U Care Fund helped 24,922 union members

I refer to the article “More NTUC members benefit from U Care Fund” (Straits Times, Nov 30).

It states that “Some 24,922 members received the vouchers this year, around 500 more than last year.

To be eligible, members should have a gross monthly household income of not more than $3,000, up from $2,800.

Where the gross household income exceeds $3,000, members can apply if their per capita income does not exceed $750, up from $725.

The gross personal income ceiling for members without dependants in the same household rose to $1,450 from $1,400.

The reviewed criteria are pegged to the bottom 20 per cent of household incomes.

Only 2.8% of union members are lower-income?

As to “there are more than 880,000 NTUC members” – does it mean that only about 2.8 per cent (24,922 divided by 880,000 members) belong to “the bottom 20 per cent of household incomes”?

Why is it that apparently – the vast majority of union members (97.2 per cent) come from higher income households?

Only 10.4% of lower-income households are union members?

With 1.2 million resident households in 2014 – does it mean that “the bottom 20 per cent of household incomes” is about 240,000 households?

Why is it that apparently only about 10.4 per cent (24,922 divided by 240,000) of these lower-income households are union members?

Why don’t the “lower-income” join the union? 

Isn’t it a “no brainer” for workers from lower-income households to join as union members, because the assistance they get from the U Care Fund would far exceed their $9 monthly membership fees?

Perhaps more can be done to reach out to lower-income household workers to become union workers.

Leong Sze Hian