Mr Speaker, sir,
Thank you for allowing me to join this debate.
I support our President in advocating an inclusive approach in discussing Singapore’s future. While we can pride ourselves with having a safe, secure and prosperous Singapore, we cannot ignore the fact that there is still a large segment of our fellow Singaporeans earning low wages. Based on 2011 WIS recipients, it is estimated that we have more than 400,000 workers earning a salary below $1700.
I have met many low wage workers through my work with the NTUC, and at Meet-the-People sessions. There are employers that take advantage of their vulnerable position. For example, for many cleaners, not only do they earn low salaries, a major component of it will be in the form of reimbursements such as transport, laundry or mobile allowances that do not attract CPF payments or included in overtime work calculation. Many struggle to meet the basic needs of their family members, may not have high job security, and may be afraid to speak up for their rights as they may feel worried about losing their jobs, especially if they are older workers. Rising costs have made their daily struggles even harder. Although the Singapore economy has performed well last year, overall, there is an increasing wealth divide.
We have done much to improve the life of our low wage workers. Several Members of Parliament have made several suggestions on what could be done to help needy families or low wage workers. I fully support their suggestions. While I acknowledge that a lot has been done to help low wage-workers, we can still do more.
Recently, it was reported in the papers that real income growth for low wage workers for the past 10 years has been flat.
Sir, I would like to urge the government to ensure that the push to increase real wages by 30% in the next 10 years will be felt by low wage workers as they are the ones who are most in need of higher salaries. In fact, NTUC would like to suggest revising the target for low wage workers’ salaries to increase in real terms by 50% in the next decade so that there will be an even greater impact on these workers.
Last Monday, NTUC together with our tripartite partners reviewed and discussed our efforts to help low wage workers. NTUC has been championing the Workfare Income Supplement, Workfare Training Scheme, and Inclusive Growth Programme and encouraging companies to embark on `Best Sourcing’ instead of `Cheap Sourcing’. We do have many success stories to show how these schemes helped boost productivity and led to wage increases for low-wage workers and NTUC fully support such initiatives. Personally, I have two doubts. First, are the salary increments given to these more productive workers equivalent to the productivity gains? Second, is the impact from NTUC’s effort alone systemic enough to make a real difference to the 400 000 low wage workers out there?
Sir, as a labour MP, I would like to urge that the drive towards achieving sustained real wage growth for low wage workers be a Key Performance Indicator for every Ministry, government agency, statutory board and social enterprise. We must do this as a shared national initiative to help our fellow Singaporeans. We cannot afford to have any Ministry or organization to take a lackadaisical / `bo-chup’ attitude in ensuring better wages and better working conditions for their workers.
Sir, for a start, every ministry and government-related organization must take ownership of the Inclusive Growth Programme. NTUC has been driving the Inclusive Growth Programme, or IGP, to help companies boost their productivity and share the productivity gains with the low wage workers but, there is an urgent need for this Programme to be ramped up quickly for a greater systemic impact. Unless, government agencies take the lead in implementing IGP, we may not realize the full impact of IGP.
In my conversation with union leaders on the plight of low wage workers, many have lamented that the strategy of outsourcing manual or blue collar jobs in many organizations, including government bodies, has partly contributed to the current situation of depressed wages for these workers.
While outsourcing has many benefits – such as saving operational costs, keeping companies economically nimble and allowing them to focus on their core businesses, it has its drawbacks too. Competition amongst service providers inadvertently leads to cost-cutting and this manifests itself in the form of low salaries for their workers. To make matters worse, contractual obligation spanning over few years at fixed contract price means that the salary of these low wage workers will stagnate. Sir, we should ask ourselves this question, it is morally justifiable to save cost through outsourcing at the expense of workers’ salary?
Sir, I would like our Government Ministries and Statutory Boards to re-look at the strategy of outsourcing jobs that are needed on a daily basis. I recall when I was a child; my father was a civil servant as he worked as a daily rated worker with the PWD. As a result, my whole family had medical benefits that covered public clinic consultations. We did not have a lot of comforts but our basic needs were met. I wish this can be the case for all low wage workers working in government bodies to be direct employees so that they are protected from the bluntness of the economic system.
Sir, having these workers as direct employees will lead to higher expenditures for ministries and public institutions, and this seems to go against the principle of exercising prudence in spending public funds. However, we should ask ourselves even if we can quantify the savings made from outsourcing, what is the social cost to it? If we spend more of public funds on having low wage workers as direct employees of the public sector, while ensuring that they have higher salaries and better benefits, would it not translate to looking after the needs and welfare of Singapore workers? Moreover, having workers as direct employees will increase a worker’s sense of belonging to the public service and they will feel that the government is taking care of their interests.
Sir, if employing these low-wage workers as direct employees is not viable for whatever reasons, I would propose then for ministries, and government bodies to practice “Best Sourcing” according to its rationale and intent. Based on our sense on the ground, there will be less resistance from the ministries if Ministry of Finance reviews the financial compliance guidelines in the Government’s Instruction Manual to be more explicitly in supporting `Best Sourcing’. NTUC, as the champion for workers, is willing to work with the MOF on this and work with other Ministries on its implementation.
Sir, `Best Sourcing’ is not new to NTUC which has been actively championing Best Sourcing as an initiative to help low wage workers earn better salaries and employment terms. This year, the Tripartite Committee on Low-Wage Workers will be pushing for companies to practice `Best Sourcing’ so that the basic rights of low wage workers are protected and they receive fair wages. I support this call and would like to suggest that MOM and NTUC work on a list of good service providers that give fair wages and employment terms to their workers. Ministries and public institutions should then consider only tenders put up by these companies recognized by the unions. Again, NTUC is willing to work with any Ministry to ensure that the workers are being paid a fair salary
Sir, earlier I shared that the nature of the contractual obligation between some Ministries and the service providers will make it difficult for low wage workers to get salary increases annually. Let me give an example, currently a Ministry has a cleaning contract with a term of 3 years plus 3 years of extension and the contract price remains throughout. Workers under this contract will typically have stagnant wages for six years. This is totally unacceptable. I would like to encourage ministries to relook their existing contract with service providers to enable that these workers to enjoy wage increments instead of earning the same salary for the duration of the fixed price contract. This is something that must be done if the government is serious in helping low wage workers earn sustainable real wage increases of 30% (or it is 50%) in 10 years.
If all these measures do not sufficiently address the issue, then we might have to think about introducing a law to make service buyers legally accountable for the welfare of these workers.
