(Delivered in Parliament on 5 March 2018)
Supporting Contract Workers – Daniel Goh
Chairman Sir, term contract workers make up 10% of our resident workforce. Last year, the Tripartite Standard on Employment of Term Contract Employees was launched. It is a good first step in ensuring better protection of contract workers. When I asked the parliamentary question on the compliance mechanisms for the Standard in October last year, Minister Josephine Teo said that in two months, 400 employers, accounting for more than 28,000 or 17% of all resident term contract workers, have adopted the Standard. Could the Minister give an update on how many contract workers are now covered under the Standard?
I have two points to make. First, on compliance. In her reply, Minister Teo said that the Standard relies on self-assessment by companies and engagements with employers based on complaints from employees. I would like to ask the Minister, in the past six months since the Standard was established, how many complaints have been received and what are the outcome of the engagements?
I understand the Ministry’s position to calibrate the compliance to give employers the incentive to adopt the Standard. But there is also the need for the Ministry to do occasional audits to make sure that the Standard is meaningful for contract workers. I believe many public agencies are hiring term contract workers and they should have adopted the Standard. I would like to suggest that the Ministry audit the agencies and survey the contract employees to find out whether the Standard is working and where are the gaps.
Second, on the coverage of protection. Currently, the Standard covers pro-rated leave benefits, adequate training, and the notice period for early termination or non-renewal. The notice period is the same as the notice period for retrenchment of permanent employees. But what is missing in the Standard for Term Contract Workers is the recommendation of retrenchment benefits. Without this recommendation in the Standard, term contracts remain a risk of being the route for employers to avoid the moral and regulatory pressure of retrenching employees responsibly and fairly.
CPF for Self-employed Workers – Chen Show Mao
Sir, self-employed persons account for around 8-10% of working residents and, with the rise of the gig economy, may well increase significantly in the future.
The Ministry has indicated it accepts the tripartite working group’s recommendation of a contribute-as-you-earn model for Medisave whereby contribution to the self-employed worker’s Medisave account of CPF is required as and when a service fee is earned. As the Ministry further studies its implementation, could the government also look into more ways to encourage gig workers to make further voluntary contributions to their CPF by providing them with strong incentives to do so?
There is substantial evidence from public policy efforts that positive actions can be induced through non-compulsory incentive mechanisms. For instance, could a “default” be established where CPF deductions (beyond Medisave) initially match those of regular-economy workers with the same job profile, but being nonbinding, would permit opting into a lower amount? Alternatively, could gig workers receive information in their CPF statements about typical contributions by regular-economy workers in comparable employment circumstances, to encourage them to follow the “social norm”?
Self-employed persons typically face short-term cash flow needs, which may trump their longer-term economic interest in saving for future retirement. Could the government look into offering incentives for self-employed persons who voluntarily contribute to their Ordinary, Special or Retirement accounts, including favorable tax treatment when they do so?
Sexual Harassment in the Workplace – Dennis Tan
In the past few months, the topic of sexual harassment in the workplace has been hotly discussed globally. Many, mostly women, have taken to social media to talk about their experiences in facing and dealing with sexual harassment at work.
Minister Lim Swee Say told the House last year that the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) received 800 complaints over the last three years, of which fewer than five were about workplace harassment. It was not clear if these included sexual harassment cases.
This contrasted with the survey done by AWARE in 2008 with 500 respondents where 54% of the respondents experienced sexual harassment at the workplace. But more recently, according to a Straits Times report from 10 December 2017, one in four cases at AWARE’s Sexual Assault Care Centre are about workplace harassment. We have also read press reports of such cases in the past year.
Concern
Are there sexual harassment incidences happening at our workplaces which are not being surfaced, due to a variety of reasons e.g. out of fear of repercussion at the workplace, affected persons are highly likely to be reluctant to report sexual harassment at their workplace, especially if the perpetrator is a superior? This is especially so if company policies are not explicit on what constitutes sexual harassment, and what standard of procedures are taken when reports are made.
Minister Lim had also said TAFEP works with NTUC and SNEF to conduct regular courses to manage workplace harassment and trained a fair amount of company representatives in the past 2 years. However, the measures in TAFEP guidelines are not prescriptive, and the ministry does not track how many firms have implemented the recommendations.
At present, the TAFEP guidelines are clear and good in giving specific guides to employers on what they can do to reduce incidences of workplace harassment.
However, the guidelines still places a bit more emphasis on affected persons taking responsibility for their own workplace safety – keeping alert, looking out for signs, and understanding what constitutes harassment.
There is less emphasis on educating staff on how to NOT harass, and the consequences of doing so. The guidelines also do not illuminate on sexual harassment in detail. As seen in recent debates around the globe, it can be sometimes ambiguous to perpetrators on what constitutes sexual harassment.
I would like to propose that MOM should issue definitive guidelines on workplace harassment. Such guidelines can include clearer definitions of sexual harassment as well as to take into account the concerns I have raised earlier.
MOM should also keep track of companies who have implemented the recommendations made in the guidelines and whether guidelines are followed through in cases reported.
Finally, may I suggest that the Ministry of Manpower could consider carrying out a fresh survey to get a more realistic picture of the incidence of sexual harassment at the workplace here in Singapore? It may provide a better picture so as to help the ministry as well as NGOs to take a more focused approach to handle all related issues more effectively.
Silver Support – Daniel Goh
Chairman Sir, I have argued in my Budget debate speech that Silver Support payouts to needy seniors based on HDB flat type may cause hardship for the seniors as well as send the wrong signals. Seniors who meet the criteria for Silver Support are already means-tested to be requiring cash support to meet their everyday needs. They are rigorously means-tested to have low lifetime wages, live in a HDB flat, not own large properties, and have low household support. The HDB flat type is not part of the means-testing. However, seniors who live in larger flats get less payouts though they are just as needy as those who live in smaller flats.
This does not make sense. The seniors who qualify for Silver Support are already means-tested to be needy. The size of the flat that they happen to live in does not make them more or less needy. Many seniors often do not have a choice of which son or daughter to live with, or the size of the flat could be a legacy. Having payouts tiered according to flat types seem to signal two things to seniors and their families. One, it is better for a senior to stay with the child with a smaller flat or to live alone. Two, it is better for the family to downgrade to a smaller flat. These signals go against the thrust to get our seniors to age in place. Can the Minister explain the rationale behind the tiered payouts?
I also have several questions that address other specific concerns. What is the breakdown of beneficiaries of the Silver Support Scheme by gender? Since the payouts started, how many beneficiaries have lost their eligibility for Silver Support and what were the reasons? Minister had said seniors who did not qualify for Silver Support could appeal for a review of eligibility. How many appeals have been received so far? Out of these, how many were approved? What were the main reasons when the appeals were not approved? On the appeal process, how can a senior make the appeal? What documents or documentation are required for the appeals?
Employee CPF Contribution Flexibility – Leon Perera
When we discuss retirement adequacy, we speak of replacement rates, the ratio of retirement income to pre-retirement earnings. Nowadays, many PMETs are finding themselves retrenched, being unemployed for stretches of time and/or having to take pay cuts later in life, due to economic disruption.
As a result, the replacement rate from their CPF Life pay-out may increase as a result of their income dropping later in life.
In the case of people who are in this at-risk group, who have already reached their CPF minimum sum and who can show that their income has dropped severely, can MOM consider allowing them, on appeal and for a limited time, to contribute a smaller amount in employee CPF, so as to free up more cash for their day to day needs?
That would mean that their CPF does not grow as quickly and they will get less CPF Life pay-outs when they retire. But they will still get the CPF Life pay-out generated by the minimum sum. And if their working income has dropped drastically, then a smaller CPF Life pay-out in future would still achieve a reasonable replacement rate with less employee CPF paid for some years prior to retirement. I hope MOM will consider this.
CPF LIFE and Women – Daniel Goh
Chairman Sir, the gender differentiated premiums for CPF Life compounds the effect of the gender income gap. This gap stands at 18% and has not changed in a decade. It suggests we have hit a structural limit to closing the gap by improving the educational attainment of women. To put it simply, this structural limit is that women’s participation in the workforce tends to follow the M-curve, leaving employment in their 30’s and 40’s to provide care-giving for children or aged parents.
In general terms, the current gender income gap means that women will have 18% less CPF savings than men when they enroll in CPF Life. With the gender differentiated premiums, women will get less income per month from CPF Life than men.
The argument for gender differentiated CPF Life payouts is that it is fair because women as a group live longer than men. The corollary is that a unisex CPF Life with the same payouts for men and women will make men “cross-subsidize” women for living longer. I don’t know why men “cross-subsidizing” women so that everyone can have reasonable retirement income until they pass on is so terrible a notion.
Let’s take a step back and consider this. Now, women are already disadvantaged by the gender income gap and the unpaid caregiving in the middle of the M-curve. Should not women be given the slight advantage at the end of their lives, just in terms of CPF Life payouts, for the sacrifices they willingly take up during the most productive phase of their lives?
The other argument for gender differentiated CPF Life payouts is that it is following the industry norm for annuities. But CPF Life is not a commercial product sold by a private insurer. It is a national pension programme that combines commercial standards and the social protection concerns of a progressive government. The retirement inadequacy of women is a major social protection concern in our ageing society.
Productivity of Older Workers – Chen Show Mao
Sir, Many members have spoken on the importance of our older workers to our future. I agree with them. I’d like to to urge that we give importance to raising the productivity of older workers (and to job redesign as a means to achieve that objective) by making it part of the Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs), in addition to leaving it to the efforts of individual employers.
Could we expressly identify Job Redesign for Older Workers as a key component of each ITM to be set out among the suite of initiatives for improving productivity in any given industry? So that we may spur the collective thinking that can go into finding better solutions of Job Redesign for Older Workers, and direct some of the industry’s efforts at innovation in this direction. Perhaps resources could be pooled by companies in the industry to develop best practices, to modify tools and equipment for use off-the-shelf by older workers throughout the industry?
As businesses in our industries think about how to change, even disrupt, processes in the workplace in order to generate greater value on the back of better-used resources, could we make Job Redesign for Older Workers a required part of the syllabus?
We know Productivity is one of the four pillars supporting the growth and competitiveness plans of an ITM. Could we envision Job Redesign for Older Workers as a key component of ITMs: a third Horizontal, along with Promoting Info Comm Technology adoption and Skills development. It can help to support the industries and produce improvements across the economy, in the face of an ageing workforce.
Employment for People with Mental Illness – Daniel Goh
Chairman Sir, in many jurisdictions, there are laws that ban the use of pre-employment questionnaires asking job seekers about their mental health to reduce discrimination. In 2016, the Minister replied to my question on doing the same here that such declarations will not disqualify a candidate from being considered for the job. However, the reality is not so rosy. In October 2016, The Straits Times reported on employment discrimination faced by people with mental illness, in which several interviewees said that they felt the “sense of societal rejection most acutely while job hunting.”
I understand that job applicants who think they have been discriminated against could report the case to MOM, which will then investigate to make sure that the employers are conducting fair and progressive recruitment practices. The problem is that hard evidence of discrimination often does not exist, as the discrimination is often not communicated or is only verbally communicated. Can the Minister please share how many cases of discrimination on the basis of mental illness have been reported to MOM and the outcomes of investigation by MOM?
Sir, we have done quite well in encouraging employers to hire and integrate people with disabilities into the regular workforce. The culture of inclusive and progressive employment is setting in; the mind-sets of employers and consumers have been changing. I believe the Government could and should extend the same experience to promote the inclusive employment of people with mental illness and change the prevailing prejudices against mental illness. The World Health Organization has estimated that in developed economies, one in four people have a mental illness some time in their lifetime. Inclusive employment of people will go a long way towards combating society’s prejudices against mental illness. Inclusive employment will assure people with mental illness that seeking help for their illness will not prevent them from gainful employment in the future, which in turn will help them integrate into society and minimize relapses.