I refer to the Labour Market report Q2 2010 released on 14 September.
79,000 unemployed
“Some 79,000 residents including 69,900 Singapore citizens were unemployed in June 2012”
Most unemployed degree holders
“While their unemployment rate was the lowest among the education groups (3.3%), degree holders formed the largest group among the unemployed residents at 20,500 or 26% in June 2012, but this was lower than their share of 29% in the resident labour force” – This means that by educational grouping, degree holders formed the largest group amongst the unemployed.
Older workers – most unemployed
“Reflecting their large representation in the resident labour force (56%), mature residents aged 40 & above remained the largest group among unemployed residents in June 2012 at 37,100 or 47%, notwithstanding their below-average unemployment rate of 3.1%” – This means that mature residents remained the largest group among unemployed residents.
Older, more educated – harder to get jobs
Taking the above two statistics together, it may indicate that the older you are and the more educated you are, the harder it may be to get a job.
Long-term unemployment rate up
“The long-term unemployment rate was unchanged over the year at 0.7%. Some 15,700 or 20% of the unemployed residents had been looking for work for at least 25 weeks in June 2012, similar to 15,500 or 19% a year ago” – This means that the number of long-term unemployed residents increased slightly, despite the robust jobs growth. This may indicate that more people were not able to get a job after 25 weeks or longer.
Only degree holders’ long-term unemployment rate dropped
“Among the tertiary educated, the improvement in long-term unemployment rate for diploma & professional qualification holders (from 0.7% to 0.6%) was offset by the increase for degree holders (from 0.6% to 0.7% )” – Degree holders were the only education category that had an increase in the long-term unemployment rate, which may indicate that the more educated you are, the longer it may take to get a job.
Long-term unemployment rate up for younger workers only
“Similarly, the increase in long-term unemployment rate for younger residents aged below 30 (from 0.5% to 0.6%) was offset by the improvement for those in their 30s (from 0.6% to 0.4%)” – Why is it that even younger residents who may probably be not asking for very high wages relative to older workers, may also be taking a longer time (at least 25 weeks) to get a job, and was the only category by age to have had an increase in the long-term unemployment rate?
Older workers higher long-term unemployment rate
“Mature residents aged 40 & over had above-average long-term unemployment rate of 0.9%, unchanged from a year ago. Coupled with their high representation in the resident labour force (56%), seven out of ten (70% or 11,000) long-term unemployed residents in June 2012 were aged 40 & over” – Not only did mature residents had a long-term unemployment rate which was higher than the average, the number was also disproportionately higher. So, it may mean that the older you are, the harder it may be to get a job, even after at least 25 weeks.
PMETs most likely to be made redundant?
“Professionals, managers, executives & technicians (PMETs) accounted for a higher number and share of workers made redundant (1,410 or 64%) than in the previous quarter (1,190 or 46%)” – This may indicate that the more educated you are, the higher was the relative chance of being made redundant.
“Six in ten (60%) residents laid off in the second quarter of 2012 were aged 40 & over, higher than their workforce composition (54%)” – This may indicate that the older you are, the higher was the relative chance of being laid off.
“The majority or 73% of residents made redundant were previously holding PMET jobs, higher than the PMETs’ representation in the workforce (52%)” – This may indicate that the more educated you are, the higher was the relative chance of being made redundant.
Short work-week or temporary layoff rose
“The number of workers on short work-week or temporary layoff rose to 3,570 in the second quarter from 2,580 in the first quarter of 2012, after a slight decline from 2,720 in the fourth quarter of 2011. Nonetheless, this was well below the high of 26,530 in the first quarter of 2009 during the last recession” – So, the number of workers on short work-week or temporary layoff rose, despite robust jobs growth.
Degree holders/PMETs worse improvement in re-entry rate?
“The re-entry rate rose compared with the previous cohort across all broad occupational, educational and age groups as well as for both males and females. The most notable improvements were recorded by residents previously in clerical, sales & service positions (from 47% to 68%) and those with secondary qualifications (from 51% to 72%). PMETs (from 44% to 51%) and degree holders (from 43% to 44%) saw more moderate increases from March to June 2012, with their rates remaining below the overall average” – What this may mean is that degree holders had the worse improvement in the re-entry rate by education, and PMETs had the worse rate improvement by occupational group. So, it would seem that the more educated you are, the harder it was on a relative basis to other education and occupational groups, to get a job within 6 months of redundancy.
Job vacancies decline
“Amid the subdued global economic outlook, the number of job vacancies declined over the year by 15% to 47,300 in June 2012. After adjusting for seasonality, job openings fell over the quarter by 8.9% to 45,600. This was the second consecutive quarter of decline after hitting the high of 55,400 in December 2011. Correspondingly, the seasonally adjusted job vacancy rate, which measures vacancies relative to total manpower demand, fell to 2.3% in June 2012 from 2.5% in March 2012 and 2.9% in December 2011.
The seasonally adjusted ratio of job vacancy to unemployed person declined for a second consecutive quarter, as job vacancies fell faster than unemployment in June 2012. For every 100 job seekers, there were now 91 job openings, down from 105 in March 2012 and 120 in December 2011” – Job vacancies are declining, which may be contributing to the difficulty for some to get jobs.
Longer working hours
“Total weekly paid hours worked per employee averaged 46.4 hours in June 2012, marginally higher than 46.2 in March 2012 and June 2011 but lower than the high of 46.6 in September 2008 before the last recession. The trend broadly mirrored that of the weekly paid overtime hours which averaged 3.9 hours in June 2012, up slightly from 3.7 hours in March 2012 and June 2011” – Looks like people have to work longer hours. No wonder a recent survey showed Singaporeans were overworked and were more stressed. (“Singaporeans overworked, more stressed: survey”, Channel NewsAsia, Sep 13)
Security guards still overtime champions?
“Employees in construction and manufacturing continued to clock in above-average paid hours at 53.2 and 50.4 hours per week respectively. This was mainly due to the longer paid overtime hours in construction (8.4) and manufacturing (7.4). Services had shorter working hours (total: 43.6, overtime: 1.8), though selected industries namely security & investigation (total: 57.2, overtime: 13.8) and land transport & supporting services (total: 48.5, overtime: 5.3) clocked in long hours of work” – It seems that security & investigation (security guards?) continue to be the champion for the numbet of hours worked, which may continue to translate into one of the lowest per hour basic wage in Singapore.
Labour productivity declined
“Labour productivity declined over the year by 1.9% in the second quarter of 2012. This was the third consecutive quarter of year-on-year decline, following contractions of 2.3% in the preceding quarter and 0.5% in the fourth quarter of 2011” – So, what is going to happen to wages when we keep hearing that wages can only go up with productivity?
Negative real wage growth?
“The nominal average (mean) monthly earnings rose over the year by 2.8% in the second quarter of 2012, higher than the growth of 0.9% in the preceding quarter. Weighed down by inflation, the real average (mean) monthly earnings fell over the year by 2.3% in the second quarter of 2012, after declining by 3.9% in the first quarter” – Looks like its going to be yet another year of negative real wage growth. Since this data is for the nominal average (mean) monthly earnings which is normally higher than the median earnings, real median wage growth may even be worse this year, following negative real wage growth like that in 2008, 2009 and 2011, with only a 0.5% increase in 2010.
Costs rising
“The overall unit labour cost (ULC) rose over the year by 5.4% in the second quarter of 2012, up from the increase of 4.1% in the previous quarter. Manufacturing ULC rose marginally over the year by 0.3%, significantly lower than the 4.7% increase in the first quarter. Driven mainly by the slower growth in ULC and cost of services, the increase in manufacturing unit business cost (UBC) moderated to 3.7% from 5.4% in the first quarter” – Costs are going up but productiivity is down. So, what gives?
Hiring expectations down
“Hiring expectations for the third quarter of 2012 moderated, amid a less optimistic business outlook for the second half of 20123. A net weighted balance of 4% of manufacturing firms expected to expand headcount in the third quarter, down from 8% in the preceding quarter and 10% in the same period last year. In services, the net weighted balance of firms that anticipated increased hiring in the third quarter of 2012 (+9%) was the same as a quarter ago, but lower than in the same period last year (+17%)” – Hiring expectations don’t look good.
Having read the above, what do you think of the report’s
“Concluding Remarks
Employment creation increased in the second quarter, while layoffs eased for the second successive quarter. Consequently, unemployment improved, reversing the slight increase a quarter ago”?
Leong Sze Hian
