It was reported that employers will now face prosecution in court and other harsh penalties for discriminatory hiring practices, including those involving making false declarations on fair hiring consideration.

Manpower Minister Josephine Teo had warned that employers found guilty of engaging in workplace discrimination would not be permitted to apply for new work passes for a minimum of 12 months. In the “most egregious cases”, she said the debarment period may extend to up to 24 months.

Under the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF), employers are required to advertise job openings for positions with a monthly salary of under S$15,000 on the national Jobs Bank for a minimum of 14 days for locals to apply before they are allowed to apply for an Employment Pass (EP) to get a foreigner in.

In particular, MOM publicly named and penalized a few companies which were caught for flouting FCF. These companies have submitted EP applications for foreign job applicants and not fairly considered any local applicants. They did not conduct any job interviews for Singaporean locals for one reason or other. One company even lied to MOM saying they had when they had no intention of interviewing any locals. All of them have already pre-selected their foreign candidates before putting up job advertisements on Jobs Bank just for show.

All these companies could have avoided legal troubles with MOM if they had taken the trouble to at least “wayang” a bit to interview some local candidates. In such cases, the companies can still give the excuse that they have interviewed the locals and did not find any of them suitable. It would be difficult for MOM to find fault with these companies.

Interview Expert Academy: 41 reasons why candidates fail at interviews

So, if companies are bent on hiring their favorite foreign job applicants, they can still fool MOM by inviting some of the local job applicants for interviews. But what excuses can these companies come up with in case MOM asks them for the reasons for rejecting the local candidates?

Interview Expert Academy, which helps people to overcome difficulties and challenges in job interviews, compiled a list of 41 reasons why candidates fail at interviews from their past experience dealing with interviewers in companies, and told by interviewers themselves:

  1. Poor preparation
  2. Displaying a negative attitude or generally being negative
  3. No enthusiasm for the company or the role
  4. Being dishonest
  5. Vague or uninteresting interview answers
  6. Arriving late
  7. Arriving too early
  8. Being rude to the receptionist
  9. Smelling like a cigarette
  10. Dressed inappropriately
  11. Wearing sunglasses
  12. Keeping a scarf on during the interview
  13. Wearing too much perfume or aftershave
  14. Shaking hands too weakly or too strong
  15. Complaining that you were kept waiting for the interview
  16. Sitting in a too relaxed or aggressive manner
  17. Chewing gum, a pen or playing with your hair
  18. Forgetting or mispronouncing the name of the interviewer
  19. Forgetting what is written on your CV/Resume
  20. Being unprepared for the standard interview questions
  21. Lying about your skills, experience, knowledge and qualifications
  22. Being rude or uncomplimentary about your previous company or boss
  23. Sharing too much personal information
  24. Failing to explain how your skills match the job in question
  25. Interrupting the interviewer
  26. Asking too many questions or irrelevant questions
  27. Not asking good questions
  28. Yawning
  29. Not making eye contact or making too much
  30. Getting angry or defensive
  31. Using phrases like “you know”
  32. Laughing at inappropriate moments
  33. Sounding desperate or overeager
  34. Checking the time
  35. Asking about the salary too early
  36. Having poor manners
  37. Being overconfident
  38. Not building rapport
  39. Not listening to the interviewer’s questions
  40. Inappropriate photos or comments on social media
  41. Keeping a tissue for cleaning your glasses in your bra

As can be seen, if a company doesn’t want to hire someone, there are indeed plenty of reasons for the company to use. It would certainly mean wasting more of Singaporean applicants’ time by inviting them to come for “bogus” interviews so as to help fool MOM, for those companies which have already pre-selected their foreign candidates. MOM’s latest FCF updates would not be of help at all.

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

丹绒巴葛安检站查获四把仿真枪 已交由警方侦办

丹绒巴葛安检站发现可疑货柜箱,并查获四把仿真枪。 移民与关卡局昨日(9日)在脸书上发表文告,当局于上周日(6日)对一个货柜箱进行扫描时,发现该货柜箱非常可疑。 据文告指出,该货柜箱申报为玩具和家用品,但因事有蹊跷,执法人员到进口商的场地进行拆柜,结果发现四把仿真枪和配件。 目前案件已转交警方侦办。 移民与关卡局重申,边境防卫我国安全的第一防线,类似的隐藏方式将可能被恐怖分子用于走私武器和爆炸物,并可能对新加坡展开袭击。 当局会继续在关卡进行安检,避免任何人企图偷渡或是走私毒品、武器、爆炸物或其他违禁品。

Payback time?

Why is the Govt penalising Burmese activists and students? By Leong Sze Hian.

五年前被指杀人引渡到槟城 莫汉将由律师拉维代表讨说法

本社今日(10日)获悉,Carson律师事务所的拉维律师(M Ravi)有意代表莫汉(Mohan Rajangam)先生,向法庭提起刑事检讨(Criminal Revision),以申诉检讨莫汉在2015年被引渡到马国槟城的记录。 据了解莫汉也尝试询问另外两名律师协助,不过他们无意挑战政府;莫汉表示已与律师拉维接洽,也有信心后者能代表他向有关当局讨个说法。 有关刑事检讨相信将检讨莫汉从被逮捕到引渡到槟城,其中的程序是否符合正当性。 本社此前报导,50岁的莫汉原本在一家物流公司任职,但是五年前却被指控涉嫌一宗在槟城发生的谋杀案,警方直接突击他的工作场所搜查并逮捕他。 在被拘留两日后,他被带到法庭,传译员读控状,指他在2015年3月2日晚间9时20分,涉嫌在槟城乔治市枪杀一名印裔男子。 但莫汉解释,当天他人在兼职的夜总会办生日活动,且护照可证明那段时间他根本没去过马国。不过审讯同日傍晚6时45分,他仍被带到兀兰关卡,转交给马方官员。 他在马国逗留长达四个月,但是马国法庭未提控他,最终因未涉及谋杀嫌疑被释放。然而这段经历却让他饱受煎熬,除了健康受影响,他也为此丢失工作。 莫汉选择在生活重归轨道的五年后,才愿意口述自己的故事。 对于莫汉的经历,本社总编已在去年12月17日,致函包括内政部、法院、外交部等多个部门求证,迄今尚待有关部门回应核实信息。