The Online Citizen

Re-employment act: 90 per cent get pay cut?

January 07
16:36 2012

~by: Leong Sze Hian~

The Re-employment Act has been implemented on 1 January 2012. Employers are now required to offer re-employment to their workers at age 62.

Many re-employment issues?

There may still be many unresolved issues with the re-employment act. From the perspective of workers, for example, what if a worker is offered re-employment at a huge pay cut such as 50 per cent? Since re-employment can be offered for just 6 months or a year at age62, what happens at say 63? If you have health problems, what happens if you are offered re-employment without the continuation of your existing medical benefits and insurance? For those not offered re-employment, with a compensation of $4,500 to $10,000, what if they can’t get another job? Since the CPF Life annuity payout starts at 65, what happens to those who are not offered re-employment at 62?

As I understand that about 14 per cent of HDB flat mortgages are still outstanding at age 55, what about those who bought a HDB flat after age 32 on a typical 30-year mortgage, which may still be outstanding at age 62? Since workers with less than 3 years of employment, are not covered under “re-employment”, will some employers be less willing to employ those age 56 to 58?

In the past, the retirement age was just raised to 60, 62. Why not just extend the retirement age to 65 now, instead of giving employers so many options? I would like to suggest that we recognise model employers who say offer re-employment to all workers on the same terms?

Why not have an Equal Opportunity Employment Commission like Hong Kong? Are there any countries in the world that has legislation that allows employers to cut employment terms across the board in any way, just three years before workers’ retirement at 65?

Follow public sector?

I also refer to the Public Service Division’s (PSD) letter “Public sector not currently reviewing re-employment guidelines” (ST, Dec 22), in response to the articles “Public sector reviewing rehiring terms” and “Better rehiring deals in private sector” (ST, Dec 21). It states that “Our guidelines allow public agencies to re-employ up to 10 per cent of retiring officers in a year at the last drawn salary”. Does this mean that 90 per cent of public sector officers will get a pay cut? How was this figure of 10 per cent derived?

The public sector should be setting a good example, for the private sector to follow. If the private sector follows suit, then 90 per cent of workers may also expect a pay cut.


Support TOC! Buy Uncle Leong’s book here!

  • rockabyebaby

    This is definitely the result of promotion via self-defined “merrytorcracy”! What else can it be? Carlie Rose any sincere and truthful comments?

  • AngelOfDeath

    REPORT:Wait to Retire at 65 = Die Sooner?

    http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/age-65-rule/19869-report-wait-retire-65-die-sooner.html

    I retired at 53 and am 65 this month.

  • iVOTExiaoBENG

    let be honest ere..who is goin to mploy a 62? cisco perhaps?

  • Its so easy not to employ a 62

    No need talk about a grand old age of 62.

    Just talk about 38 or 40.

    employers need not give you reason why he want to hire or not hire you.

    Correct me if my understanding is wrong.

    I mean, if any employer wants you out, there are a quadzillion reasons and excuses they can use to make you go.

    This 62 thingie is at best a facial.

  • I want to knock senses into you people!

    Look at the IT industry.
    Look at any IT department you can find.

    Its not just a Majority are foreigners. Its an Extreme Majority full of foreigners.

    Why?

    1. CPF.
    2. Age.
    3. Cheaper.
    4. Contract
    5. Policy.
    6. the People accept.
    7. Employers like to cut costs.

    the IT industry is full of young people and most are non-citizens.

    Its nothing as great as rocket science or nuclear physics.

    Its just an applied science like engineering.

    Already Young citizens are not getting most of the IT jobs.

    Why talk about 62?

  • Hans Kaiser

    PSD tells their public agencies to hire only if performance rated good which is higher than private sectors’ “satisfactory”

    AUPE concluded MOU with Chemical Industries to rehire at old pay n satisfactory job performance. Why PSD insists otherwise? PSD is encouraging wilful cropping of mature employees n hence discrimination of the aged/ Teo CH, pls wake up. Earn so much money must be more alert to the wool over your eyes/ Izzit your Perm Sec also go to France to learn gourmet couking when more pple got no more jobs?

    Why the double or higher hurdle when PSD is part of the tripartite lobby?

    Govt pushing for more silvering hair to be gainfully employed and yet does not seem to be aware of what Stat Boards n Ministeries are doing…

    Case of playing dumb???

  • 2016

    For Singaporeans the older they get the more their pay will be cut, EXCEPT some party people, the older they get the higher and higher and higher and higher their pay + fat bonus.

  • Jimmy

    Good questions from Leong.

    But let’s face it like what “Its so easy not to employ a 62″ has said, no employer needs give good reason for not continuing to hire you. The compensation for service discontinuation can be contractually loose & meagre to the disadvantage of the employees.

    The Equal Opportunity Employment Commission would be a timely pressure. But it is more about the culture & the will of exercising & enforcing this pressure of equal opportunity & ensuring that it takes place starting from top leadership rather than another piece of legislation which is there for comfort but could be ineffective if it is just another showcase. Don’t we have unions currently ?

  • rockabyebaby

    LHL said last year that this is a global thing! Did we hear wrong fom this horse’s mouth. Or was he spewing self revelation. No better ideas but just follow the crwod. Didn’t they call us “Uniquely Singapore” with thier UNIQUE Remunaerations? So why not UNIQUE IDEAS after they GCT & TTKY said “Knowledge Based Economy”? But did they say if for bringing in “FT” and that we Singaporeans are “No Talent” back then in 2001 when Woody Goh won GE 2001? Goh “C_ck Talk”?

  • hardertruths

    If the unions agree to what MOM says so, what can employees do about it? If you have no one to represent you, what rights do you have to disagree? It’s take it or leave it–pure and simple. This is Singapore!

  • hardest truth

    The hardest truth is the people up there could only think how to reward themselves heftily. Citizens at the bottom are nothing but stastistical digits which can be easily manipulated and conjured up to make everything appears good no matter what predicaments they are in.

  • CANNON

    can sommon sgporean workers be like lky.

    can we be re-emplpoyed as ‘SENIOR’ MANAGER OR SENIOR GM or whatever?

    can we also take more flights to visit the company’s overseas branches to offer ‘FREE’ ADVISORY?

    YA?…ya?

  • Sad

    Look at the Public Sector, CDC, WDA, MOM, MOH, MOE, MINDEF, GIC, Temasek, MAS.
    You ever passes by their Ministries?
    Look at the number of cars are parked outside.
    Budget cut? Where? We the locally born Singaporeans are suffering. Yet, those PUBLIC CIVIL SERVANTS working in Shenton Way do not know we have OVER SUPPLY of IMMIGRANTS?
    Is pretty sad that we still allows this government to hold their leadership yet no good companies are produced by current management. Sad.

  • Rodolfo

    It is generally true that older workers are slower, suffer from poorer eyesight and have more health problems than in their prime. It is only natural that pay is adjusted to reflect these realities.

    One might say wisdom comes with age. And that is true. But one can hardly expect workers outside the knowledge economy to be able to swap their wisdom for additional wages.

  • Pingback: Daily SG: 10 Jan 2012 « The Singapore Daily

  • EPHolder

    Given the propensity of SG government to use tax measures to get desired behavior: provide tax incentive based on difference between median age of employees of given company (including foreigners) and median age of SG citizen population as a whole (excluding foreigners). If median age within the company is 25 and SG citizen population median age is 39 then tax the company 14% more (39-25). If median age is 43 then give them a break of 4% (39-43= -4). This also solves incessant drive of the employers to replace old citizens with young foreigners, hitting them in the pocket makes it not so attractive.

  • iVOTExiaoBENG

    Rodolfo9 January 2012
    It is generally true that older workers are slower, suffer from poorer eyesight and have more health problems

    One might say wisdom comes with age. And that is true. But one can hardly expect workers outside the knowledge economy to be able to swap their wisdom for additional wages
    ………….
    wah when did you become so BRAVE?
    you are torkin/TERKAN leekingyou hor…

TOC TV

Archives