I refer to the front page headlines story “Foreign workers help create good jobs for S’poreans: PM” (Singapore Straits Times, Apr 21) and “Foreign workers help to create more good jobs for Singaporeans: PM” (Channel News Asia, Apr 21).
The former reads, “In his speech, Mr Lee (Hsien Loong, right) noted that six in 10 of the employees are ‘Singaporeans and permanent residents’. Singapore residents also take up two-thirds of the managerial and professional positions, he added.”
The front page headlines story on Singapore’s Chinese daily Zao Bao on April 21 was also on Lee’s remarks at the opening of a S$3.7 (RM9) billion wafer plant, that foreign workers help to create jobs for Singaporeans.
Given the remarks at the end of the Singapore Straits Times article that “the government’s foreign worker policy could emerge as a hot-button issue this election as some believe that it has hurt residents’ job prospects and depressed wages”, I find it somewhat strange that even at this eleventh hour before the Singapore general election on May 7, Singapore’s prime minister is still using ‘Singaporeans and permanent residents (PRs)’ statistics.
For instance, “six in 10 of the employees are ‘Singaporeans and permanent residents’, could mean just one Singaporean and five PRs.
As to “Singapore residents also take up two-thirds of the managerial and professional positions…”, it could also mean, say, one-third Singaporeans and one-third PRs.
Also, according to the CNA report, since “in the technician and manufacturing jobs, two-thirds are foreign workers”, it could mean that as little as one percent of the one-third are Singaporeans and the balance 99 percent are PRs.
Meaningless statistics?
So, the bottom line is that the Singapore PM’s statistics may not tell us much about jobs for Singaporeans, because of the 1,200 workers in the new wafer plant, 480 are foreigners, and as many as 716 could be PRs, with just one Singaporean manager, one Singaporean professional, one Singaporean technician and one Singaporean in a manufacturing position.
So, the $64,000 question may be, how many are actually Singaporeans?
To illustrate the frivolity of the data, if half the locals are PRs, it may mean that only 30 percent of the total work force are Singaporeans, with one-third of the managers and professional positions and one-sixth of the technicians and manufacturing jobs being Singaporeans, respectively.
Surely the data breakdown of the locals into Singaporeans and PRs should be available, as it is only 1,200 people who are all employed in just one company in the island state.
The finance minister has the figures, but not the PM?
If Singapore’s finance minister can present ‘Singaporean only’ workers’ incomes and ‘Singaporean only’ households’ incomes in the budget statement in Singapore’s Parliament in February, albeit that it was one of the very rare occasions that ‘Singaporean only’ statistics were disclosed, why is it that the Singapore PM can’t now?
Well, your guess is as good as mine!
100 percent foreign staff?
Under the Singapore Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) employment policies, an employer may be able to hire entirely non-Singaporeans, because under the foreign worker quota rules, a company can have unlimited employment of PRs and employment pass holders (EPs), up to 25 percent of S-pass workers and 50 percent of Malaysian work permit holders in certain sectors like the services sector. For non-Malaysian work permit holders like those from China or India, the quota is much lower at generally 10 percent.
To illustrate the above with some examples, a company can have 100 percent PRs, 100 percent EPs, or 100 percent mixture of PRs and EPs,
Alternatively they may comprise 50 percent PRs and EPs, with 25 percent S-pass, 15 percent Malaysian work permit holders and 10 percent China/India work permit holders, etc, as well as an unlimited number of foreign university interns on typically six-months stay in Singapore, who do not need to be subject to any of the foreign worker quotas.
