With reference to the article “Singapore’s Foreigner Influx: Facts and Myths” (TR Emeritus, Nov 3) and the

TR Editorial “MTI: We are careful in bringing in foreign manpower” (Oct 7), I would like to make some remarks to MTI’s reply.

MTI: “Our experience and empirical data from developed countries show that economic growth is positively related to wage growth. The benefits of economic growth have filtered down to all groups, including lower-income households. From 2006 to last year, the 20th percentile saw real household income growth of 2.2 per cent per annum”

Real household income vs worker’s wages

Real household income for lower-income households may have grown in recent years because of a higher number of people working in each household, as more people may need to work in the household in order to survive – Why?

Because workers’ (not household) real median wage growth may have been negative over the last 5 years or so (negative in 2011, 2009, 2008, + 0.5% in 2010).

Longest work hours per week

Another reason why real household income appears to have increased is because we work the longest hours in the world.

Basic hourly wage vs gross wages

Yet the basic per hour wage has been declining. For example, to about $4 for cleaners, security guards, traffic wardens, etc. They earn more because they typically work 12 hours a day for 6 days a week.

Economic growth = Wage growth?

Singapore may be the exception rather than the rule, as to the experience of developed countries – economic growth in Singapore may not really have translated into real wage growth on a relative basis.

MTI: “The average unemployment rate for lower-educated residents also remained low: 3.4 per cent over that period, even as foreign employment grew at a faster rate. Economic growth is needed for the opportunities and benefits a vibrant economy brings. It will also provide us with the resources to assist lower-income households”

Unemployment rate

I understand that the unemployment rate does not include those who have given up looking for work after 6 months or more.

Also, if you include those on various training schemes which e2i , WDA, etc, will pay most of the fees to encourage you to attend – who may not counted as unemployed, discouraged workers (persons outside the labour force who were not actively looking for a job because they believed their job search would not yield results), some of the 153,600 or 14.4% of economically inactive residents in 2011 who intended to look for a job within the next two years of whom 110,800 had work experience, the ‘under-employed’ (those who are employed, but may only be able to get a part-time job, short-term contract, a much lower paying job, free-lancing other than as a matter of choice, etc, the number of ‘actual’ unemployed may be higher.

What “opportunities and benefits a vibrant economy brings” are we talking about, when real wage growth may have been negative against the relentless rise of HDB prices, electricity tariff, healthcare costs, etc, which arguably hits the lower-income most.

Leong Sze Hian