Feb 4, 2009

NTUC chief says Jobs Credit scheme saves jobs and workers' CPF

Labour chief Lim Swee Say has defended the government's Jobs Credit scheme and emphasised that the scheme not only helps save jobs, but it also helps to save workers from having a cut in their Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings rate.

He added that Singapore's workers have three major concerns now. They are about keeping their jobs, ability to find another job after being retrenched and whether their CPF contributions would be affected.

He said: "Can we save all jobs? With Jobs Credit, can we hope to have zero retrenchment? If there is any announcement on retrenchment, does it mean that Jobs Credit scheme is a failure?

"Just like a CPF cut, Jobs Credit likewise is not a wonder drug. Jobs Credit is meant to save jobs, but Jobs Credit cannot aim to save all jobs.

"How far should we go to try to save jobs as we go through this downturn? The realistic side of me says 'let's go as far as we can' and that is the reason why the labour movement supports the decision by the government to draw on the past reserves.

"This is because it is important that the government sends a clear message that the government is putting in the best effort. And in response, the labour movement, the employers and workers must put in the best effort as well."

Several MPs who supported the Jobs Credit programme want the government to monitor its implementation closely.

Mayor, South-West CDC and MP for Hong Kah GRC, Dr Amy Khor, said: "Whilst the acting manpower minister has said that it would be left to companies to decide how to make use of the Jobs Credit scheme, a completely laissez faire approach in this case may appear quite unproductive to Singaporean workers concerned about their livelihood.

"Since it is a cash injection from government coffers, the government has the moral authority to compel recipients of the Jobs Credit to save jobs for Singaporeans as much as is reasonably possible."

MP for Jalan Besar GRC Denise Phua said: "There should be accountability on the part of recipients of our precious reserves. Is there a need to inflate the coffers of healthy enterprises who are not at risk of losing their employees?

"Would a broad-based blunt Job Credits scheme simply mean moving our precious reserves into the wrong pockets and creating windfalls of some at the expense of taxpayers and target recipients, especially those who are vulnerable such as the elderly, the disabled and the needy retrenched?"

However, the labour movement chief is not in favour of attaching strings to the Jobs Credit scheme.

Mr Lim continued: "If a company is not doing well, that it has to retrench workers, we deprive them of Jobs Credit, so aren't we pushing them further towards the downturn, thereby speeding up more retrenchments? So I don't understand the logic."

Another concern is that the scheme would be abused by employers.

Deputy Speaker and MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC, Indranee Rajah, said: "Supposing I have two companies and one of the workers is paid S$4,000. Maybe if I split his job, then put him in one company and I pay him S$2,500 and I put him in another company and pay him S$1,500, then do I get two Jobs Credits?"

MP for Potong Pasir Chiam See Tong, who missed most of the Budget debate last year because of a stroke, gave a 15-minute speech in the House.

He called for greater transparency in the distribution process of the funds allocated in the Budget to those who are in dire need of help.

A key point which the MPs want to put across to Singaporeans in this Budget debate is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to battling this downturn, especially in the efforts to minimise retrenchments and cut costs for business.

Some 50 MPs shared their wide ranging views on the Budget in the last two days.

- Channel News Asia

No comments:

Post a Comment