan Khee Giap, head of NTU's Asean Economies Monitoring, Nanyang Business School, said: "The number of non-resident workforce is very large, runs over 700,000......the unemployment is only less than 90,000, then something is very wrong, why can't we match that? If only we can cover some of this 30,000, the problem would be mitigated.....it's very urgent that we don't see unemployment as a short term issue."
Dr Tan and fellow researcher Chen Kang forecast that the Singapore economy will probably expand 1.3 percent this year.
They earlier predicted economic growth to be 3.3 percent, but this is no longer realistic given the impact of SARS.
For year 2004, they expect the Singapore economy to grow 4.9 percent.
Thursday, July 24, 2003
Without foreigners, economy would go into tailspin
Without foreigners, economy would go into tailspin
24 July 2003
Straits Times
UNION leader R. Mohanadas was upset that 63 of his Singaporean colleagues from SIA Engineering Company were laid off when higher-paid Filipinos doing the same jobs were spared.
Yesterday evening, he made an impassioned plea to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew to explain why Singaporeans were the ones let go from the aircraft maintenance unit.
Said the 35-year-old, who is from the Singapore Airlines Staff Union: 'You know how difficult it is for us to explain to our members? They ask, 'Why are we paying dues to the union when it can't even protect our rice bowl?' '
Although noting that he did not have the full details, the Senior Minister said: 'Other things being equal, it does not make sense to hire a foreign worker when you've got your Singaporean.
'You do that only when, without a foreign worker, your business will be worse off.'
Taking a wider perspective on the issue of foreigners, he said the problem arises because Singaporeans, having grown more affluent, are not willing to do certain jobs.
So removing them from Singapore would be a bad idea because the 'economy will go into a tailspin', SM Lee said.
Foreigners now hold 200,000 jobs in the manufacturing and services sectors, many of which could be filled by the current crop of 89,000 jobless Singaporeans. But they refuse these positions.
However, that did not mean they were lazy or being picky, Mr Lee was quick to add. And relying on foreign workers is typical in developed economies.
As Britons grew more prosperous, Indians, Pakistanis, Africans and Caribbean workers were hired for the jobs they did not want.
Mr Lee made clear that he understood people's resistance now to jobs they see as dirty and menial, unlike in 1965, when Singaporeans 'were poor, hungry and willing to try anything'.
Now, they have grown accustomed to a higher level of comfort and prosperity.
This prompted the Senior Minister to trawl through the various 'light jobs' which Singaporeans could do. He found 5,000 vacancies in horticulture - jobs such as landscaping and gardening - which pay about $1,500 a month.
But Singaporeans shun them, he said, because they do not want to be in the sun or get 'hot and uncomfortable'.
In the construction industry here, jobs that involve electrical fittings have no takers. But in Australia, he said, all building jobs are done by Australians, who are very cost-effective because they are trained.
Singapore is now doing the same, with the Institute of Technical Education trying to produce specialists, he added.
The solution, then, is to redesign jobs so that Singaporeans will be enticed to do them, said Mr Lee.
'If we say tomorrow, all foreign workers leave, I think Singapore will be worse off, not better off.
'But if you say, let's adjust and see how we can redefine the work, we can have this chap employed.'
Turning back to Mr Mohanadas' question, SM Lee had this parting shot: 'I am sorry if I cannot give you a simple answer, 'Yes, let's sack the Filipino.' Can't be done.'.
24 July 2003
Straits Times
UNION leader R. Mohanadas was upset that 63 of his Singaporean colleagues from SIA Engineering Company were laid off when higher-paid Filipinos doing the same jobs were spared.
Yesterday evening, he made an impassioned plea to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew to explain why Singaporeans were the ones let go from the aircraft maintenance unit.
Said the 35-year-old, who is from the Singapore Airlines Staff Union: 'You know how difficult it is for us to explain to our members? They ask, 'Why are we paying dues to the union when it can't even protect our rice bowl?' '
Although noting that he did not have the full details, the Senior Minister said: 'Other things being equal, it does not make sense to hire a foreign worker when you've got your Singaporean.
'You do that only when, without a foreign worker, your business will be worse off.'
Taking a wider perspective on the issue of foreigners, he said the problem arises because Singaporeans, having grown more affluent, are not willing to do certain jobs.
So removing them from Singapore would be a bad idea because the 'economy will go into a tailspin', SM Lee said.
Foreigners now hold 200,000 jobs in the manufacturing and services sectors, many of which could be filled by the current crop of 89,000 jobless Singaporeans. But they refuse these positions.
However, that did not mean they were lazy or being picky, Mr Lee was quick to add. And relying on foreign workers is typical in developed economies.
As Britons grew more prosperous, Indians, Pakistanis, Africans and Caribbean workers were hired for the jobs they did not want.
Mr Lee made clear that he understood people's resistance now to jobs they see as dirty and menial, unlike in 1965, when Singaporeans 'were poor, hungry and willing to try anything'.
Now, they have grown accustomed to a higher level of comfort and prosperity.
This prompted the Senior Minister to trawl through the various 'light jobs' which Singaporeans could do. He found 5,000 vacancies in horticulture - jobs such as landscaping and gardening - which pay about $1,500 a month.
But Singaporeans shun them, he said, because they do not want to be in the sun or get 'hot and uncomfortable'.
In the construction industry here, jobs that involve electrical fittings have no takers. But in Australia, he said, all building jobs are done by Australians, who are very cost-effective because they are trained.
Singapore is now doing the same, with the Institute of Technical Education trying to produce specialists, he added.
The solution, then, is to redesign jobs so that Singaporeans will be enticed to do them, said Mr Lee.
'If we say tomorrow, all foreign workers leave, I think Singapore will be worse off, not better off.
'But if you say, let's adjust and see how we can redefine the work, we can have this chap employed.'
Turning back to Mr Mohanadas' question, SM Lee had this parting shot: 'I am sorry if I cannot give you a simple answer, 'Yes, let's sack the Filipino.' Can't be done.'.
Without foreigners, economy would go into tailspin
Without foreigners, economy would go into tailspin
24 July 2003
Straits Times
UNION leader R. Mohanadas was upset that 63 of his Singaporean colleagues from SIA Engineering Company were laid off when higher-paid Filipinos doing the same jobs were spared.
Yesterday evening, he made an impassioned plea to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew to explain why Singaporeans were the ones let go from the aircraft maintenance unit.
Said the 35-year-old, who is from the Singapore Airlines Staff Union: 'You know how difficult it is for us to explain to our members? They ask, 'Why are we paying dues to the union when it can't even protect our rice bowl?' '
Although noting that he did not have the full details, the Senior Minister said: 'Other things being equal, it does not make sense to hire a foreign worker when you've got your Singaporean.
'You do that only when, without a foreign worker, your business will be worse off.'
Taking a wider perspective on the issue of foreigners, he said the problem arises because Singaporeans, having grown more affluent, are not willing to do certain jobs.
So removing them from Singapore would be a bad idea because the 'economy will go into a tailspin', SM Lee said.
Foreigners now hold 200,000 jobs in the manufacturing and services sectors, many of which could be filled by the current crop of 89,000 jobless Singaporeans. But they refuse these positions.
However, that did not mean they were lazy or being picky, Mr Lee was quick to add. And relying on foreign workers is typical in developed economies.
As Britons grew more prosperous, Indians, Pakistanis, Africans and Caribbean workers were hired for the jobs they did not want.
Mr Lee made clear that he understood people's resistance now to jobs they see as dirty and menial, unlike in 1965, when Singaporeans 'were poor, hungry and willing to try anything'.
Now, they have grown accustomed to a higher level of comfort and prosperity.
This prompted the Senior Minister to trawl through the various 'light jobs' which Singaporeans could do. He found 5,000 vacancies in horticulture - jobs such as landscaping and gardening - which pay about $1,500 a month.
But Singaporeans shun them, he said, because they do not want to be in the sun or get 'hot and uncomfortable'.
In the construction industry here, jobs that involve electrical fittings have no takers. But in Australia, he said, all building jobs are done by Australians, who are very cost-effective because they are trained.
Singapore is now doing the same, with the Institute of Technical Education trying to produce specialists, he added.
The solution, then, is to redesign jobs so that Singaporeans will be enticed to do them, said Mr Lee.
'If we say tomorrow, all foreign workers leave, I think Singapore will be worse off, not better off.
'But if you say, let's adjust and see how we can redefine the work, we can have this chap employed.'
Turning back to Mr Mohanadas' question, SM Lee had this parting shot: 'I am sorry if I cannot give you a simple answer, 'Yes, let's sack the Filipino.' Can't be done.'.
24 July 2003
Straits Times
UNION leader R. Mohanadas was upset that 63 of his Singaporean colleagues from SIA Engineering Company were laid off when higher-paid Filipinos doing the same jobs were spared.
Yesterday evening, he made an impassioned plea to Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew to explain why Singaporeans were the ones let go from the aircraft maintenance unit.
Said the 35-year-old, who is from the Singapore Airlines Staff Union: 'You know how difficult it is for us to explain to our members? They ask, 'Why are we paying dues to the union when it can't even protect our rice bowl?' '
Although noting that he did not have the full details, the Senior Minister said: 'Other things being equal, it does not make sense to hire a foreign worker when you've got your Singaporean.
'You do that only when, without a foreign worker, your business will be worse off.'
Taking a wider perspective on the issue of foreigners, he said the problem arises because Singaporeans, having grown more affluent, are not willing to do certain jobs.
So removing them from Singapore would be a bad idea because the 'economy will go into a tailspin', SM Lee said.
Foreigners now hold 200,000 jobs in the manufacturing and services sectors, many of which could be filled by the current crop of 89,000 jobless Singaporeans. But they refuse these positions.
However, that did not mean they were lazy or being picky, Mr Lee was quick to add. And relying on foreign workers is typical in developed economies.
As Britons grew more prosperous, Indians, Pakistanis, Africans and Caribbean workers were hired for the jobs they did not want.
Mr Lee made clear that he understood people's resistance now to jobs they see as dirty and menial, unlike in 1965, when Singaporeans 'were poor, hungry and willing to try anything'.
Now, they have grown accustomed to a higher level of comfort and prosperity.
This prompted the Senior Minister to trawl through the various 'light jobs' which Singaporeans could do. He found 5,000 vacancies in horticulture - jobs such as landscaping and gardening - which pay about $1,500 a month.
But Singaporeans shun them, he said, because they do not want to be in the sun or get 'hot and uncomfortable'.
In the construction industry here, jobs that involve electrical fittings have no takers. But in Australia, he said, all building jobs are done by Australians, who are very cost-effective because they are trained.
Singapore is now doing the same, with the Institute of Technical Education trying to produce specialists, he added.
The solution, then, is to redesign jobs so that Singaporeans will be enticed to do them, said Mr Lee.
'If we say tomorrow, all foreign workers leave, I think Singapore will be worse off, not better off.
'But if you say, let's adjust and see how we can redefine the work, we can have this chap employed.'
Turning back to Mr Mohanadas' question, SM Lee had this parting shot: 'I am sorry if I cannot give you a simple answer, 'Yes, let's sack the Filipino.' Can't be done.'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)