Many of the attendees turned up to protest the government's liberal immigration policies which have resulted in Singaporeans having to compete with foreign PMETs for jobs
By Nigel Tan
Chief Editor
Around 200 people turned up at the Speakers’ Corner at Hong Lim Park on Saturday for the Employ Singaporeans First event organised by transitioning.org and its founder Gilbert Goh.
Mr Goh is also a National Solidarity Party politician, having stood as a candidate for the NSP in Tampines GRC at the recent general election.
The main message championed by the event’s four speakers was the need for a “Singaporeans First” policy so as to ensure greater job security for local workers who currently face stiff competition from foreigners. The ruling PAP argues that foreign workers are a necessary component of Singapore’s continued economic growth as they are willing to take on jobs that are shunned by Singaporeans.
The PAP’s liberal immigration policies have created a schism between employers and disgruntled employees, who believe that foreigners are often favoured by companies because they are prepared to work longer hours for less wages, do not require CPF contributions, and do not have National Service obligations, amongst other things. Some employers, on the other hand, feel that Singaporean workers are too sheltered and self-centred, with former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew famously saying that they were less “hard-striving” than foreign workers.
The immigration issue was a hot topic at the recent general election, with the NSP calling for new rules to require foreign Employment Pass applicants to earn at least $4,000 per month, up from the current $2,500 a month. The NSP argued that this would ensure that foreign PMETs are of a high enough quality to make significant contributions to the economy, while removing their competitive advantage on the basis of being cheaper than Singaporeans.
During his speech, Mr Goh also highlighted that employment agents were exploiting the growing demand for cheap foreign labour. These agents often charge high fees to foreign workers in exchange for promising to secure them jobs in Singapore. Many PMETs from countries such as India, China, Vietnam, the Philippines and Myanmar have been flooding in to Singapore, often accepting entry-level positions because of the higher pay compared to their home countries.
At the Hong Lim Park event, Mr Goh collected more than 100 signatures in support of the Employ Singaporeans First program, which he says he will submit to Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam – who is also the Minister for Manpower. Mr Goh also added that he would be organising a discussion session to throw up possible solutions to the problems which Singaporean workers are currently facing.
Mr Goh set up transitioning.org with the intention of having it serve as a support group for unemployed Singaporeans when he himself was retrenched during the recent economic crisis.
–
The author is Chief Editor of The Satay Club
Wow, it seems like my comments have gotten some people quite riled up, to the point that they are starting to become trolls. Why can’t there be more tolerance of diverse opinions? Or is the internet becoming intolerant of balanced views due to its inherently anti-PAP climate (as was mentioned in a Straits Times article some time ago)? Is it true that anything PAP is bad, and anything opposition is good?
Some have accused me of “blind loyalty” to the PAP. Let me clarify that I am not a PAP member, grassroots leader, nor am I affiliated to the PAP in any fashion. As such, I have no “loyalty” to the PAP. I am just a Singapore citizen who believes that the PAP has done much good, and who wants the current system to continue. There are many Singaporeans who share my view (60.1% to be precise) but unfortunately many of them are not as vocal as I am, therefore their views are often drowned out by the more “noisy” opposition supporters. I happen to hold the view that the current system in Singapore is beneficial to all of us, and I don’t want the opposition to come in and subvert the system with their political agenda. Why is this so? Let me explain:
(1) In Singapore, we don’t conform to the standard dogma of “Western liberal democracy”. So, we have been called “undemocratic” by some. But let me ask: what is the point of democracy? Is it an end-goal in itself, or should it be used as a means to achieve a much more important end, which is progress and prosperity?
(2) Under the current system, we have got strong government. Yes, the government has control over many functions, including the civil service, the PA, the grassroots organisations, the military, Parliament, etc. Some might argue that this is bad. On the contrary, I argue that this is good. Why? Because this way, our government is able to implement policies without having to waste time politicking and bickering. The government also does not have to pander to the masses and to implement populist policies to win votes. At times, unpopular decisions are necessary for the betterment of the country. For example, if you held a referendum on whether NS should be abolished, many people would vote “yes”. But is this the way to go? Would our country suffer as a result? Those of you who are parents, why don’t you ask your kids “do you want to do your homework” or “do you want to eat your vegetables”? What do you honestly think they will say?
(3) The current system is not as undemocratic as some try to make it out to be. We have gone for free elections, fair elections, independence of the judiciary. Anyone can run for office, even “political clowns” like the slipper man, Harbans Singh, Desmond Lim, the Jeyaretnams (both father and son), and so on. We have a Speakers Corner where anyone can speak on any issue. We have an independent President to serve as a check and balance against the government. We have NCMPs who guarantee that there will always be opposition voices in Parliament even if the PAP wins all the seats. Yes, we are not as liberal as some Western countries, but we are a predominantly conservative Asian society. We don’t condone street protests, irresponsible media and so on. We don’t allow marginal groups like the gay lobby or the hardline Christian lobby to sway public policies through political interference. Do you want that? Do you want to have your work disrupted by traffic jams thanks to protests by Greenpeace or Falungong, which have no relevance to you? So where do we draw the line? As it is, we are not exactly North Korea, are we?
(4) Under the Singapore system, we practice meritocracy. We reward those who are ambitious, talented and hardworking. We punish those who are lazy and unwilling to improve themselves. How do we achieve this? By having little or no safety nets for the “underclass” in society. This way, those who are ambitious, talented and hardworking stand to reap the fruits of their labour. In other countries, top earners are taxed 40% or 50% so as to provide unemployment benefits for those who are jobless, as well as other benefits such as free healthcare, free education, free housing, etc. Do you really want to work your ass off, only to have to pay 40% of your earnings to support those who can’t be bothered to earn an honest living? More importantly, do you think it is right for our kids to grow up thinking that if they don’t make it, it’s okay, the state will always look after their needs? Let me tell you, go and scrutinise the WP and SDP manifestos. This is exactly what they want! They are advocating for welfarism! I am staunchly against this because it would destroy the meritocratic, hard-striving culture that we have built up over the years. I think that hard work is a virtue that needs to be encouraged, not put down.
(5) I agree with most of you that the PAP is imperfect and has made mistakes. But which government in the world is perfect? I challenge you to name me one. Our leaders have already owned up to their mistakes. In some cases, they have resigned or been replaced. Even our Prime Minister has apologised publicly. But let’s look at the PAP’s track record as a whole. We came from being a third world country to being one of the world’s safest and most prosperous nations in just 40 years. Tell me, which other government has managed to do this? 40 years ago, some of our parents were still living in kampungs. We need to be mindful of how far we have come, and not assume that we were always a developed country. Look around you in Southeast Asia. Look at the Thais, Indonesians, Filipinos etc. They have “democracy”, they are allowed to have mass protests, they even have coups every now and then! But where have they come? We are having it much better than them.
I hope that my clarifications will serve as food for thought. Have a think of some of the issues I have raised, and then tell me whether it is me who is “blindly loyal” to the PAP or whether it is some other people here (who I shall not name) who are biased due to their blind and illogical hatred of the PAP? I speak facts and I have come up with the above justifications to support my stand. Can those who disagree with me do the same?
Wow, it seems like your comments have gotten more people quite riled up, to the point that more are starting to become pissed. Trolls? Why can’t there be more tolerance of diverse opinions that represent the larger majority of the more information (not MSM alone) informed public? Notice the internet is becoming a platform for sourcing more views balanced or otherwise, due to MSM media filtering that doesn’t give a more complete picture ( anti-pap sentiments quasi-condemned/mentioned in a pro-pap platform Straits Times some time ago? LOL, draw your own conclusions…! ) Of course nobody’s perfect both PAP or Opposition. “Blind loyalty” to the either bodies will not bring anyone forward. Let me clarify that I breathe oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide. I am just a Singapore citizen who believes that the PAP did much good under the Old Guard and courageous gentlemen like Ong Teng Cheong, Tan Soo Choon, Tay Eng Soon, who , like them, simply wants the current system to improve. There are many Singaporeans who share my sentiments (near 40% to be precise) but unfortunately many of the rest of our populace are not as objective we’d like them to be, hence therefore our views are often drowned out by the more “Fortissimo” PAP supporting MSM. I happen to hold the view that the current system in Singapore can be made to be more beneficial to all of us, and who in their right mind wants ANY party to come in and subvert the system with their political agenda per se. Why is this so? Let reality speak for itself:
(1) In Singapore, although we don’t conform to the standard dogma of “Western liberal democracy”, the youth and older public at large wants more Transparency and Accountability from a ruling incumbent whose tendencies border on the paranoid against alternative views or proposals that are open for perusal and scrutiny albeit only on the Internet. Just notice how many ST forum letters have been edited in their content before ink meets paper? So, we have been called “undemocratic” by some. But I agree: what is the point of having democracy per se? It should be used as a means to facilitate and achieve a much more important end, which is progress from being a nation of worker into Thinkers (not conformists per se) and the prosperity that follows from being more involved in the processes that define our existences.
(2) Under the current system, we may have an efficient system compared to many other countries but the cracks are showing. Yes, the government has control over many functions, including the civil service, the PA, the grassroots organisations, the military, Parliament, etc. Some might argue that this is bad or good. Although this way may facilitate our governing body’s Speed in implementing policies without having to spend time in politicking and bickering. But what’s the point if the resulting direction is in a poor, well, more elitist self-serving direction? Granted our government does not have to pander to the masses and to implement populist policies to win votes, but at the same time the oxymoronic reality is our Interests are often under-represented by public servants voted in to represent these same interests! At times, unpopular decisions are necessary for the betterment of the country. For example, in the past, Dr Goh Keng Swee’s very intellectual and insightful speeches were met with more blurs than affirmation from our general public who were less educated back then. The Reverse is true today. For example, even if you held a referendum on whether NS should be abolished, many more people would vote “No” for the good of our country if you argued with clarity and objectivity on why it keeps & enhances our Social Fabric and more crucially personally set good examples by walking the talk yourself as contributing members of our people. But notice that this is the way to go: Collaboration works, not a no-say monopoly over policies that involve our very existences as citizens. Would our country suffer as a result when we encourage a social culture of more Thought before action rather than one that simply takes action to up GDP (& minister bonuses) but not GNP to a far more better distributed extent? Those of you who are parents, wouldn’t you initially sternly tell your young children “what homework are you doing” or “eat your vegetables” and then after they have ‘developed’ into young thinking adults, watch and encourage them to take the initiative themselves from seeing you set the example and their learning how to Evaluate earlier? What much further do you honestly think they’d go in the world, compared to rote-learning like tuition social animals and interacting in Tagalog instead of their mother tongue’s and English culture from young?
(3) Although our current system seemingly appears democratic as some try to make it out to be, the first-past the post system makes it a gross under-representation. We have gone for free elections, fair elections, all independent of the judiciary. Anyone can run for office, even “political clowns” like the slipper man, Harbans Singh, Desmond Lim, the Younger Jeyaretnam (the son), and so on. But ultimately, the GRC system has made 60% of votes translate into a staggering 93% of Parliamentary Seats representing that same percentage!! We have a Speakers Corner that’s the laughing stock of the world where anyone must register with the police as they supposed ‘freely’ speak on any issue. We HAD an independent President in Mr Ong Teng Cheong who tried to serve as a check and balance against the government but was told it would take 56 years to even get information?. We have NCMPs who “guarantee” that there will always be opposition voices in Parliament who too often get ruling party ears that hear anytime more than they listened, much less take any action. Yes, we can’t be as liberal as some Western countries, overnight no less, as we are a predominantly conservative Asian society. The culture we’ve inherited from our (quite authoritarian) past doesn’t condone peaceful street protests, competition in media to improve what perspectives/voices we read and so on. Who would like supposedly “marginal” groups like the gay lobby or the hardline Christian lobby to sway public policies through political interference, but who today wouldn’t want a system that allows positive evaluation of different perspectives before deciding in a clear transparent way announced to all, that will work? We could actually use the occasional disruption by protests by Greenpeace or Falungong, to understand better before drawing conclusions as a truly more tolerant society…! Traffic Jams may happen, but that falls directly under how many COEs are allowed…! Drawing the line as it is, doesn’t involve drawing over people’s facial surfaces…after all, we are not North Korea, are we, as someone said?
(4) Under the Singapore system, we practice scholastic meritocracy that that has been rewarding all too many on academic achievement rather than an educational system that teaches a love for learning and moral empathy. What the late Dr Goh Keng Seng said still rings true today. To get our society forward we need 3 attributes of “Creative Thinking, Character & (most importantly) Morals”. Today we may reward those who are appear ambitious, talented and hardworking. We punish those who are lazy and unwilling to improve themselves. Ironically, the upper elite classes have subtly brought in little or no safety nets for the “underclass” in society. This way, those in the elite classes who are ambitious, talented and hardworking stand to more likely reap the fruits of their labour whilst their counterparts in the lower social classes with similar attributes are shortchanged by a system that favours the socially more favored or financially more endowed upper echelons of our society. In our country, salaried earners are already “taxed “40% monthly through a CPF system that increases minimum sum with each passing year and retirement age to 68 (?!) so as to provide economic benefits for those who simply pay a wage close to those of cheaper FTs… Many remain jobless or even when college-educated, simply have to turn to selling insurance, driving Taxis or even be security guards, to survive. Other supposed benefits such as affordable healthcare, good education, “affordable” housing, etc, are an affront to what our people have worked their lives out for. Of course, who wants to work your ass off, only to have to pay 40% of your earnings to support those who can’t be bothered to earn an honest living such as in the European welfare system? More importantly, don’t you think it is critical for our kids to grow up as thinking, better evaluating adults who are more likely to make it, with better financial education, liquidity and the courage to take the initiative? It’s not okay for the state to always look after their needs but who better, in the short term, to allow better thinking than those who hold the reins of information and school culture in our society – a far more collaborative effort from a society of less stressed parents, teachers and their administrators alike will see this possibility at a far higher level. Let me ask all, go and scrutinise any political party’s manifestos including the ruling party and make objective decisions that will get the latter’s socks pulled much higher because of the Competition. This is exactly what they need! Our government may be vehemently against welfarism but that doesn’t give them an excuse to dissipate our social nets for all too many who are suffering under Profit Capitalism! I am staunchly against this because we won’t even have a strong social net to hold the meritocratic, hard-striving culture that we have built up over the years up in the first place. I think that hard work is a virtue that needs to be encouraged, but not to the extent when the law of diminishing returns keeps setting in from a local populace increasingly disillusioned and most of all, over-worked by exploitative bosses we too often see these days!
(5) I agree with you that the PAP is imperfect and has made mistakes. No government in the world is perfect. I name the Japanese one as the closest one that has facilitated a society that encompasses all three aspects of what Dr GKS mentioned. Their only shortcoming is a socio-cultural one that translates into economic stagnation – they have a tendency to think the world revolves around them, that the world occurs in their context. Many locals from there even hold back from purchasing non-Japanese items when overseas. I experienced this first hand when I worked there. Their leaders own up to their mistakes and more impressively, step down when they’ve made mistakes in the course of their tenure. Compare that to our Prime Minister who has apologised publicly timed so eerily close to voting day on the behalf of his cabinet….whilst his minister subordinates played with their handphones during those same proceedings as he was speaking! It’s one thing to look at the PAP’s track record as a whole but let’s not lose objectivity by analyzing within those same years. Yes, we’ve come from being a third world country to being one of the world’s safest and most prosperous nations in just 45 years but tell me, which other government has also managed to do this without that same good collaborative team primarily responsible for it who were made to step down in about the mid 80s, with so much following high-handed incompetence from their successors with so little accountability and transparency? Our people’s, the progress of our nation is at stake. 40 years ago, many of us were still living in kampungs. Yes, be mindful of how far we have come, not simply assume that we are always a developed country. But more importantly we must always be more mindful of where we are heading, at all times.; imagine driving a car with one’s head facing backwards…! We can look around Southeast Asia where many countries have “democracy”, coups and mass protests that are anarchical and often reach nowhere in their populist approach. We are having it much better than them because we have stronger Rule of Law, but in spite of it, a poorer quality of life when it extends beyond over-worked materialism alone. We need a far better culture of Critical Thought than blind acceptance of MSM propaganda.
I hope that my re-analysis will serve as food for thought. Please have a think about the issues many of us have raised. It is not a matter of whether it is me or another who is blindly loyal to being anti-establishment or pro-PAP. It is a matter of noticing and realizing where all of us fall short, whether in this country or beyond, and having the courage to rectify the situation from carefully analyzing and moving forth from there in the right directions. Many of us speak facts evaluated in an objective context that extend far beyond 43 kilometres and are no less uninformed of how good our country’s situation is relative to many others. It is from objectively and constructively seeing and fixing the Bad of our nation/people’s situation that reflects our true stance. It is a position supports or disagrees objectively from point to point, constructively. We’ve done more than the same and hope you will too.
Wow, is that the best you can do? Doing a copy/paste job and plaigiarising my post with your own editing?
Anyway, the truth is now revealed. You are trying to deceive everyone with your ‘help the poor’ bullshit but trying to subtly plug your welfarist and socialist agenda. You are a closet communist, so why not just come clean with your true stand? Let’s have a classless society! Where everyone is paid the same regardless of their education level or occupation! Isn’t that what you want?
Oh and one more quesiton! Are you a SDP mole?
Wow again? Thanks, it wasn’t. Hahaha….Plagarise? I might as well say your use of the alphabet is a copy and paste of everybody else’s vocabulary! A point by point rebuttal that follows your prose (& (sic) high and mighty tone) and you counter it with your usual half-pass six manner instead of understanding the Content of what we’re putting across here. Of course, what do you expect ….this is Society! When did I ever mention I wanted a classless society. Even the communist Chinese wised up. My true stance is whether we combine the better attributes of other societies including the Japs, Norwegians, Finns etc, using a better sense of history and perspectives, to adapt-create a better workable social-governmental culture that more than anything else that I believe will bring us forward. Pragmatism with VISION and empathy is the means to moving our society forward without keeping our eyes transfixed on the speedometer per se and not realising we may be in many wrong lanes. Oh and one more statement: I’m not a mole from any political party. Please report that to your masters.
Please read this assessment by an MIT professor about Singapore and you’ll get what I mean: http://exchersonesusaurea.blogspot.com/2011/06/mit-professor-criticizes-singapore.html
The German Example
By DAVID LEONHARDT
The New York Times
7 June 2011
Germany has been a frequent cudgel in recent fights over the American economy. When Germany has grown faster than the United States, stimulus skeptics like to point across the Atlantic Ocean and say that austerity works. When it has grown more slowly, people who think the American stimulus made a big difference — including me — return the favor.
But the full story is more interesting than any caricature. In the last decade, Germany has succeeded in some important ways that the United States has not. The lessons aren’t simply liberal or conservative. They are both.
With our economy weakening once again — and with Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany visiting the White House this week — now seems to be a good time to take a closer look.
The brief story is that, despite its reputation for austerity, Germany has been far more willing than the United States to use the power of government to help its economy. Yet it has also been more ruthless about cutting wasteful parts of government.
The results are intriguing. After performing worse than the American economy for years, the Germany economy has grown faster since the middle of last decade. (It did better than our economy before the crisis and has endured the crisis about equally). Just as important, most Germans have fared much better than most Americans, because the bounty of their growth has not been concentrated among a small slice of the affluent.
Inflation-adjusted average hourly pay has risen almost 30 percent since 1985 in Germany, the kind of gains American workers have not enjoyed since the ’50s and ’60s. In this country, hourly pay has risen a scant 6 percent since 1985.
Germany also managed to avoid a housing bubble, unlike the United States, Britain, Ireland, Spain and other countries. German children have stronger math and science skills than ours. Its medium-term budget deficit is smaller. Its unemployment rate is like a mirror image of ours: 6.1 percent, well below where it was when the financial crisis began in 2007. Our rate has risen to 9.1 percent.
I’m not saying that the United States should want to become Germany. Americans remain considerably richer. We have the innovative companies — Wal-Mart, Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter — that make other countries swoon. We remain the world’s immigration Mecca.
Yet for all the strengths of the United States, almost nobody claims that the economy is in especially good shape. It so happens that our current out-of-town guests could teach us a few things.
•
The first lesson is that it’s really possible to make government more efficient. Like much of Western Europe, Germany long had a unemployment benefits system that discouraged work. But almost a decade ago, it began to make some changes.
It cut many benefits, in both duration and level, and it reduced the incentives to retire early. It also began trying to move the long-term unemployed into the labor force.
Specifically, the government took a fresh look at people who had not worked in years to determine who could and couldn’t work. The able and healthy were matched with potential employers. If they took a low-paying job, which was often the case, they would still receive a small portion of their benefits for a time. If they refused to work, their benefits were reduced anyway.
“The incentives to take up work were strengthened,” says Felix Hüfner of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, “and also the sanctions were strengthened.” Sure enough, the reforms have nudged more people back into the labor force — and work tends to beget more work, as people develop skills and have more money to spend.
In the United States, short-term jobless benefits are not generous enough to be a major problem. But the Social Security disability program, which is one reason nearly 20 percent of working-age American men are not working, would benefit from some German-like reforms. So would those public sector pensions that encourage people to retire at 55 or 60.
Beyond the job market, Germany has also made a big effort to improve its education system. Eric Hanushek, a Stanford University economist, notes that Germany’s performance on the main international math, reading and science tests have become such a matter of national concern that the name of the tests — Pisa — is now a household word. “In the U.S.,” he says, “Pisa is still a bell tower in Italy.”
The math scores of German students have risen significantly since 2000, extending their existing lead over American students. Germany’s national average is now higher than the average in Massachusetts, this country’s top-performing state. And there is obviously a connection between strong technical skills and a strong manufacturing sector.
But the German story is not merely about making government more efficient. It’s also about understanding the unique role that government must play in a market economy.
That role starts with serious regulation. American regulators stood idle as the housing bubble inflated. German banks often required a down payment of 40 percent.
Unlike what happened here, German laws and regulators have also prevented the decimation of their labor unions. The clout of German unions, at individual companies and in the political system, is one reason the middle class there has fared decently in recent decades. In fact, middle-class pay has risen at roughly the same rate as top incomes.
The top 1 percent of German households earns about 11 percent of all income, virtually unchanged relative to 1970, according to recent estimates. In the United States, the top 1 percent makes more than 20 percent of all income, up from 9 percent in 1970. That’s right: only 40 years ago, Germany was more unequal than this country.
Finally, there are taxes. Germany does not have a smaller budget deficit because it spends less. Germany, you’ll recall, is the original welfare state. It has a smaller deficit because it is more willing to match the benefits it wants with the needed taxes. The current deficit-reduction plan includes about 60 percent spending cuts and 40 percent tax increases, Mr. Hüfner says. It’s like trying to lose weight by both eating less and exercising more.
As I suggested before, the American economy’s strengths may still be greater than the German economy’s. But Germany sure does seem more serious about dealing with its weaknesses.
And us? Well, lobbyists for the mortgage bankers and the N.A.A.C.P. have recently started pushing for less stringent standards for down payments. Wall Street is trying to water down other financial regulation, too.
Some Democrats say Social Security and Medicare must remain unchanged. Most Republicans refuse to consider returning tax rates even to their 1990s levels. Republican leaders also want to make deep cuts in the sort of antipoverty programs that have helped Germany withstand the recession even in the absence of big new stimulus legislation.
There is no getting around the fact that financial crises wreak terrible damage. It’s too late for us to prevent that damage, and it will take a long time to recover fully. It is not too late to learn from our mistakes.
Have you tried to get a PMET job or even an entry level job in other countires? Good luck to you. Obviously, many other countries value their citizens more than our garmen, regardles of the citizen’s past, current or potential contribution to the motherland.
Just like in a family owned business, yes we can replace our own siblings and relatives with cheaper or better skilled labour if ours don’t meet the KPIs. However, this will damage or kill the relationship forever. Sometimes we need to be less calculative and more compassionate.
There is some truth that if we stop all businesses from hiring cheap or skilled foreign labour, many MNCs & even our SMEs may relocate to other countries. However, for those businesses that can’t move offshore, eg the service industry, we should require them to employ Singaporeans.
Many MNCs, GLCs and SMEs just want to maximise profit and report record breaking results year after year, so that the CEO and the VPs can reap a few months or years of bonus, and beat the others in the rat race up the corporate ladder. To them, employees are dispensable headcounts and overheads to be controled and minimised.
If we ban FTs from working in Singapore, not only will businesses relocate overseas, but Singaporean employers will also face real problems in finding the right kind of workers for the right kind of job. We are going to end up fitting square pegs into round holes. Do you think you can train a technician to become a teacher? Do you think you can train a taxi driver to become an engineer? It’s not as easy as you think. It is not a numbers game. You need to take into consideration qualitiative factors, not only quantitative factors.
Many Singaporeans are now jobless and are working as bookies, loanshark runners, MLM agents, “financial planners”, part-time property agents, or are “self employed”. Why is this the case? Could it be that they simply don’t have any skill sets to secure a proper job, or perhaps they are not willing to acquire those skill sets? There are two sides to the coin. The government can’t help those who refuse to help themselves.
Who’s talking about an Outright Ban? It’s whether we institutionalize a workable Labour system that doesn’t compromise our Social Fabric and more importantly filters out what doesn’t work for our own well-being as a people/society first before we can function as a society! We’re talking about Qualitative factors that are rooted in reexamining and tweaking the Educational and Familial aspects of our Society. A Society, whether we like it or not, has been pampered but likewise has never been allowed to walk on its own feet without the government grabbing us by our nostrils and pointing directions for 4 decades. A far more educated populace today has changed the equation. People do know and share information, and the understanding that follows, at an unprecedented rate this day and age. Pragmatism rules the day, but so does the law of diminishing “returns” in terms of the real cost of over-multitasking people to the point of fantastic profits for a small minority, whilst the majority of us just tag along, half-surviving with stagnant median wages -> We need to incentivize Employers with better employees whom I’ll bet will be far more productive when 1) working hours and conditions improve 2) employees who then would find their employers more willing to plough back profits into making/helping us be not only be better at what we can do but also expand what we can do! 3) More crucially, the family unit from poor to rich, would be more united and literally our Society would grow in number and far stronger with the Identity we’ve grew up with. Of course outright bans and overly strong Laws legislated to keep out foreigners will turn our society upside down when skills and jobs are mismatched everywhere. But eventually, in the short to medium-term and FOR the long-term it has to done in terms of limiting too many foreigners from jumping in for the economic pie, to protect our social fabric in a transparent way with proper criteria known to all. Let in too much aggregate demand via too many people from everywhere will tear us in every corner -> just take Public Housing suddenly made available for PR mass-purchase….it is little wonder that our people are screaming for affordable Public Housing when more richer folks from abroad (who easily outnumber the small number of us who called this island home first) pushed up prices into the stratosphere! You may say in a disinterested way that the government can’t help those who refuse to help themselves -> but don’t neglect how the whole EQUATION works. Our Existences are locked in 99 year Assets, an over-stressed educational system that simply pushes us like tuition cattle instead of teaching from young a love for learning and creative thinking (+the productivity and entrepreneurship that can follow). One that enforces compulsory community work simply for kids to get more CCA points or parents to have a better chance at Balloting for school places?? Having sufficient TIME is the critical factor here for both Singaporean adult and child. Time to interact less with the TV remote (after returning half-dead from a whole 12 hour workday these days), and more with our own community which include people from disadvantaged backgrounds or with whom we can Kallang-Roar again -> Identity and Empathy. Helping our own people get Skill-sets works from both the employers’ and employees’ point of view -> incentize the former with more productive workers whom I’ve seen first-hand can be if they had more time to live/breathe, and incentize the latter with growth of real income and the real tangible prospect of growing theirs and their children’s pie when they train amidst a far lower price index that comes with much lesser waves of FTs or PRs competing with their existence in housing and so many other areas of living a life here. It’s a matter of growing a GNP for our society that learns and re-learns a strong desire to be cohesive, not simply importing too many skilled PMETs who over-compete our middle class and lower class out of the picture for handsome GDP figures for a minority elite. i.e. you die your business? WE die, OUR Business & more!
Nani, as usual you are causing offence with your same old elitist mindset. Need I expose your background and your shameless self-gratification for all to see? Need I tell everyone how you shamelessly bragged about being from ACS(I) and laughed at all those who weren’t from elite schools? And how you showboated about your $25k monthly pay and your BMW? And how you sneered at ordinary working folks and called them digits? You need to develop more empathy for those who aren’t as fortunate. I suggest that you do some volunteer work in an old folks’ home. Alternatively just take a walk around the 1-room flats in Tanglin Halt. Then you will see what Singapore is really like.
@Flaming Fox: Don’t worry. Not all ACS(I) old boys are like Nani. I was from the first batch in 1992. And ironically, I am in Management as well. Empathy comes from Conscience and a willingness, and ultimately a decision and commitment to consistently see Faces and people’s living situation amidst figures instead of profit figures per se. As you mentioned, experiencing estates like Redhill and Tanglin Halt will really bring many of our people up to speed with communities where low Income and Time has stood still in a self-perpetuating vicious cycle. The painful truth is these estates are a stone’s throw away from luxurious places like Nassim Road and Distinct 9! It is whether we choose to see the full picture of Singapore, who’s riding on whom, who’s here, who’s really experiencing what. Pampered or otherwise, mindsets are ultimately a choice. Mindsets can change with the need to adapt to living or working environments, but more critically, with conscience. One’s Living Environment however can’t change anywhere as quickly when Incomes are stagnant, even if mindsets have changed. Empathy grows when we notice or help out at low-wage estates, not when time is spent at Country Clubs or Gyms week in and week out without taking a choice to peer outside ivory walls. The Best is Yet to Be.
@Economic Reality:
Isn’t it a chilling thought to know that Nani could have been one of your school mates or seniors/juniors? And that people can be so sheltered, to the point that they live in an elite bubble and actually think that this reflects reality? Unfortunately, many Singaporeans from elite backgrounds suffer from this clouded vision.
I am glad that even though you have an elite background, you are aware of the issues facing the “commoners” and can empathise.
@Flaming Fox: Most of my schoolmates in my time were and are HDB-dwelling normal folk like you and me. It was a school culture where the minority haughty elite were humbled by the average joe and the average joe were motivated by a desire to outdo the elite and often did. We basically grew up together from primary school all the way up to A levels. The issues which face our people today are common ultimately when we empathise. I guess that comes whether me, you or anyone chooses to share in another person’s existence/background or not. A choice to care from and for another’s point of view and life.
Don’t just blame the FTs. Singaporeans had the opportunity to vote for change but 60.1% of them chose to carry on with the status quo. People who can’t think for themselves don’t deserve any pity.
Another problem which no one has addressed so far is the issue of FT managers filling their department with their own countrymen. This is happening in MANY companies around Singapore. Ever since my boss hired an Indian HR manager, he has hired at least 4 Indians within just 1 month. They stick to themselves and don’t mingle with the rest of the local staff. This makes things difficult for open communication within the company. Even the HR manager himself does not socialise with us. Every single day, during lunch time, the 5 of them go out together and not ONCE have they initiated any kind of contact with us. It’s not as though they can’t speak English or what. They are simply not interested in integrating. Is this kind of culture good for productivity and growth?
“a need to type two lengthy replies (in duplicate form) when one is good enough?” -> HAHAHA yes, for you. Especially for you. I make mistakes for Mistaken people. More importantly, like Cavalry141 states, for Transparency. Such as “NON-European” for “East European”. In Singapore I was referring specifically to the Skilled PMETs in general. As you mentioned: “Unskilled workers are here because they do jobs that Singaporeans don’t want to do. They come here on contract terms. After 1 or 2 years, they have to go back home. So you need to take them out of the equation. PMETs are different. They are the ones who add value by taking on higher skilled jobs. There is already an S-pass/EP system to ensure that only those who qualify will be allowed in.” -> just ask yourself 2 simple questions 1) To a Business Owner, does adding their value add so much Revenue or simply (in our case) lowering Salaries/Costs worth our societal fabric, our society’s expense? Just see the Thousands who migrate every year. 2) The sheer avalanche of PMET foreigners we’re having now in just the past 5 years competing against our (already one of the most globally over-worked) people, how many are faking their credentials to be allowed in &/or are truly competent for work that experienced skilled Locals can do if more division of labour and subsidised training from companies are present? Read: TRANSPARENCY & SOCIETAL EXPENSE. Present your myth to a MBA trained taxi driver who still has a flat to pay off or children with university bills and see how many teeth you lose Nani.
Please stop exaggarating. If you claim that MBA graduates are forced to become taxi drivers, show some proof. I’d like to see exactly how many % of taxi drivers are MBA holders. There may be 5 or 10 such people in Singapore but certainly not a high percentage.
With regards to your point about PMETs and lower wage costs, just note that lower costs means higher profit margins. It’s an easy equation to figure out. In addition to that, some employers prefer FTs because
1) they are willing to work longer hours
2) they come here with no baggage, they just want to earn money to support their families back home
3) they are more flexible than Singaporeans
4) they are less pampered than Singaporeans who all want cushy office jobs.
Pay is not the only equation, mindsets are part of it too.
To illustrate my point, just answer the following question. If you were offered $3,000 a month to be a construction worker, working 10-12 hours a day under the hot sun, would you do it? How many Singaporeans do you know (including non degree holders) who would do it? They would prefer to take $1,500 a month to work as a clerk in an air-conditioned office and do the bare minimum, surfing the internet and going on Facebook during office hours.
Nani, noticing Trends helps before you choose to notice them from your haughty eyes. Show some proof? Just take more Taxis in your S-class lifetime in recent times and you’d get reality staring back in your face in numbers that far exceed your microscopic so-called figures!!! I’m referring to the sheer trends that have surfaced dramatically in the past 10 years. Of course, who wouldn’t want more productive, cheaper Labour if you’re running a private enterprise which is obviously run for Profit? Greed runs and has always run the equation. But notice how here in Singapore, many companies, SMEs and MNCs, have taken to retrenching tons of middle-aged or younger locals for FTs or cheaper fresh grads from literally, anywhere. My dad and several of his colleagues in a Dutch F&B MNC were simply “removed” for being above 50 years of age…! i.e. Age & Nationality Discrimination. As were several people in various other industries such as the Electronics and even the Teaching sector where they’re outsourcing and bringing in cheaper FT en masse. I’m not saying we locals aren’t pampered or not spoilt in our employment outlook. Who doesn’t want a comfy EXISTENCE, any Human being -> that includes me, you and the air-conditioned istana inhabitants. There’s two sides to the coin. Who doesn’t want to provide wealth in a comfortable manner to loved ones if you can from/on here or foreign shores? But we, Singapore are too small in our socio-economic infrastructure to support FTs at the expense of our SOCIAL FABRIC where foreigners already exceed more than 1 in 3 people (40.1%; 2010) !!! Maybe we do can be more flexible as far as salaries go, BILLS won’t be. And to answer your question: I WOULD. Many Singaporeans who catch news of this job prospect and haven’t found employment for the medium term, would, degree or non-degree holders. It would be good money for the Bills that still knock unsympathetically at our doors every month and good training for the annual IPPT that office ladies don’t go through…! Just read this article (though American) summs up what we are all going through globally and what aspects we need to urgently address: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/05/americas_vanishing_middle_clas.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+harvardbusiness+%28HBR.org%29
Unfortunately, you are living in cloud-cuckoo land and have no grasp on the reality on the ground. I can tell you that MOST Singaporeans are choosy, picky and pampered. They would not be willing to accept a construction worker job even if they were paid $3,000 a month. Even if they are employed as an office manager for $3,000 a month they will try to do the bare minimum instead of constantly upgrade themselves. Take maximum amount of time for lunch breaks and leave office as early as possible. How do I know? I have been in the management line for more than 12 years and I can tell you first-hand that employees these days are very different from 12 years ago. Nowadays, people want to “eat snake” and need to be given constant micromanagement and pressure in order for them to produce results. Everyone (especially uni grads) has an inflated opinion of their own self worth and often feel that jobs are beneath them. That is why employers are exasperated and that is why all HR professionals and managers are having a real problem finding talented staff. Note that by “talented” I don’t mean “qualified”, in the real world paper qualifications count for nothing compared to attitude and mindset. Young Singaporeans these days (those aged 35 and below) lack the hunger and drive. They all think that they are ENTITLED to career advancement, even though they are not prepared to SLOG for it like we had to in the past!
Then please read my original post if your pampered eyes can take it. LOL, you didn’t even understand the point I brought up. Just take more Taxis these days and you’ll experience it first hand, alongside MNCs who are all downsizing or relocating. Scores of educated middle-aged men are being removed from their jobs simply because Foreigners or/& fresh grads are cheaper. My own dad alongside close to 20 of his experienced sales team at a Dutch F&B MNC were all removed + simply given the “reason” that it was because they were above 50 years of age! Same with at least 5 friends of my age who were doing okay as Engineers and suddenly replaced with Indian FTs who were cheaper! Try adapting your Mindset when your pocket’s emptying with every passing month no matter what you try, with a government who thinks corporate and has no accountability vis a vis taxpayer dollars lost in the billions. To answer your question: I WOULD. As would several Locals who are currently still being pushed to the economic brink. Especially when Housing and various other Bills are unsympathetically knocking on our doors every month. It would be good for our health and good training for annual IPPTs that air-con office ladies don’t go through. Just read this following article and recognise the parallels with us. Esp. about how Business-owners are exploiting the middle class and its ramifications. http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/05/americas_vanishing_middle_clas.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+harvardbusiness+%28HBR.org%29
Read my original post and this article and you’d (probably) understand: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/05/americas_vanishing_middle_clas.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+harvardbusiness+%28HBR.org%29
By the way, I was not referring to ALL Singaporeans. Of course, the majority of Singaporeans are intelligent, resourceful and hard working. That is why they have risen to managerial positions. I am referring to the stragglers. The bottom 20-25% who refuse to upgrade themselves, thinking that they are owed a living. Shocking as it may seem, some managers/supervisors have such mindsets too. The real talents need not fear competition from foreigners or otherwise. They know that they will always be in demand.
Meanwhile, companies need qualified staff. Not just paper qualified, but responsible staff who are productive. If you are a MBA holder but you have a screwed up attitude of “doing the bare minimum to not get fired” and just want to “wayang”, then you are a good for nothing and no one will want you.
If companies are filled with such people, sooner or later they will be finished. That is why employers are faced with a real shortage of talent right now. Go talk to anyone who is working in HR and you’ll see what I mean. If our country does not make things attractive for companies and employers, sooner or later they will close down and move elsewhere. That will result in unemployment. Precisely what is going on in Europe now.
Nani, I think that your comments on Singaporean employees may be a little far-fetched, but I see what you are saying. It is definitely true that *some* local job applicants are very obviously looking for only cushy jobs with high pay. Kids these days just can’t take hardship. I do sympathize with employers and I can see why doing away with the FT policy would be disastrous. But perhaps the government could do more to explain the need for FTs to the general population. Many people are just worried about sheer numbers, but like you said, alot of the foreign workers are just here on a short-term basis as they belong to the unskilled labour category. Thus, they don’t really compete with Singaporeans for jobs.
@Economic Reality:
Just to weigh in on the issue of upgrading for local workers. There are already programs that are in place, run by WDA and e2i. I work for a CDC and I often advise unemployed elderly residents to go through those channels. The courses are usually 95% subsidised and take only a short time to complete. But the reality on the ground is that many of these workers have very limiting mindsets. They are not always willing to attend the courses even if they require no financial outlay. More must be done to help change their mindset because IMHO this is the number one factor that’s holding them back.
Just my own two cents.
@pilotproject: I salute what you’ve been trying to do. Of course many elderly residents want to hold back from training ….they’ve been working their whole lives and obviously want to enjoy the fruits of their labour or at least a situation where they can enjoy their golden years. Practical reality of course doesn’t allow for that today especially when so many people still have to service their housing loans and other financial burdens like an ever rising cost of living. I just hope a far better equation can be found than the situation which is bankrupting Europe now, or at least a quality of life that is far less stressful/crowded from what we’ve experienced from paying and paying…
I don’t see why we can’t implement a points-based system to assess those who wish to apply for SP/EP? That is in essence the same thing that is being used in the US green card system. It is also being practiced by Canada and Australia. Right now, there seems to be no “black and white” criteria for approval. It seems like the MOM will just approve you if they feel like it. There should be a proper criteria that is made known to all. This is called transparency.
@Nani: Realise the reality that you (as usual) have avoided. The whole equation of Singaporeans’ Existence has been screwed big time ever since we’ve continued depending on a productivity model that is more sweat than smart since the 80s. From an educational system that forces one to conform to one political party’s societal monopoly and myopic mindset of MNC rather than to instill a love for learning or daring, we’ve never had a strong spirit of Entrepreneurship, resulting in all too many SMEs today who don’t have the liquidity to attract much less expand. Skills aligned with Market Needs? Who can have afford to have their skills up to date on the spot, when practically most of it is tied up in artificially inflated 30 year Mortgages for supposed (99-year) “assets” that conveniently “disappear” after 2 generations of your own children’s own lives. Of course an outright ban in too short a time frame would backfire. Like you mentioned, “Foreign talents are needed in order to keep our economy competitive and robust.” Certainly, we need to keep up with the fast paced world but what’s the point when how we get there if our Social Fabric can’t hold together?!! A Balance between our own people’s interests and the imported labour we use to help support our (and give us) productivity, has to be struck and adapted with time i.e. legislate a policy that doesn’t encourage removal of the Middle PMETs just because someone else is cheaper per se. It is self-destruction of our own middle class if we continue deteriorating down a path that instead sees 60% non-locals and 40% locals. The middle class that holds us together, the very sustenance of our existence as Singaporeans. By your flawed reasoning and capitalistic rationale, we don’t need Locals for our own Society’s profit margin!! ASK YOURSELF: WHY DID THE U.S. IMPLEMENT THE GREEN CARD SYSTEM? WHY DID THE U.K., GERMANY, etc HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE SYSTEMS TO HOLD BACK HORDES OF CHEAPER LABOUR FROM EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES? AS DID AUSTRALIA. Mr Gilbert Goh as least tried helping our own people before and after the elections, no less via the help of volunteers, not via salaried members of the P.Association. He is not furthering a political agenda per se. Before you point the finger, just simply notice that even Local MNCs have to fight tooth and nail with the likes of S.Technologies in almost every sector. Sectors that include those who even manufacture your Door Knob. Open the door to your closed mind and see the bigger picture before walking into the door once again.
Is there a need to type two lengthy replies (in duplicate form) when one is good enough?
Anyway, you are quite wrong about the UK and Germany. Under current EU rules, Eastern Europeans from EU member states such as Poland, Bulgaria and so on are allowed to work freely in any EU country without applying for a work permit. As for the US green card system, I am not against it. But you need to differentiate between PMETs and foreign workers who are unskilled. Unskilled workers are here because they do jobs that Singaporeans don’t want to do. They come here on contract terms. After 1 or 2 years, they have to go back home. So you need to take them out of the equation. PMETs are different. They are the ones who add value by taking on higher skilled jobs. There is already an S-pass/EP system to ensure that only those who qualify will be allowed in. We will never reach a state where it is 60% foreigners and 40% locals. This is a myth propagated by paranoid fear-mongers. It will never happen. If you are referring to the 900,000 workers that LKY said were needed, he was talking about foreign workers (unskilled workers) not PMETs.
As far as PMETs are concerned, it’s more like 80% locals and 20% foreigners. So please don’t confuse the different types of workers and stop sensationalising things.
Stop stupidifying them first.
Having a Singaporeans First policy will have disastrous results. It will mean that business owners will have to incur much higher labour costs, and in addition, they could find it harder to recruit people. There was a report a few weeks ago about 60% of SME employers finding it hard to recruit people as Singaporeans are often choosy and picky, not to mention their skills are not aligned with market needs.
Foreign talents are needed in order to keep our economy competitive and robust. Ban them altogether, and alot of companies will find it difficult. The worst case is that they will go out of business, in turn leading to unemployment. Singaporeans need to consider the wider implications and not just blindly get sucked into a populist movement like this. Do you think that this Gilbert Goh (who?) has no vested interest in doing this? It is clear that he is trying to win votes and score political points.
@Nani: Realise the reality that you (as usual) have avoided. The whole equation of Singaporeans’ Existence has been screwed big time ever since we’ve continued depending on a productivity model that is more sweat than smart since the 80s. From an educational system that forces one to conform to one political party’s societal monopoly and myopic mindset of MNC dependency rather than to instill a love for learning or Daring to go beyond our boundaries, we’ve never had a strong spirit of Entrepreneurship, resulting in all too many SMEs today who don’t have the liquidity to attract, much less expand their talent pool. Skills aligned with Market Needs? Who can have afford to have their skills up to date on the spot, when practically most of it is tied up in artificially inflated 30 year Mortgages for supposed (99-year) “assets” that conveniently “disappear” after 2 generations of your own children’s own lives? Of course an outright ban in too short a time frame would backfire. Like you mentioned, “Foreign talents are needed in order to keep our economy competitive and robust.” Certainly, we need to keep up with the fast paced world but what’s the point when how we get there if our Social Fabric can’t hold together as Aggregate Demand & Inflationary pressures blow the roof?! A Balance between our own people’s interests and the imported labour we use to help support our (and give us) productivity, has to be struck and adapted with time i.e. legislate a policy that doesn’t encourage removal of the Middle PMETs just because someone else is cheaper per se. It is self-destruction of our own middle class if we continue deteriorating down a path that instead sees 60% non-locals and 40% locals. The middle class that holds us together, the very sustenance of our existence as Singaporeans. By your flawed reasoning and capitalistic rationale, we don’t need Locals for our own Society’s profit margin!! ASK YOURSELF: WHY DID THE U.S. IMPLEMENT THE GREEN CARD SYSTEM? WHY DID THE U.K., GERMANY, etc HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE SYSTEMS TO HOLD BACK HORDES OF CHEAPER LABOUR FROM EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES? AS DID AUSTRALIA? Mr Gilbert Goh as least tried helping our own people before and after the elections, no less via the help of volunteers, not via salaried members of the P.Association. He is not furthering a political agenda per se. Before you point the finger, just simply notice that even Local MNCs have to fight tooth and nail with the likes of S.Technologies in almost every sector. Sectors that include those who even manufacture your Door Knob. Open the door to your closed mind and see the bigger picture before walking into the door once again.