~ By Prof Lim Chong Yah ~

Paper presented at the Economic Society of Singapore Distinguished Speaker Public Lecture Series on 9 April 2012 at the Orchard Hotel, Singapore. This is Part 1 of Prof Lim's speech and Part 2 can be found here. TOC thanks Prof Lim for allowing us to republish his lecture in full.

 

 

Economic Conditions in Singapore in late 1970s

(Surfeit of low-wage workers)

* Low-wage occupations: ubiquitous

* Low-wage manufacturing: common

* General technology level: low, very low

* Women employment: low

* General under-employment: rife

* Wind of change in East Asia, particularly China

Economic Restructuring I (1979 – 81)

Singapore went through a formal economic restructuring exercise for three years, 1979 – 81, during which:

(1) Wage rates were increased across-the-board cumulatively by 20% per year;

(2) A portion of the wage increase went to CPF through increases in employers’ and employees’ contributions;

(3) Another portion of the wage increase, 4% of wages below a certain level, went to a newly-created tripartite-run Skills Development Fund;

(4) The new Skills Development Fund Advisory Council oversaw the administration of the Fund with twin objectives

(i) Substantial across-the-board subsidy for training and retraining of employees at all levels opened to all employers in Singapore.

(ii) A common-playing-field substantial subsidy for the mechanization of the production processes opened to all employers in Singapore.

Need and Objective of ER I

The overall objective of the restructuring exercise was to move the old traditional economy from a low-skilled, low-value-added and highly-labour-intensive structure to a high-skilled, high-value-added, and more technology and more knowledge-based new economy. The need for restructuring was urgent in view of increasing competition from new emerging and developing economies in East Asia particularly following the opening-up and the robust new industrialization programme of the People's Republic of China since 1978.

Five-Point Observations on ER I

Five general observations of the first formal economic restructuring exercise (1979-81) will be made here.

(1) It was self-funded, or strictly speaking, funded by the employers, not by the Government through higher taxes or from quantitative easing, or from accumulated reserves or otherwise.

(2) The exercise was very focused with only one Government-appointed tripartite agency, the Skills Development Fund Advisory Council, overseeing the exercise.

(3) The “means” for the restructuring objective was also much focused. The means were only two: one, mechanization, that is, the substitution of capital for labour, and two, training and re-training of workers, particularly technologically replaced workers.

(4) Even the training and mechanization programmes were highly focused: mechanized and trained to meet the anticipated demand of the employers; not training for the sake of training and mechanization for the sake of mechanization.

(5) Lastly, the modus operandi was through inducement, incentives and disincentives programmes, and not direction. Market forces were given a full reign. The Skills Development Fund was merely providing the direction, the support, the philip and the accelerator. The SDF merely provided the GPS.

Success of ER I

Despite some teething problems, the then considered bold and iconoclastic restructuring exercise was a great success. Real GDP displayed high real growth rates of 9.4% in 1979, 10.0% in 1980 and 10.7% in 1981. After 1981, the built-in restructuring momentum continued unabated until the regional recession year of 1985.

Subsequent Low-Wage Labour Import

Since 1985, fearing that the Singapore economy would become internationally uncompetitive, we gradually and imperceptibly eased the moratorium on the intake of lowly-paid, lowlyskilled foreign labour. Non-resident labour force increased steadily from 300.8 thousand in 1991 to 1.157 million in 2011, as shown in Diagram 1, which is based on published official statistics. GDP, as expected, expanded pari passu, as impressively as the inflow of lowlypaid foreign labour. Non-resident labour is cheap. Out of the 1.157 million non-resident work-force in 2011, only 1.7% earned wages high enough to pay income tax. The rest, the majority 98.3%, did not earn high enough to fall into the income-taxable bracket.

 

Increasing Supply of Non-resident Labour Force (‘000)

It cannot be over-stated that successful economic restructuring can only take place with a moratorium on cheap labour import. There is, as you know, an unlimited supply of lowlypaid foreign labour in our region. One cannot substitute capital for labour, if labour is cheap.

That was why the NWC in 1979 recommended a cumulative 20% increase in labour cost per year for the restructuring years of 1979-81.

Adverse Impact on Domestic Wage Rates

Below is a simplified diagram to illustrate this often forgotten simple principle of price in relation to supply and demand. Diagram 2 shows that an increase in the supply of labour, ceteris paribus, brings down the wage rate from W0 to W1.


Part 2 continues here

__________________________________

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Why can't SBS raise money through issuing more shares?

  ~by: Sharon Ng~ Much has been said on why the S$1.1B…

【选举】李显龙索求强力委托 林瑞莲:新西兰政府没多数议席仍防疫有成

原总理、行动党秘书长李显龙昨日重申,该党需要选民给予强力委托,才能有效做好防疫工作。 对此,工人党主席林瑞莲在今日受访时就指出这是给选民的“虚假选择”(false choice),也指在国外一些多元民主社会,在防疫工作上也表现出色,例如台湾和新西兰。 “没有理由行动党若无法占有所有议席,就不能做好防疫工作。” 她也指出,甚至于新西兰总理的执政党,在国会根本没有大多数议席,但同样还是做得很好。 事实上,不论新加坡人投选执政或在野党,大家都很清楚,在必要时都会同心团结给予政府支持抗疫。

Which “online campaign” was that again, MOS Lee?

By Howard Lee The spate on service and conservancy charges (S&CC) arrears…

零工经济和电动滑板车禁令下的收入困境

自本月5日起,电动滑板车禁止在行人道上驾驶,这间接影响了GrabFood送餐员的生活,甚者有者感叹因为部长一句话,而失去了上千元的收入。 一名以GrabFood送餐员维生的网民希瓦(Siva),于脸书发文有关禁用电动滑板车一事对送餐员的影响,此文一出立即引发网民热议,但从他的分享也得以知道,送餐员的薪资竟比一般工薪阶级更高。 据希瓦表示,他在担任送餐员的过程,每月至少会有3500元的固定收入,比起以前在办公司担任白领工作的2200元更高。 再对比人力部职业工资调查(The Occupational Wage Survey),如果希瓦所言属实,他所挣收入恐怕比起清洁工与劳工、司机、工地工头的所得还要高,甚至还比秘书、服务及销售人员都高。 数据显示,公共巴士司机与罗厘司机的收入,平均是1600元至2400元;而一名餐厅服务员的收入则达1400元,均低于送餐员的收入,加上送餐员的上班时间弹性,让单亲父母能够暂时解决时间的问题,如此看来,虽然送餐员工作并非正职,但这未免不是一份“好工作”。 尽管希瓦表示已尽量遵照当局设下的一系列条规,但自禁用令开始后,希瓦担忧收入将大幅缩水,尤其在现在劳动市场低靡,人人求职不易的年代,更是难以寻求新出路。   劳动力市场低靡  国人转向零工经济…