I refer to the article “Govt agencies told: No age bias in hiring” (Straits Times, Apr 11).
“An oversight”?
It states that “The ministries have corrected what they said were “an oversight”.
Once-off, many times, long time?
Is this “oversight” a once-off event?
How many times have this “oversight” occurred in the past?
Was this an ongoing “oversight”?
If so, for how long has this been going on?
How many have “oversight”?
How many ministries and agencies had this “oversight”?
Do some private employers have “oversight” too?
How many employed, despite “oversight”‘?”
As to “They added that the errors did not stop them from hiring older security guards”, how many over-55 security guards were employed last year?
What was their percentage over the total number employed last year?
What percentage of the security guards employed now are over 55?
“Oversight” in other jobs too?
Was this “oversight” applied to just security guards, or other jobs as well?
What is the percentage of all employees and contract staff who are over 55?
Encouraged to work beyond 65?
As to “”There is no statutory age upon which employees are required to stop working, it (MOM) added”
“The Government is encouraging older workers to keep working and wants firms to continue to hire them, so government agencies have to lead by example,” he said”, I have a relative who reached 65, and expressed his wish to continue working. But he was rejected by his employer, a government agency.
I also understand that denial of requests to continue working beyond 65 may be the norm, rather than the exception.
In this connection, what percentage of those who request to work beyond 65 are successful?
What percentage of all employees are over 65?
No age, gender, marital status, race?
As to “The Public Service Division (PSD) – the civil service’s human resource arm – yesterday pledged to continue supporting Tafep’s guidelines.
“We do not ask for information such as age or date of birth, gender, marital status, race and religion in our job application forms” said Mr Tan Hoe Soon, a PSD director”, how many ministries and agencies also do not ask for all this information?
Monkey see, monkey do?
Or monkey see don’t do, monkey don’t do?
How many private employers also do not ask for all this information?
What percentage of private employers do not ask for all this information?
Guidelines without statistics quite useless?
What’s the point of guidelines, when there are no statistics as to the extent to which they are being adhered to? Using surveys of arguably small sample sizes of generally large companies to indicate that all is well with guidelines, which may have practically little or no legal consequences for non-adherance, may not be the best way forward.
Any more “future oversights”?
After all, perhaps one can always explain it by way of just “an” or “another oversight”?
Leong Sze Hian
