“The government should not skirt important parliamentary questions on low-wage workers,” said Red Dot United on Wednesday (4 November).

In an article on the party’s website, it was noted that the revelation by Senior Minister of State for Manpower Zaqy Mohamad that 52,000 Singaporeans earn less than S$1,300 per month after receiving workfare supplements and CPF (Central Provident Fund) contributions is contradictory to what was said by Senior Minister of State for Health Dr Koh Poh Koon two weeks ago.

In a Facebook post two weeks ago, Dr Koh had said: “With Workfare and employer CPF contributions included, only about 56,000 across a variety of job roles earn less than $1300”.

RDU asked why there was a discrepancy and if the 4,000 people “matter”.

The article went on to note that Mr Zaqy also “dismissed a parliamentary question on the number of workers whose take-home wages are $1,300 and below (excluding CPF contributions and all supplementary schemes such as support schemes), by saying that it was not meaningful or accurate to focus only on take-home pay.”

The party questioned: “Why is Mr Zaqy evading the question? Is the Government trying to downplay the number of low-wage Singaporean workers in our midst?”

Pointing out that the government has refused to give straight forward answers to parliamentary questions before, the party asserted that this “sets bad precedents”. It emphasised that the government “should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public and should refuse to provide information only when disclosure is not in the public interest.”

The article went on to say that the government has said it is not ideologically against implementing a minimum wage, yet it defends the Progressive Wage Model as it produces better outcomes.

But the PWM only applies to three sectors which cumulatively account for only 15% of low wage workers, RDU noted.

It further argued: “The complex structure of the PWM makes it a slow instrument in addressing the pressing need for better wages for the bottom 20 per cent of income earners.”

The party then asserted that a “major change” in the wage-setting framework is required, and that the country urgently needs a social policy commitment to protect the most vulnerable workers against poverty.

Pointing to research that shows minimum wage as having a positive impact on productivity growth, RDU argued that Singapore, being a “one of the fastest ageing society in Asia” could further reduce the state’s over-reliance on foreign manpower. As such, it should not dismiss a policy suggestion such as minimum wage.

RDU then states it’s support for a legal minimum wage to ensure a universal wage floor.

As with almost all conversations about minimum wage in Singapore, RDU did not forget to quote the study led by Assistant Professor Ng Koe Hoe from the National University of Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy which found that elderly Singaporeans living along will need between S$1,379 to S$1,721 a month to meet basic needs.

Therefore, the Party suggests that the proposal for a take-home minimum wage to be set at S$1,300 as ” a reasonable one which sets a base standard for a life of respect and dignity.”

Mindful of the current difficulties faced by many businesses and that it might not be the right time for companies to bear the additional cost this policy might incur, RDU also propose a temporary Wage Credit Scheme-like programme to help small and medium enterprises to adhere to the universal wage-floor.

RDU chief Ravi Philemon is quoted in the article as saying: “I hear arguments as to why now may not be the right time to implement a minimum wage. But instituting a universal wage floor now signals that the dignity of the work is sacred even in a crisis.”

The Party concluded urging the government to lift the wages of all low-wage workers who are not earning enough to sustain themselves or their families.

“If they are not in jobs covered by the PWM, find other social policies to bring immediate financial assistances to such workers. Workers are the backbone of the economy.”

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Gratefulness has nothing to do with it

This is a letter from a TOC reader. G Hui/ I would…

那位针砭时弊的“孔大山” 文化奖得主英培安离逝

文化奖得主、笔耕半世纪的本地知名作家英培安,于昨日(10日)下午1时35分因病去世,享年74岁。 英培安出生于1947年1月26日,早在公教中学时期就开始创作,七八十年代曾以笔名“孔大山”写了不少风格犀利,针砭时弊的杂文。他还曾在黄金大厦经营“前卫”书店,并先后出版独立杂志《前卫》和《茶座》。 不过,1977年11月,英培安却被怀疑与“马来亚解放阵线”有联系,在内安法令下被捕而拘禁近四个月,最后才发现无罪。此后他致力长篇小说写作,例如1987年出版《一个像我这样的男人》,1989年出版《孤寂的脸》。 1995年,他在桥北路中心三楼开设“草根书室”,专营文史哲书籍,顿时成为本地文史爱好者的宝库,也是文化旅客的朝圣之地。 2014年三位有心人林仁余、林永心和林韦地接手草根书室,英培安则专心写作。 早在2007年,英培安就被诊断罹患前列腺癌第四期,即便无法动手术,他仍以顽强意志力抗疾。25万字的长篇小说《画室》,就是在抗癌和面对官司期间的四年完成的。 不幸的是,2015年,又被诊断患有大肠癌,手术切除了一段大肠。据《联合早报》报导,英培安的妻子吴明珠指出,2020年5月英培安接受检查,又发现胰脏癌,手术过后血糖高低不定,胃口也不好,血糖过低时会变得神志不清,曾经因此由救护车紧急送院。 回溯六年前,他针对武吉巴督补选受访表达看法。对于有人称,民主党秘书长徐顺全和执政50年政府硬干,如同“鸡蛋碰石头”,对此他直言“我选择站在鸡蛋这一边,我也希望你们站在鸡蛋这一边。” “只有独裁国家文化人才不会出来讲话”,“如果没有了批评的自由,那是很严重的事情”。

【冠状病毒19】领取免费口罩 狮城大厦外现人龙

淡马锡基金会自本月21日开始,为全国居民免费提供两个可重复性使用的口罩,导致在各个口罩领取机前大排长龙。 Raven Qiu昨日(9月22日)在脸书群组Complaint Singapore发帖指出,21日在狮城大厦外惊见长长的人龙,还以为发生了什么大事。 “从昨日(9月21日)起可以领取免费口罩。难怪狮城大厦的两架口罩领取机前,自早上10时开始就大排长龙。”   有关的免费口罩是由淡马锡基金会提供,旨在减轻民众购买口罩的负担,领取截止日期定于10月4日。 居民只需要在领取机前扫描身份证、学生智能卡、出生证、外国身份证或任何政府签署的身份证件条形码后,就可以领取口罩。有关的口罩也提供给家佣和工作准证持有者,而12岁以下儿童可领取儿童口罩。 居民也可携带所照顾或协助者的身份证件,以帮助后者领取口罩。 淡马锡总裁何晶于9月9日在脸书上,宣布派送口罩的消息,并表示会提供足够的口罩供应,也敦促民众不要在活动首三天就急着领取口罩,避免出现人群。 https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?vanity=TemasekFoundation&set=a.3150162375210271