New Shityzen Li Yeming now questions FCF

[Sammyboy RSS Feed]

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

New citizen Li Yeming now questions FCF


November 13th, 2013 | Author: Contributions




New citizen Li Yeming


Hi TRE,

This is an article from Li Yeming published by SPH’s Zaobao not too long ago
(31 Oct). It’s full of contradictions!

I translated the article but do bear with me cause I’m not a professional
translator. Please help to point out any translation mistakes.

Read the article and it will help you have a better understanding on the real
motive of this guy Li
Yeming.

007

Editor’s
note: Who is Li Yeming? He is a PRC turned Singaporean and
vice-chairman of the research and publications committee, Singapore Federation
of Chinese Clan Associations (SFCCA).

Writing to Zaobao on 15 February 2013, he accused opposition MP Low Thia
Khiang of “inciting xenophobia” during the White Paper debate in Parliament.

Mr Low rebutted Mr Li in Zaobao, categorically denying the accusation. Mr Low
was shocked that Mr Li had accused him of “inciting xenophobia”, saying that Mr
Li had selectively interpreted his speech in Parliament. Mr Li later accused Mr
Low of taking his words out of context.

To make matters worse, Mr Li responded harshly when netizens questioned him
on Facebook over his accusations against Mr Low. Feeling indignant over the
whole incident, he later wrote an account of his supposed “persecution” by the
Singapore internet mob and sent it to a PRC newspaper 《国际先驱导报》 for publication
(‘Li Yeming tells the Chinese his Net ordeal‘), presumably to
seek solace among citizens in China.

A TRE reader commented, “It’s very surprising that as a Singaporean, Li would
write to a foreign medium to publish his complaints against his fellow
Singaporeans. Is he trying to say that Singaporeans are against outsiders?” The
reader added, “The newspaper is mostly read by the mainland Chinese. What are
his intentions? To get help from outsiders?”

Based on this act, netizens further questioned Mr Li’s loyalty, even though
he is now wielding a Singapore
passport.






理性审视新雇佣框架

人力部上月底推出被称为“公平考量”的新雇佣框架，

从明年８月起，将强制有意雇佣外籍人士的雇主须在由政府设立的“工作信息库”刊登至少１４天招 聘广告，证明 已尝试招聘新加坡人不果后，才获准聘请外籍员工。

这项旨在推动优先雇佣本地专业人士、经理和执行人员（PME）的新框架，宣布后受到国人的广泛 支持。在国会 辩论中，朝野双方也目标一致。反对党提出的均为建设性意见，主要是如何扩大、完善新框架，堵住 政策漏洞，以 便更有效地保护国人就业。

完全看不到有人质疑，制定新框架的出发点是否存在问题？即便有，在强大的民意面前，要说出来， 也是需要勇气 的。可笔者百思不得其解的是，新雇佣框架究竟是在针对什么问题，解决什么问题呢？

外籍员工是威胁，还是帮手？

不难看出，新框架透出的潜台词是，新加坡人的就业正受到威胁。而威胁来自何方，似乎不言而喻。 这应该是顺应 了“外籍员工抢饭碗”的强大民意，所以要用政策手段来确保国人在职场竞争中得到优先，以此让国 人感受到政府 的照顾，改变以往“政府只照顾外国人”的坊间印象。

可笔者要问的是，新加坡的失业率仅为２％。在经济学家的眼里，如此低的失业率不仅意味着“全民 就业”，也显 示了人力资源的紧张。换句话说，市场上的真正问题不是“外国人抢工作”，而是“有工作没人做” 。这是新加坡 企业面对的老问题。

这两年，在政府严厉收紧外劳和外籍员工政策后，新加坡的失业率和冗员人数不减反增，这与一些中 小企业倒闭或 外迁，一些大企业因人力成本上涨，而被迫采取外包战略有关。笔者认为，人力资源紧张所造成的负 面影响，未必 就对本地员工有利。

长期以来，新加坡靠补充外劳和外籍员工来缓解人力资源紧张的问题。李显龙总理日前主持茨园民众 俱乐部动土仪 式时，与一名来自印度的挖土机操作员交谈，过后在其面簿上对协助建设新加坡的外籍劳工表示感激 。这引来许多 网友的赞许和正面回应。

陈川仁部长在国会上也说：“有些行业是新加坡人不愿意从事的。从结构角度来看，外籍员工在一些 行业仍可扮演 一定角色，为劳动队伍增值，进而制造其他的工作与机会。”可见，无论是外籍劳工还是外籍的白领 员工，从整体 上来看不是在抢新加坡人的工作，相反，他们是本地劳动队伍的有益补充，是协助建设新加坡的“帮 手”。

旧制度没有保护新加坡人吗？

当然，这不等于在微观层面，外籍员工没有加剧竞争。不过，一定程度上的竞争不是坏事。人力部需 要做的是将竞 争维持在合理、健康的水平。而原有的准证申请机制，其实已有所考量。当局并不缺乏保护新加坡人 的手段。

我曾经访问过一名外籍员工，她在一家政府医院担任医生助理，工作三年获得上司和同事的一致认可 ，却因为准证 更新不获批准而必须离职。医院为了留住人才，曾多次向人力部上诉。最后得到的答复是，这类工作 （非护士工作 ）是保留给新加坡人的。

这说明人力部在批准外籍员工的准证时，是个案批准，是有考虑具体行业、具体工作的。只要认真执 行，这套机制 足以保护本地人的就业机会，防止出现不合理的竞争。只是国人未必了解相关运作，也未必知道，外 籍员工的准证 申请从来不是来者不拒的。尤其最近两年，申请难度之大远超过一般人的想象。

与已有的准证审批机制相比，要求雇主刊登１４天招聘广告，证明已优先招聘新加坡人，究竟有多大 实际意义呢？ 难怪有网民认为，新框架“做秀”的成分更大一些。

在“保护”与“公平”之间

虽然舆论普遍认为新框架是在保护国人，职总秘书长林瑞生也多次表示，新雇佣框架将保护本地专业 人士、经理和 执行人员的就业机会，但陈川仁部长在多次讲话中始终强调“公平”，而不是“保护”，并在国会强 调，我国仍是 开放且具有竞争力的国家。

为什么要这么说？因为一般认为，只有缺乏竞争力才需要保护，而保护与开放是两个相反的政策方向 。显然，避免 强调“保护”，有助于避免新政策造成某些负面观感。

可问题是，强调“公平”就不会造成负面观感吗？笔者观察到，在新框架宣布后，坊间普遍认为，新 加坡人在职场 上正遭受严重的不公平对待。虽然数据显示，今年首六个月有关不公平雇佣的投诉不到两百起，最近 遭人力部处罚 的仅有十例。数据似乎并不支持“不公平雇佣已非常严重”的说法。

但持这一观点的公众会反问，如果不严重，那当局为什么要制定新框架来维护公平呢？不要忘记，当 局掌握有更多 数据，相信他们是发现问题严重，才会推出新政策。可是陈川仁部长曾经表示，大部分企业并没有问 题，涉及不公 平雇佣的只是少数。而第三方的调查也显示，多数企业更愿意雇佣本地人，而不是相反。

我想大家都会同意，任何公平的社会，都不可能杜绝不公平个案的发生。在现实生活中，重点不是有 没有个案，而 是有多少，以及有没有纠错机制和惩处手段等。显然，针对个案，需要加强的是执法。从严从速查处 违例个案，更 能传达当局要确保公平雇佣原则的意志。

新框架显然不是用来针对个案的。那推出新框架的用意何在？为什么要让大多数没有问题的企业去执 行一套额外程 序，来证明自己已遵守“公平雇佣”的原则？只因为有少量违例个案存在？这样的政策出发点是否有 问题？新雇佣 框架到底是在针对什么呢？

2013-10-31，刊于《联合早报》

Translation

RATIONAL
REVIEW OF FAIR CONSIDERATION FRAMEWORK

The Ministry of Manpower introduced “Fair Consideration Framework” last
month. Starting from August 2014, whereby firms making new EP applications must
advertise the job vacancy on a new jobs bank administered by the Singapore
Workforce Development Agency (WDA) and run for at least 14 calendar days before
hiring foreign workers.

The introduction of FCF aims to give Singaporeans more priority and to
promote hiring local professionals, managers and executives (PMEs). It is was
widely support by the people upon the announcement. In parliamentary debate, the
ruling and the opposition share the same objectives. Constructive comments are
raised by the opposition, which focus on how to expand and improve the new
framework, closing the loopholes, and to protect Singaporeans to be employed
more efficiently.

Why no one questions on the FCF? Even if there is, but due to strong public
opinion, it certainly requires courage to voice out. But what puzzles this
author on the new employment framework is : what it is targeting and what kind
of problem to be solved?

Foreign employees: a threat or a help?

It is obvious that the new framework passes the subtext is that the
employment of Singaporeans are under threat. It seems that threat comes from
where, is self-evident. This should be a due to strong public response that
“foreign employees snatching the jobs away from Singaporeans”, as such, by
implementing this policy is to ensure that the Singaporeans get priority in the
employment competition, in order to make them feel that they are taken care by
the government. This is to change the anecdotal impression where ‘the government
only take care of the foreigners’.

What this author wants to stress is that Singapore unemployment rate is only
2%. In the eyes of economists, such a low unemployment rate not only means “full
employment”, also shows the tension of human resources. In other words, the REAL
problem is not on “foreigners robbing Singaporeans’ jobs in the job market”, but
rather “the job nobody (Singaporeans) wants”. This is the old issue which
Singapore companies are facing.

For the past two years, with the government strict tightening on foreign
labor and foreign workers policies, Singapore sees unemployment rate and the
number of redundancies increasing rather than decreasing , as some SMEs closing
or moving due to the rising labor cost and forced to take an outsourcing
strategy.Therefore the author thinks that the tensions in human resources are
caused by the negative effects, are not necessarily beneficial for the local
staff.

Over the years, Singapore rely on foreign workers and expatriates to ease the
shortage of manpower problem. Prime minister Lee Hsien Loong who has presided
over the groundbreaking ceremony of Ci Yuan CC recently, has engaged in
conversation with an excavator operator from India. He expressed his gratitude
on his facebook to foreign workers who helped build the Singapore. This
attracted many netizens praise and positive response.

Minister Tan Chuan Jin also said in parliament: “Some industries are
reluctant to engage Singaporeans from the structural point of view, foreign
workers in some industries still play a role. From the Angle of structure,
foreign workers in some industries can still play a role, adding the value of
labor force, thus creating other jobs and opportunities.” Therefore, as you can
see, both foreign workers and foreign white-collar workers, on the whole, are
not vying for Singaporeans to work, but on the contrary, they are the beneficial
supplement of local labor force, is to assist the construction of “helper” in
Singapore.

The old system not protecting Singaporeans?

Of course, this does not mean at the micro level, foreign employees did not
increase competitions. However, a degree of competition is not a bad thing. MOM
needs to do is to maintain in a reasonable, healthy competition level.The
ORIGINAL Employment pass and work permit application, in fact, has been put
under consideration. The authorities are in fact not lack of means to protect
Singaporeans.

I once interviewed a foreign employee who worked as a physician assistant in
government hospital for three years where she gained the boss and colleagues
approval, But because her employment pass was rejected she had to leave her job
despite her employer was trying to keep her job by sending numerous appeals to
MOM. The final answer from MOM: This kind of job is reserved for
Singaporeans.

This suggests that MOM will be considering specific industries and specific
work before approving the employment pass application. As long as it is executed
carefully, such policy is able to protect local jobs, to prevent unfair
competition. Singaporeans may not understand how the procedure is carried out,
and they should know any application submitted is not always turned out to be
successful. Especially during the last two years, to receive a successful
application is so much difficult beyond an average person imagination.

Comparing with the existing assessing system before issuing EP/WP other than
require employers for 14 days of recruitment advertisements that they have
priority for Singaporeans, but what is the actual meaning? It is no wonder that
the netizen thinks, that the composition of the new framework is more of wayang
show only..

Between the “protection” and “fair”

While public opinion holds that the new framework is to protect Singaporean,
NTUC general secretary Lim Swee Say has also repeatedly said that new framework
will protect local professionals, managers and executive jobs, but Minister Tan
Chuan Jin has stressed in his speeches several times that it is “fair”, rather
“protection”, and stressed that our country is still open and competitive during
the parliament.

Why say so? Because it is generally believed that only need protection, and
lack of competitiveness and protection and open is two opposite direction.
Obviously, avoid emphasis on “protection”, and help to avoid the new policy
caused some negative impressions.

The problem is, stressing that “fair” will not have negative impressions? the
author observed that after the announced a new framework, it is generally
believed that Singaporeans in the workplace is suffering from serious unfair
treatment. Although, according to data from the first six months of the year
complaints about unfair employment is less than two hundred. MOM recently has
only punished 10 of such cases. Data does not seem to support the “unfair
employment has very serious” argument.

But the public will be held in this view and as, if not serious, why should
the authorities formulate new framework to maintain the fairness? Don’t forget,
authorities have more data, believe that they are found the problem is serious,
will launch the new policy. Minister Tan has said, most of the enterprise do not
involve in unfair employment, those involving is just a minority. And third
party survey also showed that most companies prefer to hire locals, and not the
other way round.

I think everyone will agree that any fair society is likely to put an end to
happen the unfair cases. Did in real life, the focus is not the case, but how
many, and if there is any error correction mechanism and punishment method.
Obviously, in view of the case, it is necessary to strengthen the enforcement of
the law. Strictly investigate violation cases promptly, can communicate more
authorities to ensure that the principle of fair employment will.

A new framework is clearly not used to target cases. What is the purpose of a
new framework? Why should companies with good reputation to implement a set of
additional procedures and prove that they have to comply with the principle of
“fair employment”? Just because there are only a small amount of violation cases
exist? Such a policy starting point is there a problem? The new hire framework
exactly target for what purposes?

The 2013-10-31. Lianhe Zaobao.

Editor’s
further note: With regard to Mr Li’s assertion that there is only a
small number of job discrimination cases (he probably quoted TAFEP’s figure of
200 or less), Mr Li may wish to review the results of this survey of close to
1,000 employees: Survey confirms rampant job discrimination against SGs

The survey conducted by recruitment firm eFinancialCareers last month
confirmed that a large number of companies in the finance industry are
discriminating against Singaporeans in their hiring. A majority or 52% of the
respondents admitted their company had favoured foreigners for some job
openings.

In fact, the situation was so bad that 2 ministers had to have a “friendly
talk” with senior members of the financial industry, informing them of the
problem.



Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.