All incoming taps must be recalibrated to regulate the flow of talent and foreign workers and the control of the SPass is one of those taps. It is a sensible and reasonable move considering that the aggregate job supply will contract with massive job losses especially in the categories of PMETs.
The next 2 quarters of 2009 may see one of our steepest job losses and the possible retrenchment of more PMETs who are better qualified and skilled, will add to the upward momentum of unemployment. SPass was initially mooted in an era of boom where qualified technicians and workers are in shortages and this category of workers are the sandwiched layer between those holding Employment Pass (EP) and Work Permit (WP). The scheme provided great hiring impetus as Singapore was growing and we need all the skilled human resources to compensate for our lack of it in Singapore. They are mostly skilled in the technical areas like in the constructions, manufacturing and offshore and marine industries. The service industry also has its fair proportion of SPass workers over the last 2 years.
1. Raising the bar and entry requirements for new incoming SPass workers inevitable will tightened the tap and unless the employers can show cause that the skills needed are exceptional and lacking within our pool of, increasingly large, jobless Singaporeans, then those foreigners who now enter into our job markets must have those needed skills. Those SPass applicants in the service industry will likely be hardest hit as these jobs are easily replaceable by Singaporeans with training if needed. The learning curve for such skills like sales, marketing, retail merchandizing or even administrative and accounting functions are not as steep as those in the technical areas like safety supervisors, construction foreman or commissioning superintendant where specific technical qualifications are needed.
The employers can pay Singaporean $1800 to do the same job and still enjoy the Jobs Credit from the government. For those skills like customer service or those in the hospitality areas, the jobless Singaporeans especially the PMETs can easier pick up the training subsidy and be trained for the new jobs. In short, SPass workers for the service industry are likely to be screened tighter and the window for them will be smaller so long as the jobs are considered replaceable by Singaporeans.
2. We deal with the hard industries like offshore and marine and manufacturing and these are where specific technical skills are required and where SPass workers are most needed.
3. Experienced die and mold makers, autocad designers, R&D engineers, commissioning foreman and superintendant, safety engineers and other technical positions are not easily replaceable and if the skills have steeper and longer learning curves, it is unlikely that the unemployed PMETs can easily fit into the profile. The job market is already under extreme duress and across most sectors from manufacturing, offshore and marine to construction and the supply of jobs are unlikely to grow to give more employment to the jobless Singaporeans. Apart from skill-based needs for SPass requirements, employers used to have problems hiring Singaporeans for jobs requiring irregular working hours with split and shift works. This "attitude-based" aversion to such jobs in the retail and customer service, hospitality and healthcare can be shifted with the power of hunger to have a change of hearts. With ample training opportunities and the re-structuring of work contents, these jobs may power up the next leg of our economic restructuring which is the service sector.
There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis and the SPass flow regulation is one of the many ways for MOM to preserve more replaceable jobs for Singaporeans. It is inexcusable and irresponsible for employers to get foreigners in if unemployed Singaporeans, especially the PMETs who are capable for the jobs and may be willing to take a lower pay, be denied the opportunities. I think the issue is about attitude on both sides of the equation. The employer attitudes which must be a willing employer and for as long as any jobless Singaporeans can perform the role, notwithstanding his last job position or experience or even pay. The jobless Singaporeans', especially the PMETs, attitudes must be to pare down expectations with a view to gain new experience. If the equation can balanced off, our employment situation in Singapore cannot be worse off.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Enough Help?
Close to $91 billion loss for the combined investments of Temasek/ GIC is frightening. Is that about almost 4 times of what the total Budget proffered to Singapore to help lift us up from the dire economic situation.
Are they sunk and not recoverable? Those assets, including shares in UBS are deeply under-water to be meaningful. Our investment in ABC Learning from Australia went belly-up. Most assets classes, of all types from property to shares to all derivative instruments are steeply discounted. Whether actualized losses or paper losses, they are still huge losses, by any measures and no matter who is counting, it is still painful.
Grappling with today's economic woes is quite slippery. I read the Wall Street Journals and together with the broad mix of periodicals, I get the feel that even major governments from Aso, Brown to Obama are experimenting different prescriptions to see if they can lift the monumental weight of today's crisis. I do not get any sense of confidence or relief because the more I read, the more fearful I become. Our government, notwithstanding, is trying to figure a way out of it. In the same vein, I believe the senior executives of Temasek and GIC are planning different scenarios to recalibrate those loss investments and to park them in defensive investments and at appropriate time to grow them again. It may be painful but it has not run aground like in Iceland where the entire country economy bankrupted. Look around - Malaysia, Thailand, Korea, Japan or Indonesia.
Are we doing better than the rest? I think we are. Most of those Asian countries are looking at us to see how we are coping and emulating certain policies.
The Great Depression of 2009 is really beyond you and me. As far as we are concerned, we have to live each day seeing how the marco-level events pan out and to see how it will affect us and our competitiveness.
For those needing help at MPS, help will be rendered to make sure that Singaporeans are not left without food, without opportunity for a job, without access to medical care. I have seen old parents being abandoned by children who turned up at MPS for help. These are the pockets of Singaporeans where outreach must be swift and quick. I saw tears in resident who was worried sick because he could not pay up the medical bills with chase letters. We seeked for deferment and at the same time to apply for social assistance. I saw residents who skipped their mortgage payment because they have lost jobs. We asked for deferment of the mortgage. We saw some parents, children in toll come to MPS for help because their father were imprisoned, sicked or jobless and there were little food left. These are local issues we deal with every week to ensure that residents like these received help. They are not forgotten.
For those who do not come to MPS, we go to them through house visits.
Those of us who can commit time, notwithstanding the political platform, can do the same. I have deep admiration for Chiam See Tong who win unwavering support from his constituents despite the many allures from PAP and this just shows proof that his single minded dedication pays off. It is not about upgrading, it is not about resources, it is really about the care he gives and attention given to his constituents. His MPS at the void deck is sparse but work still get done. Quietly and it works. Chiam See Tong is not verbose, full of high ideals on democracy or what is democracy but he worked the ground, grinding away faithfully solving local concerns.
I think this should be the way for opposition to win the hearts and minds of the electorate - genuine care for local issues. They may be small - neighbour quarrels, dirty corridors or an application for a bursary. It is gruelling work as it means going doors after doors, knowing the people and getting help to them.
以民同行。
Are they sunk and not recoverable? Those assets, including shares in UBS are deeply under-water to be meaningful. Our investment in ABC Learning from Australia went belly-up. Most assets classes, of all types from property to shares to all derivative instruments are steeply discounted. Whether actualized losses or paper losses, they are still huge losses, by any measures and no matter who is counting, it is still painful.
Grappling with today's economic woes is quite slippery. I read the Wall Street Journals and together with the broad mix of periodicals, I get the feel that even major governments from Aso, Brown to Obama are experimenting different prescriptions to see if they can lift the monumental weight of today's crisis. I do not get any sense of confidence or relief because the more I read, the more fearful I become. Our government, notwithstanding, is trying to figure a way out of it. In the same vein, I believe the senior executives of Temasek and GIC are planning different scenarios to recalibrate those loss investments and to park them in defensive investments and at appropriate time to grow them again. It may be painful but it has not run aground like in Iceland where the entire country economy bankrupted. Look around - Malaysia, Thailand, Korea, Japan or Indonesia.
Are we doing better than the rest? I think we are. Most of those Asian countries are looking at us to see how we are coping and emulating certain policies.
The Great Depression of 2009 is really beyond you and me. As far as we are concerned, we have to live each day seeing how the marco-level events pan out and to see how it will affect us and our competitiveness.
For those needing help at MPS, help will be rendered to make sure that Singaporeans are not left without food, without opportunity for a job, without access to medical care. I have seen old parents being abandoned by children who turned up at MPS for help. These are the pockets of Singaporeans where outreach must be swift and quick. I saw tears in resident who was worried sick because he could not pay up the medical bills with chase letters. We seeked for deferment and at the same time to apply for social assistance. I saw residents who skipped their mortgage payment because they have lost jobs. We asked for deferment of the mortgage. We saw some parents, children in toll come to MPS for help because their father were imprisoned, sicked or jobless and there were little food left. These are local issues we deal with every week to ensure that residents like these received help. They are not forgotten.
For those who do not come to MPS, we go to them through house visits.
Those of us who can commit time, notwithstanding the political platform, can do the same. I have deep admiration for Chiam See Tong who win unwavering support from his constituents despite the many allures from PAP and this just shows proof that his single minded dedication pays off. It is not about upgrading, it is not about resources, it is really about the care he gives and attention given to his constituents. His MPS at the void deck is sparse but work still get done. Quietly and it works. Chiam See Tong is not verbose, full of high ideals on democracy or what is democracy but he worked the ground, grinding away faithfully solving local concerns.
I think this should be the way for opposition to win the hearts and minds of the electorate - genuine care for local issues. They may be small - neighbour quarrels, dirty corridors or an application for a bursary. It is gruelling work as it means going doors after doors, knowing the people and getting help to them.
以民同行。
My loyalty is first and foremost, to the people of Singapore. It has always been so, and will always remain so
I was in Nanjing for a long time this February for business and in one of our conversations with my colleagues I was asking about 岳飞 of the later Song period. 北宋末年，深受民族压迫的汉族、契丹族、渤海、奚等各族人民，"仇怨金国，深入骨髓"，纷纷自动组织起来反抗。The Hans were persecuted by the minority tribes and they were deeply sore with hatred. All his life, he was fighting for a single cause 精忠报国 - to serve his country with single-minded dedication and to unify his country. 收复故土，统一祖国的强烈愿望和要求。
He was willing to lay his life down for his country much to the admiration of the latter generations - not what he did then because he defied the emperor's edict to return from the battleground and insisted on fighting the enemy pushing them near defeat. Many distanced themselves from this apparently recacitrant general and some called for his execution because of his defiant. 诏书下了三次，岳飞都加以拒绝，不受开府仪同三司(一品官衔)的爵赏和三千五百户食邑的封赐。他在辞谢中，痛切地表示反对议和："今日之事，可危而不可安，可忧而不可贺。"并再次表示收复中原的决心，"愿定谋于全胜，期收地于两河，唾手燕云，终欲复仇而报国。"这无异于给宋高宗当头泼了冷水，从而更使赵构、秦桧怀恨在心。"但岳飞不顾个人得失，坚持抗战到底的立场，率领军队，联络北方义军，卓有成效地从事抗金战争，筹划收复中原、统一祖国，成为全国抗金民族战争中的有力支柱。
Our past President Ong's words: "My loyalty is first and foremost, to the people of Singapore. It has always been so, and will always remain so." warms my heart and he'll be judged on his merits, contributions, dedications and loyalty to Singapore. Many of us, I believe, share my sentiments.
I mused at the political dancing by opposition parties of all hues and colors. So much posturings like wearing kangaroo T-shirts and decrying the lack of democracy. I wonder who they truly represent? I am not sure if they have an inking of the type of democracy or the kind of country they wish they will want to live in? If the opposition takes a more people-centric approach like Low Thia Kiang and Chiam See Tong who truly walk their grounds and know the constituents, PAP will have a hard contest since it is the battling with the hearts and minds with genuine care and love for the people. Hearing Sylvia, I am convinced she is mostly logical and a Singapore-loving person as I am. Having said that, as in all political powers, the incumbent will ensure its survival and mindshare sustainability with the electorate and will work itself against all opposing forces. Then the challenge to the opposition really will be - win us if you can.
Whatever the outcome or the slate the opposition may wish to put up, it must always be done for the love of the people and 岳飞 steadfast loyalty and dedication to his country is admirable.
精忠报国的精神， 以民同行。
He was willing to lay his life down for his country much to the admiration of the latter generations - not what he did then because he defied the emperor's edict to return from the battleground and insisted on fighting the enemy pushing them near defeat. Many distanced themselves from this apparently recacitrant general and some called for his execution because of his defiant. 诏书下了三次，岳飞都加以拒绝，不受开府仪同三司(一品官衔)的爵赏和三千五百户食邑的封赐。他在辞谢中，痛切地表示反对议和："今日之事，可危而不可安，可忧而不可贺。"并再次表示收复中原的决心，"愿定谋于全胜，期收地于两河，唾手燕云，终欲复仇而报国。"这无异于给宋高宗当头泼了冷水，从而更使赵构、秦桧怀恨在心。"但岳飞不顾个人得失，坚持抗战到底的立场，率领军队，联络北方义军，卓有成效地从事抗金战争，筹划收复中原、统一祖国，成为全国抗金民族战争中的有力支柱。
Our past President Ong's words: "My loyalty is first and foremost, to the people of Singapore. It has always been so, and will always remain so." warms my heart and he'll be judged on his merits, contributions, dedications and loyalty to Singapore. Many of us, I believe, share my sentiments.
I mused at the political dancing by opposition parties of all hues and colors. So much posturings like wearing kangaroo T-shirts and decrying the lack of democracy. I wonder who they truly represent? I am not sure if they have an inking of the type of democracy or the kind of country they wish they will want to live in? If the opposition takes a more people-centric approach like Low Thia Kiang and Chiam See Tong who truly walk their grounds and know the constituents, PAP will have a hard contest since it is the battling with the hearts and minds with genuine care and love for the people. Hearing Sylvia, I am convinced she is mostly logical and a Singapore-loving person as I am. Having said that, as in all political powers, the incumbent will ensure its survival and mindshare sustainability with the electorate and will work itself against all opposing forces. Then the challenge to the opposition really will be - win us if you can.
Whatever the outcome or the slate the opposition may wish to put up, it must always be done for the love of the people and 岳飞 steadfast loyalty and dedication to his country is admirable.
精忠报国的精神， 以民同行。
Friday, February 20, 2009
Losses at Temasek and GIC- Take things in Perspective
The losses in GIC and Temasek were quite regretable and in fact alarming. The combined losses is almost equivalent to 5 times of Citigroup's net worth today.
Almost every major banks of repute, be they in US, Switzerland, London, Germany, Paris or anywhere else, they suffered brutal onslaught because of their exposure, small or large, to sub-prime or some complicated derivative investments. Hedge funds, private equities and funds of all shades see their investment declining at unbelievable rate. Unless traders properly time their shorting of markets, not many players, large or small, banks or funds, government or individuals are spared from the financial fallout.
Temasek and GIC may not have buck that trend and like the many who suffer from the financial meltdown, there was a write-downs on loss investments. Of course we are certain that going forward, there will be preservation of the funds and Temasek will position its money for the next phase of growth. The strategy now is not growth but defensive investment to preserve what is left. There is a proper time to make money and now it is not that time.
To put matter in perspective and to give some measure of support to Temasek and GIC, our hundred of billion of investment did not magiccally materialize as it mysteriously disappeared. It was not God-sent. It was painstakingly built up to become a respectable reserve. Whether those sovereign funds are from Abu Dhabi or from Dubai, they were similarly hit, if not worse off than Temasek.
The meltdown affects everyone with Madoff's Ponzi scheme crippled because of the lack of fund to pay forward to those who invested their hard-earned money in the Lehman's products in Singapore.
Almost every one is hit and it is really only how blue or black they are.
Almost every major banks of repute, be they in US, Switzerland, London, Germany, Paris or anywhere else, they suffered brutal onslaught because of their exposure, small or large, to sub-prime or some complicated derivative investments. Hedge funds, private equities and funds of all shades see their investment declining at unbelievable rate. Unless traders properly time their shorting of markets, not many players, large or small, banks or funds, government or individuals are spared from the financial fallout.
Temasek and GIC may not have buck that trend and like the many who suffer from the financial meltdown, there was a write-downs on loss investments. Of course we are certain that going forward, there will be preservation of the funds and Temasek will position its money for the next phase of growth. The strategy now is not growth but defensive investment to preserve what is left. There is a proper time to make money and now it is not that time.
To put matter in perspective and to give some measure of support to Temasek and GIC, our hundred of billion of investment did not magiccally materialize as it mysteriously disappeared. It was not God-sent. It was painstakingly built up to become a respectable reserve. Whether those sovereign funds are from Abu Dhabi or from Dubai, they were similarly hit, if not worse off than Temasek.
The meltdown affects everyone with Madoff's Ponzi scheme crippled because of the lack of fund to pay forward to those who invested their hard-earned money in the Lehman's products in Singapore.
Almost every one is hit and it is really only how blue or black they are.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Crowing of Dissents by the Same Crows
Everytime I try to square off with reasons those arguments put up by the dissenting voices of Gopalan Nair or Chee Soon Juan, who openly decry the lack of democracy and that the ruling party is a dictatorial regime, I cannot reconcile their patriotism and their ideals for Singapore.
After reading thread after thread of their discussions and watching their videos on Youtube, it does touch some heart strings and I must admit that it does not offer any real and practical solutions to issues like the low-wage workers' issues or joblessness in Singapore or to manage the traffic congestion in Singapore except to ask for abolition of ERP.
There are many things the oppositions can do to garner the support of civil-minded and reasonable electorate. They can genuinely represent the cause of Singaporeans in a certain district or special interest groups like disabled or children with special needs. There are so many issues that need help. The latest one will be the Lehman's linked investment products which Tan Kin Lian spoke on behalf for. He would have represented a cohort of Singaporeans affected by the sad saga and those affected will become his main constituents if he genuinely lends his helping hands. There are also avenues for the oppositions to meet the people and to organize like-minded, Singapore-loving individuals to come together to help those in needs. Meet the Peoples Session run by the PAP is not a natural outreach program by the party. It is run by volunteers with a deep conviction that they want to help residents solve their problems. Few people these days will have the time or convictions to volunteer on a political platform particularly since the day-to-day tasks of meeting residents is knocking on doors and explaining policies or provide a empathetic ears to their woes and to see what help can then be rendered. This is grueling hard work that calls for dedications and commitments.
Has the opposition got the necessary gumption to put up like-minded men and women who can walk the ground and help the residents with their woes. Democracy, freedom of speech, linguistic discussion on nepotism or autocracy are over-the-head notions for these folks. They want help in organizing themselves. They may have fallen into credit card problems or with kids needing assistance in school because of the demanding school curriculum. Or they may need some short-term financial assistance to help them get through a difficult period. The oppositions can similar gather sponsorships and helps to render to their constituents to win their support.
If none of those are forthcoming from the opposition, it will not be hard to see why the discerning voters will want to vote for them. Unless the opposition can form the next government, their strategy cannot be to govern but to provide the alternative voices to a section of Singaporeans who voted for them and to help them in their everyday lives and to ensure sustainable living. They are to provide the checks on the government policy excesses or spending irrationality. The tact should be to win seat after seat, hopefully, in closer proximity to form a larger geographic coverage. Political lines, all over, old and modern are drawn on north-south, east-west divide.
The opposition must evolve to become better or they cannot forever go on berating PAP for their lack of democracy or freedom of speech. Many governments have already run their countries aground by lack of vision or not displaying strong leadership and any political meadering will only mean that Singapore will fall back to the pits like in the snake-and-ladder game. We are far too small to be always in political contemplation on what we are to become or what state of democracy we want or how much liberty the opposition want.
Opposition parties in Singapore must rise up to offer new options to Singaporeans and stay on firm ground of reasons and rationales. Win the hearts and minds of the people. Don't beat your chests and cry foul.
Oppositions in Singapore unite if you can.
After reading thread after thread of their discussions and watching their videos on Youtube, it does touch some heart strings and I must admit that it does not offer any real and practical solutions to issues like the low-wage workers' issues or joblessness in Singapore or to manage the traffic congestion in Singapore except to ask for abolition of ERP.
There are many things the oppositions can do to garner the support of civil-minded and reasonable electorate. They can genuinely represent the cause of Singaporeans in a certain district or special interest groups like disabled or children with special needs. There are so many issues that need help. The latest one will be the Lehman's linked investment products which Tan Kin Lian spoke on behalf for. He would have represented a cohort of Singaporeans affected by the sad saga and those affected will become his main constituents if he genuinely lends his helping hands. There are also avenues for the oppositions to meet the people and to organize like-minded, Singapore-loving individuals to come together to help those in needs. Meet the Peoples Session run by the PAP is not a natural outreach program by the party. It is run by volunteers with a deep conviction that they want to help residents solve their problems. Few people these days will have the time or convictions to volunteer on a political platform particularly since the day-to-day tasks of meeting residents is knocking on doors and explaining policies or provide a empathetic ears to their woes and to see what help can then be rendered. This is grueling hard work that calls for dedications and commitments.
Has the opposition got the necessary gumption to put up like-minded men and women who can walk the ground and help the residents with their woes. Democracy, freedom of speech, linguistic discussion on nepotism or autocracy are over-the-head notions for these folks. They want help in organizing themselves. They may have fallen into credit card problems or with kids needing assistance in school because of the demanding school curriculum. Or they may need some short-term financial assistance to help them get through a difficult period. The oppositions can similar gather sponsorships and helps to render to their constituents to win their support.
If none of those are forthcoming from the opposition, it will not be hard to see why the discerning voters will want to vote for them. Unless the opposition can form the next government, their strategy cannot be to govern but to provide the alternative voices to a section of Singaporeans who voted for them and to help them in their everyday lives and to ensure sustainable living. They are to provide the checks on the government policy excesses or spending irrationality. The tact should be to win seat after seat, hopefully, in closer proximity to form a larger geographic coverage. Political lines, all over, old and modern are drawn on north-south, east-west divide.
The opposition must evolve to become better or they cannot forever go on berating PAP for their lack of democracy or freedom of speech. Many governments have already run their countries aground by lack of vision or not displaying strong leadership and any political meadering will only mean that Singapore will fall back to the pits like in the snake-and-ladder game. We are far too small to be always in political contemplation on what we are to become or what state of democracy we want or how much liberty the opposition want.
Opposition parties in Singapore must rise up to offer new options to Singaporeans and stay on firm ground of reasons and rationales. Win the hearts and minds of the people. Don't beat your chests and cry foul.
Oppositions in Singapore unite if you can.
Interview on Hiring Slow Down
1. Fresh graduates face a grim and uncertain job market as a global slowdown seizes the worldwide economy. Increasingly companies are taking a wait-and-see attitude and pending how the first half of 2009 will turn out, many positions are either frozen or curtailed for austerity and cost cutting reasons. For those fresh graduates, the buffet of job choices will also be limited since many industries are going into tailspin especially the manufacturing and financial industries.
The retrenched workers under 30s are not unique. We know of companies doing top rightsizing at the senior management level to drastically cut cost leaving their subordinates to take over role which may cost less than half what their bosses used to be paid. Hence for this season of job losses, the collateral damages is more widespread and deep and it cuts at all levels. Non-performing individuals will be cut and those holding on to their jobs will see themselves embracing more roles, functions and responsibilities.
To get a job is difficult and the job search can last between 1-3 months now especially in the first quarter because of CNY effect (general slowdown in businesses and lackadaisical work pace) and how the last quarter of 2008 has affected the overall mood of business. On a seasonally adjusted, annualised quarter-on-quarter basis, real GDP fell by 12.5 per cent in fourth quarter of 2008 which is a serious dampener.
The slowdown in manufacturing and financial sectors coupled with the credit crunch will spread to the domestically-oriented segments of the economy, such as property, retail, service and business service leaving job seekers with poorer prospects. Sectors which are hiring are in the transport service sector, offshore and marine and some niche R&D engineering areas as far our order books are concerned. Rest of the industries are in limbo state.
Pay and employment terms will see some adjustments and job-seekers should be more amenable to such changes as the absorption of such job-shock will bridge them to another possibility and opportunity. Job seeker can consider cross industry move or functional role change.
2. Increasingly companies are also hiring on temporary basis even at management level since they want work done but stay clear of further commitment to workers in uncertain times. Temporary and contract job generally will increase as this is a natural way to steer clear of entitlements and benefits costs at such uncertain times. Job seekers should not see this as an assault to their professionalism or that such interim job arrangement will not lead to any good. They should consider them as long as the job contents fit their skills.
3. The shoot up of unemployment for those in the 30s should not be exceptionally high as I see a more broad level cut which will be wide and deep and will cut through many levels including senior management. Hence it is not age specific.
4.Having more restive young who are unemployed will be disastrous like China with its billion population is struggling with their unemployed graduates. The impacts will be both at the societal and political dimensions. China has more than economic reasons to fear surging graduate unemployment which at the end of 2008 about 1 million of that year's graduates had not found work. In Singapore, the effect is somewhat lessened but nonetheless painful. The government encouraged the embarkation of tertiary education and many paid steeply for their degrees especially those private students. Graduating without a prospect of job will be exasperating for them.
Hopes
Like dreary dreams or rude awakenings
What is really happening?
The night seems so long; many a dream wreaked
Hoping for a light; when will the day break?
To this mad, mad world
Turning all so cold.
Jobs are scarce and fears run wild
Trepidation made confidence turned sour
Will it be me?
Or when will my turn be?
Preemptive retrenchment or whatever it will be
Pray it will not be me.
My Singapore dream has slide from hill to hill
Falling so low and falling still
Will the end be near?
I feel so sad and drear.
Be not afraid so the guru said
In hard and harsh time, heroes are made
The world still belong to those who can adapt fast
This time is bad but it will not last
Unlearn, adapt and relearn new skills
That will lead you to the new hills
Where you can see that the sky is still vast
Over the low hill there are still green grass
The retrenched workers under 30s are not unique. We know of companies doing top rightsizing at the senior management level to drastically cut cost leaving their subordinates to take over role which may cost less than half what their bosses used to be paid. Hence for this season of job losses, the collateral damages is more widespread and deep and it cuts at all levels. Non-performing individuals will be cut and those holding on to their jobs will see themselves embracing more roles, functions and responsibilities.
To get a job is difficult and the job search can last between 1-3 months now especially in the first quarter because of CNY effect (general slowdown in businesses and lackadaisical work pace) and how the last quarter of 2008 has affected the overall mood of business. On a seasonally adjusted, annualised quarter-on-quarter basis, real GDP fell by 12.5 per cent in fourth quarter of 2008 which is a serious dampener.
The slowdown in manufacturing and financial sectors coupled with the credit crunch will spread to the domestically-oriented segments of the economy, such as property, retail, service and business service leaving job seekers with poorer prospects. Sectors which are hiring are in the transport service sector, offshore and marine and some niche R&D engineering areas as far our order books are concerned. Rest of the industries are in limbo state.
Pay and employment terms will see some adjustments and job-seekers should be more amenable to such changes as the absorption of such job-shock will bridge them to another possibility and opportunity. Job seeker can consider cross industry move or functional role change.
2. Increasingly companies are also hiring on temporary basis even at management level since they want work done but stay clear of further commitment to workers in uncertain times. Temporary and contract job generally will increase as this is a natural way to steer clear of entitlements and benefits costs at such uncertain times. Job seekers should not see this as an assault to their professionalism or that such interim job arrangement will not lead to any good. They should consider them as long as the job contents fit their skills.
3. The shoot up of unemployment for those in the 30s should not be exceptionally high as I see a more broad level cut which will be wide and deep and will cut through many levels including senior management. Hence it is not age specific.
4.Having more restive young who are unemployed will be disastrous like China with its billion population is struggling with their unemployed graduates. The impacts will be both at the societal and political dimensions. China has more than economic reasons to fear surging graduate unemployment which at the end of 2008 about 1 million of that year's graduates had not found work. In Singapore, the effect is somewhat lessened but nonetheless painful. The government encouraged the embarkation of tertiary education and many paid steeply for their degrees especially those private students. Graduating without a prospect of job will be exasperating for them.
Hopes
Like dreary dreams or rude awakenings
What is really happening?
The night seems so long; many a dream wreaked
Hoping for a light; when will the day break?
To this mad, mad world
Turning all so cold.
Jobs are scarce and fears run wild
Trepidation made confidence turned sour
Will it be me?
Or when will my turn be?
Preemptive retrenchment or whatever it will be
Pray it will not be me.
My Singapore dream has slide from hill to hill
Falling so low and falling still
Will the end be near?
I feel so sad and drear.
Be not afraid so the guru said
In hard and harsh time, heroes are made
The world still belong to those who can adapt fast
This time is bad but it will not last
Unlearn, adapt and relearn new skills
That will lead you to the new hills
Where you can see that the sky is still vast
Over the low hill there are still green grass
Interview on Shorter Work Week to Cut Cost
The shorter work week is a necessary step to institute for some companies having excess labor or manpower so that they may stretch their dollar longer whilst withstanding severe lack of business or demands.
For companies undergoing severe shortage of demands or dry pipelines, manpower deployment is a topmost priority as it may drain cash flow and affect the sustainability of the businesses. When machine times are down, companies contend with depreciation and loan costs. For excess labour, it is a pure drain if the resource cannot be deployed where they are most productive. Along the spectrum of options, before any consideration of retrenchment, companies must surely consider the unsavory option of shortening workers' work week so that they may still have a job while the companies stretch the dollar. Also, some companies may have trained their labor resources for specific roles and to immediately release them when there is a down time may mean that the workers may join competitors - so it may be done in the name to retain talent.
Over-riding concerns for such measure as shortening work week must be to conserve cash flow and to stretch the dollar.
What may be the better thing to do for such idle labour? The government is providing a whole battery of up-skilling and re-skilling programs for PMET and the rank-and-file so that they may take this time to learn and relearn. Such effort may be costly for the government but it does spur the workers and an upgraded worker may be worth more than he was before. This, however, is premised that the bad times do not last more than 2-3 quarters otherwise, no amount of training will be meaningful if the general economy slumps with low demand and a general lacklastre in all major industries - from manufacturing, construction, healthcare to services.
I have seen a case where a child care teacher belaboring her low pay wishes to take the opportunity to explore a new career in hospitality and with a plethora of courses available subsidized by the government, she can now go to re-skill and on an upswing, she may embark on a totally new career path with a casino.
In better times, shorter work week work best for working mothers who prefer to spend more time at home while remaining productive in the workforce and it is in the name of better work-life balance.
For companies undergoing severe shortage of demands or dry pipelines, manpower deployment is a topmost priority as it may drain cash flow and affect the sustainability of the businesses. When machine times are down, companies contend with depreciation and loan costs. For excess labour, it is a pure drain if the resource cannot be deployed where they are most productive. Along the spectrum of options, before any consideration of retrenchment, companies must surely consider the unsavory option of shortening workers' work week so that they may still have a job while the companies stretch the dollar. Also, some companies may have trained their labor resources for specific roles and to immediately release them when there is a down time may mean that the workers may join competitors - so it may be done in the name to retain talent.
Over-riding concerns for such measure as shortening work week must be to conserve cash flow and to stretch the dollar.
What may be the better thing to do for such idle labour? The government is providing a whole battery of up-skilling and re-skilling programs for PMET and the rank-and-file so that they may take this time to learn and relearn. Such effort may be costly for the government but it does spur the workers and an upgraded worker may be worth more than he was before. This, however, is premised that the bad times do not last more than 2-3 quarters otherwise, no amount of training will be meaningful if the general economy slumps with low demand and a general lacklastre in all major industries - from manufacturing, construction, healthcare to services.
I have seen a case where a child care teacher belaboring her low pay wishes to take the opportunity to explore a new career in hospitality and with a plethora of courses available subsidized by the government, she can now go to re-skill and on an upswing, she may embark on a totally new career path with a casino.
In better times, shorter work week work best for working mothers who prefer to spend more time at home while remaining productive in the workforce and it is in the name of better work-life balance.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Jobs Credit - Does it Really Help?
This time in the Parliamentary discussion on the Jobs Credit, I found Low Thia Khiang’s persuasions compelling. He pointed that it may not be the only kind of tool the government can use to tackle the crisis.
Since it represents the main plank in the overall scheme of help, I must admit that Jobs Credit seems to tilt towards a supply-side initiative with the subsidy working more for the employers. For the average Singaporeans in general, the trickle down benefits may be less obvious though clearly all Singaporeans are saved from a CPF cut. With a cut, ramifications may be deeper since many Singaporeans rely on their CPF to pay mortgages.
In certain angle and perspective, the Jobs Credit is a blunt tool that cut across all employers, MNCs and SMEs, profitable and unprofitable and it benefits all companies absolutely blindly. In a certain way, this help will seem untargeted. The $4.5 billion must really save many jobs and assuming 100,000 jobs are saved, each job saved cost the government $45,000. The maths becomes more staggering if 50,000 jobs are saved, the cost to government is $90,000 per job saved. Again, if we are to look at the jobs saved, what is the average salary for those who lost their job? If we are saving those who are earning on average $2500 a month, for an entire year, their salary is $30,000 a year. Compare this to how much the government pays to save a job. The maths just does not add up, if we examine from this angle. From another angle, if the companies are really in deep trouble and on the brink of collapse because of cash flow, 3 months collection of a wage subsidy will do little to help. Will that really put companies to re-think? Yes, for a short term, they may hold off but in a longer run, if a trim of idle resources is necessary it must not be allowed to fester as it may become cancerous and unsustainable for a business. It is unreasonable for government to expect companies to hold off retrenchment when it does not make business sense to keep idle resources.
Agreed, that the $4.5 billion is to be used to spur companies to refrain them from retrenchment and for them to have help through wage subsidy for a year. However, the problem of saving the companies who are already doing poorly as a result of poor demand and dry pipelines cannot be saved with a wage subsidy. Poor demand for business will still persist if the macro-economics do not improve. Question therefore is will help applied directly and pointedly to those who needs it be better than applied broadly to all including some who may not need it.
As the argument goes, there is probably more ways the government can think of to help those average Singaporeans who really lost their jobs and by putting cash directly to help them may spur consumption. Nonetheless, the Jobs Credit is still a laudable measure, exceptional for a time like this one.- unforgettable. The help given to companies, small and large, profitable and unprofitable should not become forgettable.
Since it represents the main plank in the overall scheme of help, I must admit that Jobs Credit seems to tilt towards a supply-side initiative with the subsidy working more for the employers. For the average Singaporeans in general, the trickle down benefits may be less obvious though clearly all Singaporeans are saved from a CPF cut. With a cut, ramifications may be deeper since many Singaporeans rely on their CPF to pay mortgages.
In certain angle and perspective, the Jobs Credit is a blunt tool that cut across all employers, MNCs and SMEs, profitable and unprofitable and it benefits all companies absolutely blindly. In a certain way, this help will seem untargeted. The $4.5 billion must really save many jobs and assuming 100,000 jobs are saved, each job saved cost the government $45,000. The maths becomes more staggering if 50,000 jobs are saved, the cost to government is $90,000 per job saved. Again, if we are to look at the jobs saved, what is the average salary for those who lost their job? If we are saving those who are earning on average $2500 a month, for an entire year, their salary is $30,000 a year. Compare this to how much the government pays to save a job. The maths just does not add up, if we examine from this angle. From another angle, if the companies are really in deep trouble and on the brink of collapse because of cash flow, 3 months collection of a wage subsidy will do little to help. Will that really put companies to re-think? Yes, for a short term, they may hold off but in a longer run, if a trim of idle resources is necessary it must not be allowed to fester as it may become cancerous and unsustainable for a business. It is unreasonable for government to expect companies to hold off retrenchment when it does not make business sense to keep idle resources.
Agreed, that the $4.5 billion is to be used to spur companies to refrain them from retrenchment and for them to have help through wage subsidy for a year. However, the problem of saving the companies who are already doing poorly as a result of poor demand and dry pipelines cannot be saved with a wage subsidy. Poor demand for business will still persist if the macro-economics do not improve. Question therefore is will help applied directly and pointedly to those who needs it be better than applied broadly to all including some who may not need it.
As the argument goes, there is probably more ways the government can think of to help those average Singaporeans who really lost their jobs and by putting cash directly to help them may spur consumption. Nonetheless, the Jobs Credit is still a laudable measure, exceptional for a time like this one.- unforgettable. The help given to companies, small and large, profitable and unprofitable should not become forgettable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
