Committee of Supply – Head S (Ministry of Manpower)

The Chairman: Head S, Ministry of Manpower. Mr Patrick Tay. You can just take the first cut alone.

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): Chairman, can I take all my five cuts together?

The Chairman: Just one, please, and then I will call on the subsequent four.

Supporting and Representing PMEs

Fair Consideration Framework and Careers Portal

Employment of Persons with Special Needs

Employment Support for Ex-offenders

Managing Workplace Harassment

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

In my five cuts, I wish to highlight five groups of workers in Singapore whom I am concerned for and wish to speak up for. First, Professionals, Managers and Executives, PMEs for short. Second, those that have been discriminated against. Third, those that have been harassed. Fourth, those who have special needs and fifth, those who are ex-offenders.

First, PMEs, The workforce profile in Singapore is changing rapidly. Today, 57% of our resident workforce are Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs). Although we have kept unemployment rates low and retrenchment declining the past three years, I am concerned with the fact that more than 70% of those retrenched the last three years were PMETs. This is coupled with the fact that the majority of those classified as long-term unemployed are PMETs especially the matured ones and this group also found it much harder to re-join the workforce after losing their jobs.

Unemployed and retrenched PMETs. Last year during the debate on the President’s address, Minister shared that MOM will step up support for mid-career jobseekers and the long-term unemployed. Till today, there are mature PMETs who have shared their difficulties and challenges in finding and landing in jobs. Have we been successful thus far in assisting these group of workers? MOM shared that the enhanced Place-and-Train schemes and Professional Conversion Programmes will help more workers reskill and move into new occupations or sectors with progression.

The new Career Trial will also to enable more jobseekers to try out short-term work stints, to facilitate their assessment of new jobs and careers. Can MOM provide an update on these programmes and its efficacy in minimising job mismatches? In addition, for those who have been successfully placed, how has the retention rates been the past one year?

Jobs portal. Minister also shared last year that MOM will also transform its employment services through technology. The “MyCareersFuture” portal will make job searches more personalised, smarter, and faster, to better help jobseekers and employers find suitable matches. Can MOM provide an update on how far this portal has been effective in reducing missed matches and getting more Singaporeans into quality jobs?

The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, I understand you have woven all the five cuts into one speech. Take it all at one go.

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Thank you, Chairman. Young PMETs. I have also met young PMETs who themselves have faced challenges in securing a job. The Career Starter Programme was first announced in May 2018. Can MOM share how the programme benefits graduating students?

PMET Under-Employment. Then, there is the issue of under-employment of PMETs. MOM has data on time-based under-employment. However, I am more concerned about non-time based under-employment. This is where PMETs do "smaller" and "lesser" jobs than what they are equipped, trained or competent for. I have been speaking about this the past few years and recommend a comprehensive study to ascertain the severity of this amongst PMETs in Singapore.

PME Union Representation is something that the Labour Movement has been pushing for. The Industrial Relations Act was amended in 2015 to permit rank and file unions to collectively represent executive employees. To order to avoid conflicts of interest and undermining management effectiveness, executives with senior management functions were excluded from collective representation. These functions are set out in section 17(3) of the Act. The tripartite partners have also issued the Tripartite Guidelines on Extending the Scope of Union Representation for Executives.

In the years that have followed, unions which have sought to extend their scope of representation to include executives have met with some difficulties, mainly due to the overly general way in which the exclusions in section 17(3) have been worded.

On the ground, our unions have come across instances where employers cite section 17(3) to deny collective representation for executives who are not really in senior management grades or having access to information which would give rise to a genuine conflict of interest if they should be represented by the union.

The Chairman: Mr Tay, do not worry about the timing. We will add in another four minutes when you hit zero. In case you get too stressed.

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Thank you, Chairman. Some examples are, first, employees, such as sales executives or engineers who help to prepare project bids. We have come across cases where employers have refused to allow union representation simply because these employees have access to confidential information on the company’s budget and finances. Second, executives who carry out the initial rounds of performance appraisals of employees whom they are supervising, though they do not make the final determination of the employee’s performance grade or promotion. Employers have sometimes argued that such executives are not entitled to collective representation because that they can influence decisions on other employees’ performance.

The unions’ experience, therefore, is that the exclusions set out in section 17(3) are too broadly worded, thereby giving employers the opportunity to claim that even mid-level executive employees fall within them, whereas the intent behind the law was only to exclude those who are at senior management levels and carrying out functions which genuinely give rise to a conflict of interest if they are represented by a union.

I would like to suggest that the wording of section 17(3) of the Industrial Relations Act and the Tripartite Guidelines be reviewed and amended to better reflect the true intent of the law. This will help employers and unions to reach consensus on the extension of scope smoothly and expeditiously.

Considering the above issues and challenges faced by PMETs in Singapore, I suggest the tripartite partners should work together to examine in detail the plight of PMETs in Singapore, the precarious and vulnerable PMETs, so that we can identify any blind spots and further strengthen our efforts to pre-emptively and pro-actively assist them.

Second, discriminated workers. Nationality discrimination. I have been lobbying on strengthening the Singaporean Core, Fair and Progressive Hiring and eradication of nationality bias since 2011. It has been an arduous but positive journey. We have seen the introduction of the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) and the National Jobs Bank in 2014. There is also greater focus and awareness of the move towards not just fair but progressive workplaces and employment practices.

Anecdotally, the situation has improved when I speak to fellow PMEs. However, in this regard, I do still hear complaints that employment agencies and placement companies are also where some of these malpractices and nationality discrimination happens. In some cases, the nationality discrimination results in job losses of local PMEs and hiring of foreign PMEs for jobs which local PMEs can fill.

In this regard, I wish to ask MOM to provide an update on how effective has the FCF been in the past three years since implementation in levelling the playing field for our local PMEs and in eradicating "nationality" discrimination in hiring practices, including by employment and placement agencies.

I know the Minister has shared that we have nailed more than 300 companies into what MOM calls the "watchlist" where we see the "Triple Weak". Has there been an improvement since the last time she shared about this "watchlist" and what kinds of companies ‒ whether MNCs or SMEs ‒ and from what sectors are these companies from?

MOM had also introduced the Capability Transfer Programme last year. This was to help and support the transfer of specialized knowledge to strengthen the Singaporean core of talents for the future. How has been the progress thus far?

Age discrimination. Another form of discrimination is with respect to age. Ageism as they call it. There is an unconscious bias against older workers in general although it is often difficult to detect such discrimination and gather evidence to prosecute and censure perpetrators. I hope the tripartite workgroup on older workers will also look into minimizing if not eradicating this in the selection, recruitment, appraisal, promotion and even during retrenchments.

Third, harassed workers. I have raised this at the Ministry of Law’s COS but am raising this again as anecdotally, harassment in the workplace whether sexual or non-sexual in nature is something that cannot be condoned or tolerated. Currently, we have a tripartite advisory and legislation such as the Protection from Harassment Act and Penal Code which already empower the Police and the Courts to deal with egregious cases of harassment. For cases of workplace harassment that do not cross the threshold to constitute a criminal offence, it is still important that they are managed well. How can we provide more support to employers and employees to do so? How can we ensure those who whistle-blow are not prejudiced against?

Fourth, special needs workers. Another group of workers and jobseekers I am concerned about are those with special needs. Beyond those with disabilities, there are those with special needs such as Autism, Attention Deficit Hybperactive Disorder (ADHA), Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), Dyslexia and other medical and mental conditions such as depression. We know many countries in the West have strong support systems and eco-systems to provide meaningful work and jobs for such jobseekers. Can we study their successes so that we can build a similarly strong system and framework here in Singapore?

I am aware the Open Door Programme supports companies to hire, train and integrate persons with special needs. How can we build on these efforts to help more persons with special needs to join the workforce?

1.45 pm

The final group are those who are ex-offenders. I am aware SCORE has been doing more to help their in-mates transit and re-integrate back into society when they are released. Ex-offenders may require more help to re-integrate back in society, including finding employment.

The career counselling, training, employment facilitation and re-integration should start whilst they are in prison so that they can seamlessly integrate back into the labour market and be gainfully employed. This includes those who are on tagging and day release. How are we helping ex-offenders re-enter and remain in employment? Mr Chairman, in Chinese.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to call for more attention to be paid to five groups of vulnerable workers in Singapore. Firstly, more than 70% of workers retrenched in the past three years are senior PMETs. The re-employment rate and long-term unemployment rate of older PMETs are both higher than that of younger PMETs. I urge tripartite partners to strengthen collaboration, understand the various needs of vulnerable PMETs and provide timely and effective assistance to these workers.

The second group refers to workers who are being discriminated. First, in terms of discrimination by nationality. It has been three years since the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) was implemented and there is a need to assess its efficacy. Second is discrimination by age. I hope that the tripartite work group will pay attention to the issue of ageism when preparing their recommendation report.

Thirdly, workers who are being harassed. We aim to create workplaces that adopt ‘zero tolerance’ towards harassment.

Fourth, we should also pay attention to workers with special needs and give them opportunities to realise their potential.

The fifth group are workers who are ex-offenders. I urge employers not to view these ex-offenders with tinted glasses and give them opportunities to re-integrate into the work place.

Question proposed.

The Chairman: Mr Desmond Choo.

Managing Workplace Harassment

Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Sir, workplace harassment can take various forms. It can range from insensitive comments from a colleague on a working mother's maternity leave to ageism to abusive remarks by customers. It can happen to any worker regardless of age, gender, race, industry, or job function. Whatever the form and whoever the target, it causes distress and exerts an undue toll on our workers. It poisons our work environment. It has no place in our modern workplace.

We must first improve the awareness among victims and provide channels for them to seek assistance. It is important that we educate both employers and employees on how to respond to workplace abuse and harassment. We must make unambiguous that there are clear lines that cannot be crossed. Can MOM update on the number of harassment cases that it addresses annually and what are the awareness efforts and measures to mitigate such cases?

In addition, for those who might be affected by workplace harassment, we can consider counselling, especially for our frontline workers. For example, counselling was introduced in National University Hospital. It is a free and confidential service that has been very useful for the healthcare professionals who work in high-stress environment amidst high service expectations by the public and patients. Such services can be useful to help employees cope with their workplace stresses better. Can the Ministry consider expanding such services to more companies as a form of Work Pro?

Employment Support

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, over the last year, I have received feedback from residents who have lost their jobs saying that it is difficult for them to find another job. They have sent out many job applications but receive minimal responses or just rejection letters.

I empathise with these residents. Being unemployed not only affects a person’s financial commitments and his ability to pay the bills for housing and food, it also affects their self-confidence because they are unable to earn a fair income to support or contribute to the family.

It is even more difficult if the person who has lost the job is above 50 or 55 years. Many times, they blame the HR departments of the hiring companies for not even considering them for an interview once their age is disclosed.

Some of these residents have put the blame on foreigners and assert that their job losses are caused by foreigners who have displaced them. I have the following questions for MOM.

First, it is about helping job seekers. May I ask MOM what else can MOM do to help Singaporeans who have been displaced from their jobs? How effective is e2i and My Careers Future in helping them find a job. I went into My Careers Future recently and found that there are 24,268 jobs available. But yet from the experience of my residents, it seems that it is really not so easy to find a job among that over 24,000 available jobs. Some of the residents have also said that they have already visited e2i they have done everything that they have been advised to do. But yet there is no positive outcome.

So, can MOM advise how has the Adapt and Grow initiative and growth sectors effort helped jobseekers take up new jobs? Has MOM carried out any survey to assess whether job seekers are aware of the role of the Government agencies in helping them to find alternative jobs? How else can we persuade job seekers that if they can make some adjustments to their expectations, it would be easier for them to find alternative employment.

Next, it is about the Fair Consideration Framework. Last year, I raised a concern about the many companies that are on the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) Watchlist. May I ask MOM for an update as to whether the situation has improved? How many companies still carry out discriminatory practices against Singaporeans and how many are still on the FCF watchlist? Does MOM still receive feedback about companies where almost every worker is a foreigner and what other actions can MOM take to signal our unhappiness with such companies and to discourage them from discriminating against employing Singaporeans?

Lastly, it is about seniors above 67 years old. Does MOM monitor the statistics about seniors who have retired after 65 to 67 years old but are still active and willing to work but were asked to retire because of their age? What else can we do about such seniors who are still healthy and capable of contributing to the workforce? I know of companies who say that they have to keep an eye on their headcount and hence, have to let these seniors retire even though they can still contribute to the company.

Jobs-skills Mismatch

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, in the last few years, we have heard this phrase "Jobs-skills Mismatch" being used to explain the discrepancies between the share of job seekers and job openings in the labour market. We have also heard this phrase being used to frame re-training and re-skilling policies and nudge workers to re-skill. As Industry 4.0 looms and new cyber-physical system threatens to replace workers, the phrase has taken on a greater sense of anxiety.

I am not suggesting that jobs-skills mismatch does not exist and the phrase has been misused. My concern is that without proper study the concept becomes the presumption rather than fact, an ideology rather the truth.

The consequences will be very negative. Our re-skilling programmes will miss their mark. Our workers will waste their time going down blind alleys. Our employers will waist resources seeking unreal matches, and the Government will not be spending effectively.

There has been one instructive study on jobs-skills mismatch by economists in MTI in last November. The study used data from MyCareers Future.sg (MCF) platform and looked at the link between seven types of mismatches and job application outcomes.

Education, salary expectation and experience mismatches do not appear to be significant. This means that our workers are not over-educated, demanding of high pay and lacking experience, rather generic skills mismatch and non-generic skills mismatch mattered, with the latter mattering three times more. Both combined provided for about 5.8% increase in probability of an unsuccessful application.

There are a few things that we can learn from this study. First, employers seem to be more concerned about specific skills than generic skills. This is a concern as employers should not be looking for narrowly specific skills.

Second, the MCF platform may be inadvertently promoting non-generic skills mismatches by allowing for fine grain skills-based job searches. One interesting finding of the study is that the persistence of workers in applying for jobs and the greater activity of employers on the MCF platform improved application outcomes.

The conclusion may be well that at this juncture the Government should do less in applying technological solutions and focus on nudging workers and employers to do more to close the gap between jobs and skills.

Employment Support for Locals

Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Mr Chairman, with the technological shift, we see new opportunities but it also requires businesses and people to adapt and change in order to be able to take advantage of the opportunities and deal with the disruptions. What is most challenging is the speed of change we are experiencing.

Much of the disruption to jobs are being driven by technological changes. New opportunities are created with these disruptions but they do require new skills and mindsets to take on these new roles. Hence, it is no longer about providing quality jobs but also providing the support and development for employees so that they are ready for these new jobs.

With the trends I have just described, it means that people need to build capabilities throughout their lives and careers. Businesses too need to adapt to the changes of the market to effectively develop the capabilities of their people across different age groups and segments and to access talent. Across the several agencies – WorkForce Singapore (WSG), SkillsFuture Singapore, E2i, NTUC, IMDA, and many more, there are numerous programmes and initiatives to support individuals and organisations build capability for the new economy. How can these efforts be better leveraged effectively to match people to the right programmes and organisations to the capabilities they need?

How has Workforce Singapore (WSG) helped mature PMET job-seekers, and those who have been unemployed for long periods? Can MOM share how the Adapt and Grow initiative and growth sector efforts help jobseekers take up new jobs? How effective has the Adapt and Grow initiatives been and what are the new jobs that PMET job seekers and those who been unemployed for some time taken on with the initiative? What is MOM’s assessment of the success of the programme so far? Have our Singaporean PMETs whose jobs have been disrupted been able to adapt and take advantage of the new job opportunities?

Underemployment

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Chairman, underemployment basically refers to situations where a person is working but below capacity. According to the International Conference of Labour Statisticians, measuring underemployment is necessary for better policy-making, as it would improve the analysis of employment problems and contribute towards formulating and evaluating policies and initiatives to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment.

In a 2017 survey on Underemployment by the Ong Teng Cheong Institute, it was found that underemployed persons tend to face many challenges such as low morale, insecurity about their job and income, and difficulties in meeting daily expenses. While we are responding to job disruption by engaging in economic transformation and re-skilling workers, it would be wishful thinking to expect that displaced workers would find work in new industries in a seamless manner and without any discontinuity in income and benefits.

To this end, it would be most useful to know how well the professional conversion programmes such as Adapt and Grow did in terms of matching jobseekers with new jobs of comparable pay, or the extent of the pay cuts taken. Further, I understand that Adapt and Grow consists of two sub-schemes: Place and Train, where an employer has been found for the jobseeker, and Attach and Train, where training is done before an employer is found. For this latter group under Attach and Train, what was the success rate for placements?

Sir, it is good to note that MOM is tracking underemployment. Currently, MOM presents underemployment based solely on time, that is, those working part-time when they wished to work additional hours. While this is an internationally-accepted indicator, the International Labour Organisation has, over the years, highlighted the multi-faceted nature of underemployment that cannot be captured by time alone. For instance, in 1998, it passed a resolution stating that that there was a need to revise the existing standards on the measurement of underemployment and to broaden the scope to include also inadequate employment situations. Inadequate employment situations cover all those in employment who want to change their current work situation, for reasons such as inadequate use and mismatch of occupational skills; inadequate income; working excessive hours or in unstable jobs. Broadly speaking, inadequate employment could be skills-related, income-related, or working excessive hours.

To this end, the Ong Teng Cheong Institute (OTC Institute) survey mentioned earlier recognised that underemployment was too complex to be measured by a single factor alone, for example, time. The survey came up with a matrix of three factors to identify "severely underemployed", that is, university graduates working full-time who were earning less than $2,000 per month.

The OTC Institute suggested that it would be reasonable for the Government to target policies towards groups of severely underemployed persons. In view of all these, can MOM update the House on its tracking of, and policy towards underemployment?

2.00 pm

Employers and Good Jobs for Singaporeans

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Chairman, according to the Third Report of the Estimates Committee of Parliament released in October last year, 18 out of the 23 industries under the Industry Transformation Roadmaps (ITMs) would see manpower growth up to 2030, while the remainder are not envisaged to experience any manpower growth up to the same period of time. These include food services, retail and real estate amongst others, while other sectors such as construction do not have any manpower targets as their manpower needs are seasonal and based on cyclical factors.

At the recent pre-Budget dialogue with the Institute of Chartered Accountants, some panelists stated that they only had a vague idea of how small-medium enterprises (SMEs) stand to benefit from the ITMs.

Apart from the special employment credit, going forward what are the Government's plans to prompt, support and encourage Singapore companies to accelerate the transformation of their business and HR processes to hire Singaporeans above the age of 65, provide higher salaries to attract Singaporean employees or successfully hire women, men or older workers who prefer part-time work as a result of needing time to look after children, or their dependents, or for some other reasons?

How do the ITMs support these objectives, and can they play a more facilitative role in this regard than is currently the case, particularly for smaller SMEs that may find it more challenging to take advantage of the ITM format to fulfil larger national objectives of creating a strong and united Singapore?

Self-employed Persons

Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: Mr Chairman, technological advancements and disruptions together with the gig economy are changing the way organisations structure work. Today's gig economy does have experienced, talented people who possess deep skills and prefer independent work.

In Singapore, Self-Employed Persons (SEPs) make up around 10% of the workforce. These workers often choose to enter the gig economy rather than the traditional workforce in order to have more autonomy and ownership over their work, as well as flexibility over their schedules. More people may be choosing freelancing as their primary job because they have multiple skills, which allow them to fill up their time with different types of jobs.

Due to the relatively low barriers to entry, there are also individuals who may decide against seeking formal employment and choose to be self-employed as an alternative to generate income in order to be self-sufficient or in times when they have difficulties finding suitable employment. The profile of SEPs in Singapore is diverse with many different occupations.

While many chose flexible freelance work that fits their lifestyle, they sacrificing job security, perks and benefits. There is growing concern as to whether there is adequate support for their long-term financial, healthcare and retirement needs.

SEPs may not be able to raise their fees as it may make them uncompetitive when they bid for assignments. Hence it may make it hard to keep up with the cost of living. There are growing instances of SEPs that are not paid on time, accurately and in some cases not paid at all for work done. They lack protection against loss of income from prolonged illness or injury and do not have sick leave or health benefits. Some insurance policies do include such a rider, but there are no such standalone insurance products. SEPs are also challenged in developing their skills to stay current given the near-term demands of being self-employed.

The tripartite workgroup on SEPs released a set of recommendations last year recognising that most SEPs who are self-employed as their preferred choice. Can MOM share the progress on the implementation of the recommendations as well as the impact on SEPs?

CPF for Self-employed Workers

Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, self-employed persons account for around one in ten of working residents and with the rise of the gig economy, may well increase significantly in the future.

The Ministry has indicated that it is working on implementing 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 made as and when a service fee is earned. I compliment the Ministry on its efforts.

Could the Ministry also look into more ways to encourage gig workers to make further voluntary contributions to other accounts of 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 non-binding, 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 Ministry look into offering incentives for SEPs who voluntarily contribute to their Ordinary, Special or Retirement accounts of CPF, including favourable tax treatment when they do so?

Retirement Adequacy for Non-employees

Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Chairman, many were concerned when the Minister recently stated three-quarters of CPF payouts are less than $500 a month. But CPF payouts only form part of retirement income. The self-employed and care-givers and homemakers do not contribute to CPF, and rely on private savings for retirement. Older generations were especially likely to have low CPF savings, because self-employment and informal work were more common. As for women, in 1990, about half of working-age women were out of the labour force; and even today about one in four are out.

Going forward, can we ensure that CPF becomes the basic retirement system even for the self-employed, care-givers, and homemakers?

There are two emerging concerns.

First, technological disruption is likely to increase the extent of self-employment. While about one in ten today are self-employed, this may increase in the future. Even a few years spent out of regular employment will have significant impact on CPF savings.

Second, societal trends. Divorce rates have risen rapidly and this has affected older women. While in 1980, less than 2.5% of women aged 40-59 were divorced, in 2018 about 8% were divorced. Many women have spent substantial time out of work to take care of their family. There are also fewer children to provide support. In 1980, six in 10 ever-married women had four or more children; but by 2018, six in 10 had two or less.

Women have no statutory entitlements to retirement assets in divorce or widowhood. It depends on whether the court orders distribution of CPF in a divorce, and also whether the deceased names the widow as the nominee for CPF.

Statutory entitlements for divorcees and widows do exist elsewhere. In the United States, divorced spouses have entitlements to their ex-spouse’s social security; and in the United Kingdom, spouses who are caregivers earn credits towards their state pension.

What has the Ministry observed about the extent to which current and projected retirement gaps exist for own account workers and care-givers? What is the work done on policies that address these gaps, such as mandatory contributions to retirement accounts for own account workers, matching credits to CPF, and entitlements for care-givers and homemakers based on Government credits, or from spousal accounts?

Older Workers and CPF Contributions

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, the last move to the retirement age to 62 years old and the re-employment age to 67 years old, was made in 2017. Since then, there have been calls to review the next steps in promoting the employment of older workers. I understand that there is an on-going review of the retirement and re-employment ages. Can MOM share the progress of this review, and if any outcome has been arrived at?

In our Parliament sitting in February this year, we passed the combined Motions on the elderly and care-giving. In my speech in support of that motion, I urged MOM to consider raising the CPF contribution rates for Singaporeans aged 55 years old and above, something which I had spoken about in this Chamber before. As a Singaporean turns 55 years old, their CPF contribution rate is drastically reduced by 11% overall. I have asked for the CPF contribution rate to be restored to the current rate of 37% in total, for ages 55 to 60 years old. Even if the CPF contribution rate is to be cut, it should be done progressively over several years, rather than a drastic 11% cut as you cross your 55th birthday.

As more Singaporeans are marrying and having children later, at age 55 years old, many would still be servicing their housing mortgages, supporting school-going children as well as elderly parents. While I recognise that the lower CPF contribution rates for older workers help them to remain employable, the reality is that there is already a trade-off in terms of having saved up enough for retirement and in fulfilling their financial commitments towards housing, education and care-giving for elderly parents. At 55 years old, many Singaporeans would still be economically active. Restored CPF contribution rates will help in paying housing loans, education or tuition fees for their children, and additional medical expenses for elderly parents.

Is there scope to revise upwards the CPF contribution rates of older workers aged 55 years old and above, while at the same time maintaining their employability?

Supporting Senior Employment

Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, I would like to appeal for more support for senior employment and request the Ministry to review four areas, namely the retirement age, CPF contribution rates, job redesign and flexible work arrangements.

First, the retirement age. Last year, there was a call to review future steps for promoting senior employment after the move to raise the re-employment age to 67 was achieved in 2017. Increasingly, seniors are expressing an interest in continuing to work for a variety of reasons – to continue to earn an income, to keep their minds and bodies active, to stay engaged in the workplace and community or simply because they enjoy their vocations. There is no reason why they should be forced to retire just because they have reached a cut-off age. I understand that the relevance of the retirement and re-employment age concept has been relooked. Would MOM share if any conclusion has been reached?

Next, CPF rates. Older workers have lower CPF contribution rates today to keep their total remuneration competitive and help them remain employable. The trade-off is that they will have less to save up for their retirement. However, we are also seeing improvements in older workers' employability and longer life expectancies. Their wealth of experience, cumulative knowledge and skillsets are assets, enabling them to make valuable contributions to their work. I hope that we can help them to attract more contributions to their CPF, so that they can enjoy a more secure retirement. Is there scope to revise the CPF contribution rates of older workers while at the same time maintaining their employability?

Third, job redesign. Older workers have a lot to contribute but their physical decline with age is expected. Redesigning job environments and functions will allow our seniors to continue working smoothly. Under the WorkPro scheme, the Job Redesign Grant of up to $300,000 helps companies to make these changes so that workers aged above 50 can work more easily and safely. What is the Ministry’s assessment of how rapidly our businesses are redesigning jobs to make workplaces more age-friendly? I am especially concerned about senior workers in menial jobs. Does MOM have measures to get employers to expedite job redesign and create better work conditions so that the work is less strenuous for elder workers? Are there plans to update or refine the WorkPro scheme?

Finally, I would like to ask for an update on the adoption of flexible work arrangements (FWAs) in our workplaces. Does MOM have data on the number and profile of companies which offer FWA and the number of employees who take it up? How many companies have tapped on the Enhanced Work-Life Grant and how many employees have benefited? Would MOM provide a breakdown how many organisations have utilised the FWA Incentive and the Job Sharing Incentive? How can we encourage even more companies to offer FWAs?

Remove Retirement Age

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Chairman, life expectancy has risen from 76 years in 1995 to 83 years in 2017. If the retirement age remains stuck at 62 years, Singaporeans who wish to continue working would be forced into early retirement for over two decades.

Will the Government consider removing the artificial expiry date for productive senior workers, namely the current retirement and re-employment ages of 62 and 67 years. Removing the retirement age not only removes the first expiry date but also changes the current notion about the expiry of work abilities that is fixed by age. It will change the ageist mindset.

2.15 pm

The re-employment age should also be re-defined so that it is not referring to another expiry date but to a transition at 70 years old. This transition obliges employers to put our senior workers on rolling contracts on the same terms that should go on without an expiry date as long as the workers are still able and productive and want to work. It is the transition that allows employer and employee to evaluate performance and productive levels together, work out flexible work contracts if the employee so wishes and collaborate on job and workplace redesign to keep up productivity.

Financial Security of Seniors

Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to speak about the financial security of Singaporeans aged 65 and above. This generation worked hard to lay the foundation of the Singapore we enjoy today. During their time, wages were low and many worked in the informal sector.

A recent Parliamentary Question revealed that 75% of these seniors receive CPF monthly payouts of less than $500 per month. And for those seniors 70 years old and older, the average monthly payouts dropped to below $300. These payouts are clearly insufficient to provide for today’s cost of living.

Many of these seniors rely heavily on family support for financial security. Majority cited "allowances from children' as their main source of income. However, I am concerned about this generation’s over-reliance on their children, what with the shrinking size of families and the consequent burden that will have on the shoulders of the younger generation.

I greatly appreciate the launch of the Silver Support Scheme to supplement seniors’ retirement incomes, but I always wonder if the amount they receive is sufficient to provide for a basic, dignified living. I would like to ask the Minister how many of these seniors would attain a retirement income of at least $8,400 a year or $700 a month, after combining their payouts from CPF and Silver Support Scheme. I would like to suggest to the Minister to review the retirement adequacy of seniors, those with little or no family support, and consider whether they may receive top-ups to their CPF, perhaps in the form of "Retirement Income Supplement", in order to attain a Basic Retirement Sum payout currently at $700 per month.

Mr Chairman, Sir, on a brighter note, we can take comfort in the fact that the same group of seniors, 65 years and above, 76% of them are property owners and the slew of HDB policies introduced in the recent years present many options open to these seniors who wish to unlock value in their homes, for a very comfortable retirement if they know how to do it.

However, these housing monetisation options are not widely known and understood by seniors. Many seniors aged 65 and above received very little education and tend to leave financial matters in the hands of other family members. They are ill-equipped to understand the options – too many and too complex – and even if they do, I am always worried whether they can manage those money released judiciously.

Let me illustrate this with the story of my resident Mdm Tan, not her real name. She is aged 83. She approached me for financial assistance after her husband passed away. Mdm Tan has an adult son, who lives with her in her fully paid-up 4-room flat and the son earns $4,000 per month but he refuses to support her with any allowances nor to help pay for living expenses. Although we were able to secure some short-term assistance from the Government for Mdm Tan, she did not qualify for long-term financial assistance because of her son’s income as well as the option to monetise her flat. She found it a challenge every month to pay for her food, medical and utility bills, until we helped her realise the significant value of the asset she owns – her 4-room flat.

It took us nine months, working together with HDB, to help her understand the option of monetising her flat. She chose the Lease Buyback Scheme. She now lives a very different lifestyle, with a healthy cash balance of over $80,000 in her bank account, whilst receiving a monthly payout of over $2,600 from CPF. She is now often seen out and about in the community, happily enjoying the company of friends and hobbies like painting, visiting her doctor confidently and never having to worry about overdue bills.

But I am still concerned about Mdm Tan – she recently told me that her niece has suddenly become very friendly and has asked her that she be made a joint account holder of Mdm Tan’s now very healthy bank account. Mdm Tan came to me and said she is "embarrassed" if she refused her niece’s request. Luckily, Mdm Tan listened to her Member of Parliament on the risks of doing so and she has held on tightly to her bank account, so far!

Sir, there are many more Mdm Tans out there. I would like to ask the Minister to step up the Government efforts to reach out to seniors, perhaps through the Silver Generation Office, to equip them with better financial literacy to safeguard their savings and to understand the many ways they can draw value from their property, from renting out a spare room to downgrading to a smaller flat so that they can fund a comfortable retirement.

"Triple Weak" Companies

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, according to the MOM, "triple weak" companies are those that do not meet the minimum criteria in terms of nurturing and having a Singaporean Core in their workforce and having a tangential reference to Singapore's economy and society. The prospects of Singaporeans being hired into such companies and doing well or getting promoted are low.

In September last year, the Minister of Manpower confirmed that the Ministry was monitoring 250 companies labelled as "triple weak", up from the 100 in February. Out of the original 100 companies, about 20 were removed from the watch list as their HR practices had been raised to industry standards. Does the Minister have an update on MOM's investigation into the remaining companies?

Separately, has there been a reduction in the prevalence of such "triple weak" companies? What is the current number of companies that are under investigation and which industries do such companies predominate in? How does the Ministry identify such companies and is there scope for greater enforcement, including whistle-blowing channels to identify such companies early? What action does MOM take for companies that are uncooperative, show no improvement in their polices or slide back to their own ways of being "triple weak"? Finally, are the directors of such companies also barred from setting up new companies and the status of their directorships in other companies revealed?

The Minister of Manpower mentioned at the last Committee of Supply that some employers have the preconceived ideas that local PMETs are either or unwilling to work so such companies write off Singaporeans without even considering them fairly. Can I enquire what action TAFEP or the Ministry takes to deal with and how does it educate such employers?

Employment Passes

Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, in applying for Employment Passes (EPs), employers submit educational certificates for employees they want to hire. However for educational certificates other than from India and China, where additional information is needed, not all employers perform independent verification with universities. The case of Mikhy Farrera-Brochez, who forged his educational certificates, dramatically illustrates the limitations to this approach.

I would like to ask if MOM currently performs some degree of checks, be it in-house or external, on educational certificates submitted for EP applications, such as using a risk-based sample check approach, for example.

As there are practical limitations on MOM's ability to verify all certificates submitted, I would like to suggest MOM could advise employers to conduct verification via a panel of low-cost service providers. Verification need not be made a compulsory condition of granting the EP. But there is every reason to believe that voluntary use of such a verification process would be high, should it be cheap and accessible. After all, few employers would want to hire an employee who falsifies credentials. Through this, we could cut down cases of such credentials forgery.

Next, what are the current enforcement mechanisms against kick-back or false salary declaration schemes whereby foreigners on EPs are paid below the salary floor or pay a portion of their salaries back to the employer in some way? It is stated in press advisories that “MOM conducts proactive checks to detect and enforce against false applications.” However, this is a crime with a so-called “willing buyer and seller”, as both parties are incentivised to collude and conceal the facts.

Right now, there is an MOM hotline for people to report infringements. How many have used the hotline and how many successful prosecutions have resulted? If effective, can we consider investing more resources to publicise this hotline.

And are there are other means of proactive enforcement used? For example, can more be done with Artificial Intelligence and data analytics to flag out suspicious activity for enforcement?

CPF Transfers to Relatives

Ms Sylvia Lim: Mr Chairman, under the CPF Act, CPF members are allowed to transfer their savings to their parents and grandparents, provided the members satisfies certain conditions. Members aged below 55 need to have the Full Retirement Sum of at least S$166,000 in their accounts, before they can do so. When the Act was amended in 2017, this provision was extended to members who had the required Basic Retirement Sum of about S$83,000, if they also had a sufficient property pledge or charge to make up the rest of the Full Retirement Sum.

These provisions are useful to enable CPF members to help provide for the retirement needs of their family members, giving them some peace of mind and reducing intra-family poverty.

These days, the formation of an immediate family nucleus should not be assumed to be the norm. Many Singaporeans are single or childless in their senior years. These persons will not have children or grandchildren who can top up their CPF balances.

I would like to suggest that the Government consider widening the categories of persons who can receive CPF transfers from family members, to include the members’ own siblings and the siblings of one’s parents, that is, uncles and aunts. These are already relationships recognised under our law for inheritance of estates, and will help boost retirement adequacy of single and childless seniors.

Retirement and Housing

Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Sir, we will spend the most productive years of our lives building up our CPF savings by age 55. After that, we will probably have to confront ageism at work, health issues, and rising cost of living. The last thing we want to do at that point in time is to argue with the Government on when and how we can tap into our hard-earned CPF savings for retirement.

The recent public disquiet over the allegation that CPF Board had quietly moved the Payout Eligibility Age (PEA) to 70, though unfounded, goes to show how much we look forward to the day when we can finally see and touch our CPF money. So, any attempt to change that day, regardless of intention, will be met with disgust and anger, and rightly so.

Thus, the call to set the auto payout at PEA by default should be considered seriously because it sends a clear message that the Government does not intend to and will not keep the members’ hard-earned savings beyond what is mandated by law.

The question we should be asking ourselves is, by setting the auto payout at PEA, will it change the fundamental tenet of the CPF saving scheme in any way? The answer is no. There is not an iota of change at all. Members can still choose to delay their payouts to earn more interests, if preferred.

Sir, CPF is like a fixed deposit instrument to me. Upon maturity date, you can expect to see your money deposited into your account with interest, unless you have instructed the bank to roll over the deposit. I can assure the Minister that no members will quibble with the Government when they see their hard-earned money deposited into their accounts automatically on their PEA unless instructed otherwise.

Next, I wish to talk about balancing retirement and housing needs using CPF. I have residents who needed to tap into their Special Accounts or Retirement Accounts to help service their mortgage arrears but such requests were mostly rejected. The standard reply given was members must always strike a balance between retirement and housing needs.

Sir, most members would not even think about tapping into these accounts for housing needs, if not out of sheer desperation. Some of these members were hauled to court by the lenders, and each court appearance would only push these members deeper into debt. Some of them were staring at a very real possibility of losing their flats.

Some of these members have less than $10,000 standing in their SA or RA, and they are already in their late 40s or 50s. How is that amount even meaningful for retirement purpose? How long can these members stretch their payouts at PEA and how much would the payout be per month? Can the CPF Board not feel the gravity of the predicament these members are facing? It is not right to make these members beg to use their own money to save their flats.

Sir, the CPF Board must also strike a balance between retirement and housing needs. If there is no roof over a person's head, what is retirement? With his home intact, a member can still rent out a room or two to make ends meet.

2.30 pm

The member can also explore the possibility of moving into a smaller flat when not under duress and use the proceeds for retirement. But all these options will vapourise if there is no flat left for the member to even plan his retirement.

Furthermore, any money used for property purchase would have to be returned to the member's CPF when the flat is sold with accrued interest. No one can siphon off any CPF money used for property purchase in any way. The money is going straight back into the CPF and nowhere else.

Sir, I certainly hope that the Ministry can exercise more flexibility in the use of CPF savings for housing needs in situations like this.

Finally, I wish to reiterate the call for more flexibility in allowing members to tap into their RA before their official retirement age of 62.

We certainly do not know when we will need to slow down or stop working completely before age 62. When that happens, our income will drop drastically. We should allow members to do their own sums to determine if they need to start their CPF payouts early before retirement age. CPF members should be given the option and flexibility to plan their retirement needs at their own comfort level. PEA should be lowered to age 60. Let us decide if we are comfortable to take the lower payout at age 60 or wait out for a higher payout later.

Singaporeans have continued to support this Government despite knowing that they can no longer withdraw their money completely at age 55. They have continued to give this Government the mandate knowing that they will not see their entire CPF savings until PEA and only in monthly payouts. Why is this Government so reluctant to even offer such flexibility to Singaporeans in return?

Opportunities for People with Special Needs

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Sir, very often, we worry about creation of employment opportunities, redesigning jobs for the seniors and the current workforce, and how we can continuously upgrade their skills to ensure they remain relevant and employable. At times, we may have forgotten that there are people with disabilities that are left without a job. This is even more critical for them as chances of learning a skill that can be used for future employment is as uncertain as them worrying whether they have enough to care for themselves at old age. This is a multi-faceted issue that warrants more attention and support.

Special needs individuals can be wide ranging, from those with varying levels of physical disabilities, to those with autism and attention disorder, and the other extreme spectrum for those with severe mental health challenges. We need to first clearly define the scope of special needs people that we are able to assist for work employment in the short term, and eventually to build a structured framework of assistance that looks into education, training and job prospects for them. It is understandable that we cannot cater jobs for the entire spectrum of special needs people. But surely, there must be specific areas that we can champion together.

I recognise the awareness by employers of people with disabilities can also contribute economically has increased in Singapore. Apart from re-designing jobs and opening the employment doors of regular companies to those with special needs, I feel that a more pressing need and area that we have to focus on is the training of special needs individuals with specific skills for different industries when they are still schooling. General knowledge and broad skills may not help them to get more work opportunities as their curriculum is already different from those taught in the mainstream schools. Once they are past the schooling age, there are even fewer institutions or higher learning avenues that can enable them to continue their skills upgrade or to learn the relevant knowledge that is in tandem with industry requirements.

Looking at those with autism or attention deficit disorder, studies have shown that they exhibit strengths in many areas related to creative work – visual arts, music, self-contained direct tasks, have strong memory, good in Mathematics and computer amongst others. With the growing gig economy and digital workplace, we can design and engage them in these areas. We can consider providing platforms for them to further their studies and skills beyond their prescribed age where schools are currently able to keep them. Similar for those individuals with physical disabilities and wheelchair bound, some are mentally well to cope with work and can be trained for suitable jobs. While some random efforts are taking place in Singapore, we should continue to learn from some companies, like Microsoft and CVS Health, that are proactive in employment practices in these areas.

I know that SG Enable actively supports people with disabilities in job training, employment information and job referrals to employers. However, with an increasing number and wider spectrum of people with special needs emerging due to awareness and medical advancement, we need to put earlier intervention to assist more special needs people in having an active income. I would like to understand what other initiatives MOM intends to put in place to assist special needs people and increase their work opportunities so as to give them a peace of mind and have a sustainable social integration as they age.

Employment of Vulnerable Persons

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Chairman, there are currently several Government-funded programmes to help companies employ, train and integrate vulnerable persons or persons with special needs or disabilities, such as the Open Door Programme, Special Employment Credit, Workfare Scheme, and Disability Management Programme. I support these programmes that help make our workplaces and companies a lot more inclusive towards those who tend to be marginalised and who face challenges beyond just equal opportunities.

How successful have these schemes been in hiring, training and integrating individuals with special needs or disabilities so as to help them be financially independent and attain self-dignity? How can we build on efforts to help more individuals with special needs or disabilities to join the workforce?

Could more support for employers be provided, such as corporate tax relief or wage support when they hire individuals with special needs or disabilities, or giving employer recognition to companies that do so?

Could MOM also provide more incentives to such employers to help them with job redesigns that can allow for flexible work arrangements so that individuals with special needs or disabilities can work from home or work from where it is convenient for them, and where they have more time and space to adjust to their new work environments and work responsibilities.

Jobs for Persons with Disabilities

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Chairman, working and holding a job is an important component of a good quality of life for everyone, regardless of abilities. Whether full or part-time, work helps pay for one's daily living and also leads to better mental health and a sense of fulfilment and dignity.

In recent years, developments, such as the SG Enable unit, the Open Door Fund and the Special Employment Credit have positively impacted the employment scene for persons with special needs or disabilities, or PWDs.

Employers, such as the United Overseas Bank, National Library Board, Starbucks, Uniqlo and others have tapped on structured employment support services by VWOs such as MINDS, SPD and ARC. Kudos to them, numerous PWDs have been gainfully employed.

However, the picture is not that rosy. It has been reported that in 2017, only five in 100 PWDs in Singapore are officially working, and this is quoted as one of the lowest in developed nations. Key barriers are several: one, an unwillingness of potential employers caused by stigmatisation and reluctance to re-design job processes; two, a lack of a large enough pipeline of trained PWDs upstream; and three, an inability to focus and scale by agencies such as SG Enable due to resource restrictions.

I have the following clarifications and recommendations MOM's consideration.

What is the accountability of MOM to this special needs workforce?

How can it increase the employment rate of PWDs in Singapore?

How will MOM tap on its vast infrastructure and network to help them identify more suitable job families in both blue and white-collared jobs?

Will MOM resource and support the hiring of inclusion managers to work with SG Enable and disability VWOs to customise skills frameworks for suitable job families identified?

Will MOM set targets to aspire major employers to up their hire rate for PWDs? Start with a minimum 1% target for large employers with staff strengths of more than 1,000. Start with the public service!

Will MOM provide more incentives for inclusive employers such as: one, making the Special Employment Credit (SEC) for PWDs a permanent feature so that employers are assured of on-going support; and two, increasing this amount or make it an inclusivity allowance to the employer so that beyond subsidising the CPF of its workers with special needs, the employer can also pay for job coaching services.

Sir, in taking a more leading active role in developing this special workforce, MOM will not only be a contributor to building a caring and inclusive society, it will also strategically enhance the employment rate of Singaporeans and help to solve the manpower crunch in our country.

Workplace Safety and Health

Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, every worker, whether local or foreign, deserves to work in a safe environment.

Can the Ministry share how does Singapore fare when compared against other developed countries, in terms of reducing our workplace fatality rate? Going forward, how can the adoption of technology help companies make further progress in workplace safety and health (WSH)? Can the Ministry share examples of companies that used technology to improve their WSH outcomes?

Some businesses have also given feedback that after every fatal incident, additional safety measures are added.

While we all understand the importance of workplace safety, how can we also take into consideration legitimate business concerns about the associated cost of implementation as well its impact on productivity?

I am not sure if it is true but a resident told me that to change a light bulb, a company needs to have three workers – one to climb up the ladder, one to hold the ladder and a third who is a safety supervisor. I hope this is not true as risk must be measured against the cost of avoiding the risk. Crossing the road also has risks but we understand intuitively that it does not make sense to have a safety supervisor at every zebra crossing.

I hope the Ministry can do a stock-take of the various WSH measures which have been implemented to see if any of these can be removed without compromising overall safety.

The Chairman: Mr Yee, you might want to know that fall from height is a very common cause of serious injuries and fatalities. So, holding the ladder is quite important.

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Chairman, I touched on Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) in my Budget debate speech, and spoke about the need to continually invest in our WSH practices to ensure that our workers can return home safely to their families every day. I mentioned four areas that we could do more to safeguard our workers' safety and health. Let me now elaborate the context why we need to implement these four recommendations.

First, I called for our tripartite partners to place more emphasis on workplace health. Our workforce is ageing. This will cause a gradual shift in the types of WSH issues we will see in the workplace. For example, we will likely see more cases of chronic occupational diseases. Poor workplace health contributes to work-related injuries and fatalities. We need to place a greater emphasis on workplace health sooner, rather than later, to address such issues early.

Second, I called for differentiated insurance premiums to increase the cost to companies with poor WSH track record as a deterrence. Although workplace fatalities have dropped to an all-time low in 2018, the number of major and minor injuries has actually increased. This could mean one of two things. Either we were extremely lucky that the accidents did not lead to a fatality, or that today's better medical science has saved victims of serious accidents from possible death. Whatever the reason may be, we need to do more to encourage companies to reduce the number of accidents at our workplace. Having a tiered insurance framework, where companies will have to pay higher insurance premiums if there are many claims of the same incident nature, will go some way to achieving this.

The 2018 National WSH Statistics have shown that even low risk sectors were not spared from workplace accidents and injuries. There is no room for complacency in WSH, and therefore I urge our tripartite partners to support making it a mandatory requirement for every company to have a trained WSH representative, to make WSH more pervasive in our workplaces.

Making WSH more pervasive in every industry will be no easy feat, especially if you consider the diverse nature of our workforce. Every industry has its own unique balance of local to foreign workforce ratio, and the nationalities within the foreign workforce are diverse. The fact that we have too many training vendors that conduct the WSH Workforce Skills Qualification courses – about a dozen at my last count – and the significant variance in training resources provided by these vendors, makes implementing a standardised culture of WSH even more challenging.

The National WSH Training Academy can help ensure high and consistent WSH standards across sectors. A centralised WSH Academy can also serve as a Centre of Excellence in WSH. The Centre can establish a central registry of WSH practitioners, share industry best practices and showcase the use of new technologies to strengthen safety standards. Our SMEs would be the biggest beneficiaries from such a Centre of Excellence, as they have limited resources and will not be able to invest heavily in developing new WSH technologies.

2.45 pm

All workers deserve to go home safe and in good health to their families and loved ones every day. The Labour Movement stands ready to work with our tripartite partners on suggestions and proposals to raise WSH standards across Singapore so that we can all benefit from safer and healthier workplaces.

Help for Workers who are Owed Salaries

Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Chairman, there are many workers who are owed salary due to company closure, and many are not able to recover their salaries. They decided against Writ of Sale and Seizure due to the high cost of filing for WSS relative to the amount of salary owed.

In the United Kingdom, if a company is insolvent and the workers’ employment has been terminated, the workers can claim for part or all their outstanding salaries out of the National Insurance Fund (NIF) which is paid by employees, employers and the self-employed. There is still a claim limit since the intention is to help workers tide over while looking for alternative employment. In Singapore, we do not have an NIF.

I would like to propose to MOM to look at scheme to provide financial or subsistence relief to help more rank and file workers who are owed salaries due to company closure.

Migrant Workers

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Mr Chairman, the announcement that the Foreign Worker Quota for the services sector would be reduced has once again put a spotlight on migrant workers in Singapore.

While the Dependency Ratio Ceilings for the other sectors remain unchanged for now, it is important that we continually take steps to focus on improving productivity at our workplaces. As at June 2018, we have more than 950,000 work permit holders working in Singapore, with more than 280,000 of them in the construction sector. With selected training, these migrant workers can contribute to productivity improvements. The Government should consider implementing a national training and skills recognition framework, similar to the Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ), for migrant workers. For foreign domestic workers (FDW), the Labour Movement hopes to obtain the MOM's support to expand the pilot skills certification programme offered by the Centre for Domestic Employees (CDE) to further improve the employment ecosystem for FDWs.

Having safe and conducive employment conditions is important to ensure that Singapore remains a choice employment destination for our migrant workers.

One area which the Migrant Workers’ Centre and CDE have been focusing on in recent years is to encourage employers to adopt electronic salary payments. We have seen some encouraging results thus far, and I hope that the Government can consider mandating electronic salary payments to migrant workers, to prevent cases of employer abuse.

As part of the work permit application process, we need to better educate employers on their responsibilities to the migrant workers they employ. Having a common understanding on the rights of migrant workers will serve to prevent potential disputes.

Today, distressed migrant workers are unwilling to come forward when they have disputes against their employers, for fear of repatriation. While MOM has made key changes to the employment transfer system for work permit holders to specifically address this, migrant workers often do not have the correct network or assistance to search for new jobs. To exacerbate matters, workers who have lodged complaints are seen in a negative light by recruiters. These factors contribute to a persistently low rate of successful job placement for this group of vulnerable workers. I hope that the Government can continue to work with the NTUC to improve the migrant worker employment system such that there is better end-to-end support for migrant workers involved in disputes with bad employers. Employers, too, need to recognise that employing such workers can be advantageous, as these migrant workers have already acclimatised to local culture and work habits.

Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, I have two cuts. Can I take both?

The Chairman: Yes, you do. Two cuts, yes please.

Retention of Skilled and Experienced Foreign Workers

Ms Anthea Ong: Regulating foreign employment agents (EAs) remains a challenge. Some local employers purportedly take a cut of recruitment fees which incentivises them to hire new workers instead of retaining foreign workers already in Singapore. This means that workers who have gained skills and experience and better socialised to our society are sent home, thus lost to our economy in favour of a continuous influx of inexperienced and low skilled foreign labour. The problem is compounded by the short window period of 14 days to seek re-employment.

Has the Ministry considered giving unemployed foreign workers who are already in Singapore an advantage for re-employment? Further, does the Ministry plan to take more resolute action against employers taking kickbacks from workers, whether transacted in Singapore or abroad? Finally, will MOM’s extend its regulatory reach abroad by introducing preferential processing and approval of work permit applications made by local EAs who have foreign tie-ups operate abroad, and more importantly, can demonstrate "clean" recruitment?

Workplace and Employee Well-being

A recent 2018 IMH study showed that one in seven Singaporeans experience a mental health condition in their lifetime. This means that an increasing segment of our workforce will have to grapple with mental health conditions while under employment. Ninety percent of psychological conditions in Singaporean adults have their root cause in workplace stress. Yet studies have shown that an overwhelming 86.5% of those employed do not seek help for their mental health difficulties. What is perhaps most striking is that even as 72% of employers in Singapore consider stress and mental health an issue which affects productivity, only 51% have emotional and psychosocial programmes in place.

Members have now heard me share the above in this House that the MOM’s intent to recognise and promote employee well-being can be further served by enacting clear and deliberate provisions that are upstream and preventive in nature. I would like to take this opportunity to flash out some recommendations I made previously, and make some additional recommendations.

First, that the definition of "well-being" in all statutes, regulations and policies pertaining to employment in Singapore must expressly include not only physical but also psychosocial well-being. Accordingly, the relevant provisions in the Workplace Health and Safety Act, as well as subsidiary legislation, must provide for the psychosocial health and safety of employees at the workplace.

Second, workplace well-being begins with destigmatising mental health conditions and conversations. In positive language, this means that we must foster inclusive employment practices. Such measures include prohibiting discriminatory employment practices such as compulsory declaration of medical history, especially for mental health conditions. That is, of course, until such information no longer prejudices a potential candidate. Ultimately, we are aiming for an employment climate that does not harbour misconceptions and pre-judgments about applicants with mental health experiences.

Finally, I wish to address segments of the employment market which are more exposed to mental health risks, namely our differently-abled employees, low-skilled workers and migrant workers. Each group is vulnerable to different work conditions connected to greater psychological hazards – these include discrimination, higher risk of physical injury and challenges in social integration.

Will the Ministry allocate budget and manpower to look into the increased mental health risks present in such segments of our job market?

Non-discrimination in Employment

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, the survey done by the Ministry in 2014 showed that two in three firms reported that they had implemented fair employment practices. The majority of those which did not were planning to do so. It has been five years since the last survey. I would like to know when we can expect to see the next survey results from MOM.

To get a more accurate picture of the situation, the survey should include interviews of employees and job applicants and not just employers, as the then Minister of State Teo Ser Luck said, would be the case for the next survey in employment exchange in 2016.

The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) sets an important framework for protecting workers. However, it still just a guideline. According to the Government's Report in December 2018, "there are enforcement mechanisms that complement these guidelines. For instance, if employers are found to have discriminatory hiring practices, such posting discriminatory job advertisements, MOM restricts such employers' ability to hire foreign workers in Singapore".

Sir, how far do these enforcement powers extend if the alleged discrimination does not violate existing laws like the Re-employment Act or Women's Charter, and where the company does not employ foreign workers?

Additionally, the Government should lead by example. MOM can consider ensuring Government agencies and Ministries avoid procuring services and goods from companies placed on the Fair Consideration Framework Watchlist.

Economics incentives can also be given to companies who consistently do well and are not on the Watchlist as a means of encouraging fair employment practices.

Restriction on Trade

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Mr Chairman, it is not uncommon to find restraint of trade clauses in employment contracts to protect the interest of the employer, by restricting a former employee from competing in the same industry and jumping to a competitor.

Such restrictions are currently not governed by legislation. As a result, we hear of instances of unreasonable restraint clauses built into contracts even for workers such as cleaners, construction workers, pre‐school teachers and even drivers. It often states that employee cannot work in the same or similar industry for one year after leaving the employment of the company.

Such unreasonable restriction of trade clauses jeopardise the livelihoods of our workers. I urge the Ministry to introduce measures to protect the interest of vulnerable segments of workers, including low-wage workers and junior PMEs.

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take a break now.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 2.53 pm until 3.20 pm.

Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]

Head S (cont) –

Women in Male-dominated Sectors

Prof Lim Sun Sun (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, I declare my interest as a Professor in the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) and as a founding committee member of the Singapore Computer Society's Women in Technologies, Special Interest Group.

I greatly appreciate the various provisions that have been announced in this year's Budget to better recognise the needs and contributions of women. I would like to take this opportunity to offer suggestions on how we can better support women in the main-dominated technology sector so that it can be much more inclusive. Indeed, there are distinct benefits to greater gender diversity across all industries. but perhaps, especially so in the technology sector.

In Caroline Perez's book "Invisible Women", exposing data bias in a world designed for men, she provides compelling evidence to show how the silencing of women's needs and perspectives can be costly and downright fatal: crash test dummies that are based on the average male physique, ill-fitting armour that fails to protect police women and cancer research based principally on data on the male immune system. These are all sobering examples of how the omission of women's needs can cause lives.

As our society is technologising rapidly, the digital and physical infrastructures that shape much of our everyday lives must necessarily reflect the needs of all and not just half of humanity. We must thus ensure that the distinct strengths of women and our valuable insights are given every opportunity to shape technology and design. After all, research shows that women have tremendous socio-emotional intelligence. We are logical and rational thinkers and also possess the self-awareness and perceive and social skills that are crucial for understanding people, interpreting difficult situations and resolving conflicting needs.

Women also continue to bear most of the responsibilities as care-givers, caring not just for the next generation, but also for the elderly in our ageing society. Women's perspectives are thus especially illuminating for improving the innovations and services that facilitate the performance of such critical duties. To say it is difficult for women to balance the needs of home with the pressures of career is, therefore, a gross understatement.

While the number of women entering the technology sector is not sizeable to begin with, attrition rises sharply after pregnancy and childcare. In a fast-moving sector such as technology, the task of re-integrating is significantly more daunting as one's skills become quickly outdated. This attrition translates into a pipeline issue. Because there are fewer women to rise to the top, younger women do not see sufficient female role models in the technology sector. They are thus discouraged from joining the sector or they leave prematurely, uncertain of their future prospects. Upstream as well, we must try our best to boost the number of women in STEM so that we can nurture the next generation of women technological leaders.

At the Singapore University of Technology and Design, we make concerted efforts to maintain a 40% women enrolment in our engineering and architecture programmes. Indeed, our female students bring well-rounded perspectives and refreshing ideas when working in collaboration with their male counterparts. As professors, we can easily tell which projects have female team members because their innovations and designs invariably have that special touch.

So, what initiatives can we introduce to increase gender diversity in male-dominated sectors? Our SkillsFuture Credit programme can certainly help women to upskill. However, we also need to better support women who take leave for pregnancy, childcare or eldercare to help them sustain and broaden their professional networks. This will help smoothen their path as they return to the workforce.

Can we therefore introduce credit programmes that can help defray the cost of membership in professional societies? Can we also have special incentives for companies in sectors where women are under-represented, to introduce more flexible work arrangements and better childcare support? And can we also foster more incubation schemes that cater to the circumstances of female innovators and that offer more systematic mentoring?

More importantly, can we fund systematic longitudinal research that tracks the career trajectories of women through various industry sectors so that we can better understand their reasons for attrition as well as the factors that promote re-entry into the workforce? It is only with robust evidence that we can take a more proactive approach to ameliorating this problem of female under-representation. These are investments that Singapore can and should make not just for women but for our society as a whole.

Flexible Work Arrangements

Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: Mr Chairman, flexible work arrangements when implemented effectively can save businesses money, reduce operating costs and boost productivity and bringing advantages across the economy for both businesses as well as the entire supply chains. Benefits include business and individual productivity, lower cost for work space for companies, and many hours saved from travelling to and from the workplace. With the competitive labour market, flexible work arrangements may be a staff attraction and retention tool for businesses.

Can MOM share the progress of companies in Singapore adopting flexible work arrangements? Has this resulted better employee outcomes, such as better employee well-being, greater worker productivity and hence, better business performance for employers?

We are witnessing the evolution of work arrangements changing beyond just flexible work arrangements. The gig economy and increasing number of start-ups is changing the corporate workplace and how we work. We are also seeing new models of industry spaces, for example, with JTC LaunchPad, dedicated or shared co-working spaces offered by players like WeWorks, CollectiveWorks, The Great Room, just to name a few.

Technology, like mobile computing, high bandwidth and connectivity, data analytics, automation, robotics and artificial intelligence are shaping how we work and where we work. This is impacting both large and small businesses. We are seeing a trend of work arrangements becoming more casual, less structured and less centrally controlled. With technological advancements and disruptions, many organisations are seeing flexible work spaces and arrangements as strategic tools to drive change and to get their employees to innovate.

So, it is no longer a matter of just providing flexible work arrangements to meet employee needs and demands or flexible work arrangements just for work-life balances that employees are demanding, but together with the redesign of work and work spaces, flexible work arrangements are becoming strategic tools for businesses to innovate, improve productivity, attract and retain talent. Co-working spaces also provide for the advantage of eco-systems of support, collaboration and sharing.

So, against this backdrop, people will require new skills and knowledge to work. The new skills required in this new landscape of work include critical thinking and problem-solving, ability to deal and make sense of data/information, ability to collaborate and influence others, effective communication skills, adaptability, learning and re-learning skills,being self-directed and creative. How and are we preparing our workers to thrive in this new world of work?

Persons with Special Needs and Ex-offenders

Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Sir, as we strive to build a more inclusive workplace, how will the Ministry encourage and help our companies to recruit, train and integrate more persons with special needs and ex-offenders?

To encourage more companies to accept and employ persons with special needs, we have to help them understand that there are many types of special needs, physical and mental, and the kind of jobs these different groups can do.

3.30 pm

Public education and greater support from the Government is very important in this regard. Perhaps the Government would also consider setting annual employment targets to employ persons with special needs in the public sector. Employers have to take the plunge, start hiring and learn along the way how they could be more supportive and understanding. Fellow workers will also benefit as they learn more about empathy.

It is important that we help persons with special needs achieve as much independence as possible through work. Employment enables them to be engaged in society, learn and make meaningful contributions, just like able-bodied persons. They can help relieve their families' burdens and their parents can take comfort in the knowledge that they will be able to cope even after their parents are no longer around. Would the Ministry share an update on the Open Door Programme?

The other group of Singaporeans whom we should make greater effort to integrate into our workplace are ex-offenders. Employment plays an important role in keeping recidivism rates down. When ex-offenders receive the chance to be contributing and be valuable members of society again, they can regain their personal dignity and make a living to support themselves and their families. What are some of the latest initiatives MOM has with the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (SCORE) to help ex-offenders re-enter and remain in employment? Persuading companies to consider ex-offenders has its own set of challenges. What schemes does MOM have to attract more employers to consider providing them with a second chance?

The Chairman: Minister Josephine Teo.

The Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for all of your cuts. Let me start by updating you on the labour market.

Overall, it improved in 2018. Total employment went up; unemployment rate remains low, and there were fewer retrenched workers. On average, workers are earning higher incomes. However, I am always mindful that there are residents who would like to work but have not found jobs, and there are also those whose jobs and wages have not improved. MOM will try our best to help everyone. What are our challenges?

First, the global economic environment is more uncertain. In the fourth quarter of 2018, total employment still grew but more slowly. The unemployment rate inched up just slightly. There could be headwinds. As a result, MTI has moderated our growth forecast.

Second, we have more seniors. The employment rate for seniors has risen steadily over the years. Unemployment rate among seniors is also quite low, actually lower than average. Still, not all seniors who want to, have jobs.

Third, labour market performance across sectors is uneven. There has been some restructuring. But productivity growth actually slowed down in 2018 compared to 2017. The gaps in some sectors are worrying. They are not keeping up with the rest of our economy and their peers in other developed countries.

In the medium to longer term, what are the prospects to improve job quality and grow wages in these sectors?

That is why we are moderating foreign manpower growth in Services. It was not an easy decision. But we have to spur further efforts to restructure. This was a hot topic. Members of Parliament have given their view on this move during Budget debate and MIT’s COS debate. I will address them later.

But first, I will provide an overview of MOM’s responses to all of your cuts.

My response alone may take about an hour. I will speak on three areas, how we will walk the tech journey with our workers, provide better assurance and support senior employment.

Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad had earlier spoken about how we uplift the wages and skills of our low-wage workers. He will elaborate on partnerships with industry and the broader community.

In addition to support for low-wage workers, we should also support persons with special needs and protect the safety and health of our workers. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Low Yen Ling will speak on our additional efforts to support women, fresh graduates and ex-offenders in the workforce.

Let me start by sharing how we will walk the tech journey with our workers. By now, all of us expect technology to have far-reaching impact on industries and the future of work. In essence, our concerns are two-fold: whether there will be enough jobs, which is a question of quantity; and whether new and transformed jobs will be good jobs, which is a question of quality.

On quantity of jobs, fundamentally, Singapore is labour-constrained. Technology is an overall plus for Singapore as it helps us sustain more economic activities with fewer people. Bear in mind that our local workforce today is not large enough to support all our manpower needs. Technology may make us more manpower-lean and need fewer people, but for the foreseeable future, it is unlikely to eradicate our manpower shortfalls.

In fact, technology also creates new jobs that are potentially of better quality, which we should welcome. Take Ms Aryani Suhardi for example, whom I met recently. For 13 years, Aryani worked as an email correspondence consultant at Prudential’s call centre, handling queries from financial consultants. When Prudential started developing a mobile app chatbot for financial consultants, a new role was created – someone needed to "train" the chatbot to intelligently handle queries.

Aryani’s years of experience handling financial consultants’ queries made her an ideal candidate for the new role of "chatbot trainer". I have never heard of such a job before – chatbot trainer.

Seizing the opportunity, she learnt from a data scientist how to train the chatbot. She has been performing well as a chatbot trainer ever since, got promoted and even started training others how to do the same.

When I met her, I was given a demo and I was impressed – the chatbot that Aryani had trained even understands Singlish!

The chatbot technology has been a plus for other Prudential Call Centre staff as well. Call volumes at Prudential’s support centres have fallen by about 40%. As a result, customer service executives could get redeployed to new areas of growth. Those who remained no longer needed to answer routine questions. They told me it used to drive them nuts. So, now they do not have to answer the same questions over and over again – the machines can do that for them – and they could now spend more time helping callers with complex queries.

This development is not unique to call centres, and certainly not Prudential. Across many other industries, whether manufacturing or healthcare, you will hear similar feedback from businesses and their employees, that new jobs are being created and existing jobs are being improved with the use of technology.

Our goal in Singapore must be to enable all businesses to take full advantage of technology to create new jobs and improve job quality. Just as importantly, we must walk the tech journey with workers, help them adapt and take up new opportunities.

This is not the attitude everywhere in the world. Driven by fear, there is growing resistance in some places to workplace and industry transformation.

In Singapore, we are in a strong position to seize the opportunities that come with technological change. There are two main reasons for this. First, our strong fundamentals give us some leeway to shape the change. Second, we have strong tripartism at work.

Instead of fanning the fear, our Labour Movement is ready to embrace the change with Worker 4.0. All Labour Members led by Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng are fully on board – every Labour Member spoke about it in the Budget debate. I am deeply mindful that this is not a given. To keep the faith with our workers, we must do everything we can to walk the tech journey with them.

MOM is not alone in doing this. Other Ministries and sector agencies have in fact put jobs and skills at the front and centre of their workplans. This phrase "putting jobs and skills at the front and centre of our workplans" is no longer so uncommon. Just go and listen to all the sector agencies about their workplans. Their Chief Executive Officers and Managing Directors use this phrase.

For example, as Minister Ong Ye Kung and Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat had shared, our Institutes of Higher Learning are expanding the number of work-learn programmes.

MOE also support employers’ efforts to upskill and reskill their workers, through initiatives such as the Nanyang Polytechnic's National Centre of Excellence for Workplace Learning – because you need to build that capability and infrastructure.

For MCI, Minister S Iswaran spoke about efforts to maintain the skill relevancy of ICT professionals, as well as convert non-ICT professionals to take on entry-level ICT jobs through Tech Skills Accelerator (TeSA).

MOH, MND and MOT will also share their efforts to strengthen worker training in the healthcare, built environment and transport sectors.

In every one of the 23 Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs), sector agencies are taking the lead in driving initiatives to meet the jobs and skills needs of the sector. We have to take the sectoral approach, not one size fits all, because it really depends on the unique circumstances and what the profile of their workers are.

But, even then, realistically, not all workers will be like Aryani who is redeployed and upgraded as her employer adopts new technology. Some workers may find themselves having to move to new jobs. This may be in another company or industry.

The Government cares deeply that such workers get help. They deserve our utmost support. We will do so through the Adapt and Grow initiative.

Time and again, we see such workers adapt to unexpected situations with remarkable courage and resilience. They pick themselves up, often with the help of their families, and sometimes with the help of our career coaches, as well as the unions. And when they overcome their challenges, they manage to continue growing.

I have met many of them and salute every single one of them because their efforts were extraordinary. That is why I, and my colleagues at MOM and WSG are determined that they will not be alone in this journey.

Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Ms Jessica Tan asked how Adapt and Grow has helped. Last year, we helped over 30,000 jobseekers secure jobs, about 20% more than 2017. This include placements from Adapt and Grow programmes, as well as career matching services by WSG and NTUC's e2i. In particular, we worked closely with sector agencies to help place locals PMETs in sectors with good potential for PMET jobs, namely, Infocomm and Media, Manufacturing and Professional services, Finance and Insurance, Wholesale Trade and Healthcare.

Since August last year, we have also added "Built Environment" as the sixth growth sector. After all, we are not done building Singapore, so the "Built Environment" also offers good opportunities.

3.45 pm

To better support retrenched workers, we set up a Taskforce for Responsible Retrenchment and Employment Facilitation led by WSG. Companies are required by law to notify the Taskforce about upcoming retrenchments. The Taskforce then steps in to provide employment assistance to affected workers.

We sometimes hear questions about whether our help has reached the right people. For example, are we really able to help PMETs? Among the 30,000 jobseekers placed, more than half are PMETs, similar to their share of our workforce. What about workers who are less qualified or older? More than 9,000 jobseekers successfully placed last year had Secondary-level qualifications or below. For those aged 50 and above, there were close to 9,000 jobseekers placed, a more than 20% increase compared to 2017.

What about those unemployed for a long time? Over 60% of jobseekers placed were unemployed. Among them, close to half had been unemployed for more than six months. We will not forget those who have yet to find a job. It is not for want of trying. For some jobseekers, the gap with what the employers want may still be quite wide, such as for experienced PMETs.

This is why we are ramping up Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs). There are now more than 100 PCPs in over 30 sectors. In 2018, close to 5,000 people were re-skilled and employed through PCPs, an increase of over 30% compared to the year before, 2017. Most of the PCP participants do well, and that includes those on Place-&-Train as well as Attach-&-Train. About nine in 10 of the PCP participants remained in employment 12 to 18 months after being placed. About two-thirds were recognised for their newly acquired skills and received higher wages than before – two-thirds.

We are also not waiting for workers to become unemployed or retrenched. We started moving upstream to identify progressive employers prepared to re-skill their workers and put them in new jobs instead of letting them go. Last year, about 1,300 workers benefited from such redeployment efforts.

I have previously highlighted the banks’ efforts to reskill and redeploy over a thousand of cashiers and tellers. Another progressive employer is Singtel. They have many desktop support staff and foresaw the arrival of chatbots. So, they worked with WSG to gradually reskill 14 staff to take on new roles in network and system engineering. This includes sending staff with no prior technical experience to get certified for their new roles.

As Singtel embarks on digitalisation across more business functions, it is working closely with WSG to reskill at least 70 more employees to higher-value added roles, such as Robotic Process Automation Specialists and Digital Sales and Marketing, all job titles that up to five years ago we probably would not have heard of.

Whether each PCP is for a thousand or just a few workers, they all add up. And as NTUC might put it, every redeployed worker matters. This is why we are troubled when we do not get the same sense of urgency in some companies. Troubles us a great deal. Sometimes, the management themselves have not figured out future directions for the business and so they cannot tell the workers how to align. At other times, the entire industry is not moving quickly enough. But WSG will keep trying to engage companies and be quick to act when they are ready.

Members may also come across feedback that some PCPs are over-subscribed while others could not get going. What are WSG’s observations? There are two. Sometimes, the work is not sufficiently attractive to our local jobseekers. The solution is to work with employers to improve job quality through job redesign and salary review. In other instances, there is interest from the jobseekers, but the employers have set too high a bar or may have relied too much on years of experience or academic qualifications to short-list the candidates. So, they find they have no shortlist.

How can WSG help? A great example is the Artificial Intelligence Software Developer Attach-and-Train PCP offered by DigiPen. DigiPen is our partner. So, this is Artificial Intelligence Software Developer Attach-and-Train. So, no job offered at the start, but attach-&-train, because we know there will be demand.

The take-up for the programme was initially low, very miserable. Companies were looking for almost-ready candidates, such as Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) graduates already proficient in C++, a programming language. These hiring requirements immediately excluded mature jobseekers who were committed to reskill but had non-technical backgrounds. WSG and DigiPen did not give up. They convinced the hirers to adjust their hiring criteria and training. They tried out just three applicants. At the end of the six-month programme, two had picked up the required skills and were successfully placed as Software Developers.

This example shows us that, given the right support, mature PMETs can switch into new, technical and seemingly daunting roles. However, it also reminds us that the numbers are not always big. Each PCP takes much time and effort to get right and, even with the best efforts, not every jobseeker will get through.

So, we need different kinds of support. Sometimes, we need to help close the salary gap between what the jobseeker hopes to get because he has legitimate financial commitments at home. But there is still a gap with what the employer is prepared to give, especially at the start. We do this through the Career Support Programme (CSP). Last year, more than 1,200 jobseekers were placed with the help of CSP. Nearly 90% had been unemployed for more than six months. As the Minister for Finance had announced, we will extend CSP by two years.

Sometimes, jobseekers and employers are just unsure about each other. So, we have Career Trial, which Mr Patrick Tay and Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked about. Career Trial helps jobseekers and employers get to know each other better before signing on the dotted line. Last year, about 730 jobseekers obtained jobs through this Scheme. This is an increase of over 40% compared to 2017.

Senior Minister of State and Deputy Secretary General Heng Chee How called for more support for care-givers to re-enter the workforce through part-time work. I support his call. Although Career Trial was just enhanced last year, we will further enhance it to include part-time jobs. This means that unlike previously, the jobs available for Career Trial will include both full-time and part-time jobs. We hope that this will benefit more jobseekers with care-giving responsibilities. For employers, too, we hope it will help them become more comfortable with managing part-time work.

To help more jobseekers, WSG must itself leverage technology. Last year, we introduced MyCareersFuture.sg. It gives jobseekers a smarter and more efficient tool for skills-to-job matching. Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Lim Biow Chuan will be pleased to know that Jobs Bank and MyCareersFuture have been well utilised by both jobseekers and employers. Since its launch in April last year, the site received more than two million visits and over 1.7 million applications.

More than 20,000 employers placed job postings on the Jobs Bank last year. That is why when Mr Lim Biow Chuan went to search, he said over 24,000 jobs on offer, I think. Among these postings, less than 15% were to fulfil the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) advertising requirements. In other words, the vast majority of job postings are because the employers find it a useful channel. I would think so because why would employers waste time doing something that does not bear fruit?

So, we hope the portal becomes more attractive to employers later this year, as we roll out new features. For example, employers will be able to short-list candidates based on skills-to-job matching. This will also help the jobseekers who may not have the right experience but have relevant skills to offer.

Overall, while we are encouraged by the good progress of Adapt and Grow (A&G), we still have concerns about those we have not been to help. There are three areas to work on.

First, the A&G initiative is relatively new and people may not be aware of the help available. So, WSG and e2i together operate five service centres for career matching. Last year, WSG decided to bring these services to the heartlands. Do not wait for Mohamad to come to the mountain, right? Take the mountain to Mohamad.

They call this programme Careers Connect On-The-Go (CCOTG) – a mobile truck that brings career matching services to different places. It helped to reach about 3,100 jobseekers from Jurong West to Tampines. We will do more to strengthen outreach. Nee Soon South – coming! I could not help it. Very sorry. In fact, I am not sure whether we have actually been to Nee Soon South already.

The second area of improvement is our programmes. Take PCPs, for example, which we will need more of. We will continue to launch new PCPs but we will also revamp existing ones to be more effective.

Finally, for every successful jobseeker, there is probably another who is still searching. The change in employment situation may have come too suddenly. They need time to come to terms with it. Adjusting expectations is very much a part of this process, and some adjust faster than others. Career coachers tell me this because I meet them regularly. Quite often, there are other difficulties, such as tensions at home that are distracting them from the process. Our career coaches are there to support, to handhold these jobseekers so that they know there is help and hope. But prevention is always going to be better than cure. We should help as many as we can stay relevant so that they need not be displaced at all. NTUC's Worker 4.0 and Training Council initiatives, therefore, deserve strong support.

Besides Adapt and Grow, another way in which we walk the tech journey with workers is to better support self-employed persons (SEPs), which Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Chen Show Mao raised concerns about. Up to now, the much-feared tsunami of gig work has not quite materialised, certainly not in Singapore. And even when I checked in with my counterparts abroad, not quite.

A proxy for gig workers are our SEPs, even though most of them are in traditional occupations like taxi-driving, real-estate marketing, insurance or financial advisory. In absolute numbers, there were actually fewer SEPs in 2018 compared to 2017. Their share of the resident workforce has also been consistent for well over a decade, at 8% to 10%. So, last year closer to the 8%.

4.00 pm

Part of the reason is that the labour market has improved. Compared to a year ago, the share of SEPs who prefer regular employment has fallen sharply from about 20% to below 10%. Of those who are still SEPs, most did not try looking for regular work – because they might have found the jobs if they tried. The vast majority of the SEPs have told us it is their preference, and we respect it. We cannot predict how their numbers may grow in future. But it is better to be prepared. This is why we formed a Tripartite Workgroup to recommend ways to better support SEPs.

Ms Jessica Tan asked for an update on our implementation of the Workgroup’s recommendations, which I had shared at last year’s COS debate.

To reduce payment disputes, we launched the Tripartite Standard on Contracting with SEPs last year. Close to 500 businesses have adopted the Standard, covering 30,000 SEPs. We also make the Tripartite Standard Alliance for Dispute Management available to SEPs if they want mediation services and I can share with Members that actually the numbers have been quite modest. Maybe it is an awareness issue but maybe the problem is not as bad as is being described. So, we will keep monitoring this. The numbers have not been very large.

To shape contracting norms, because it is ultimately to mediate, it is better to have a contract. So, you must shape the contracting norms. We have just launched a new template. SEPs can make a request to their service-buyers to put in writing the key terms of engagement and this template shows them what kinds of things you put in the key terms of engagement, to safeguard your interests.

To support SEPs in adapting to technological changes – we worked with tripartite partners and sector agencies to give them access to technical skills training through the relevant Skills Frameworks. So, depending on which sector you are in, if there is a sector that has got the relevant skills framework, better make sure that your needs are also taken into account and reflected in the skills framework. We are also supporting SEP associations, such as the Singapore Coaches Association, to develop non-technical skills training, so that SEPs are equipped to start and maintain their businesses in a viable fashion.

Assoc Prof Dr Walter Theseira and Mr Chen Show Mao asked how our CPF system can better enable SEPs to save for their retirement and healthcare needs.

Currently, SEPs are required to contribute to their MediSave accounts on an annual basis. They can additionally make voluntary CPF top-ups to build up their retirement savings. They can do so any time. But some SEPs face difficulties even making their MediSave contributions. So, they default. This is why we will introduce a "contribute-as-you-earn" (CAYE) scheme. It will help SEPs make small regular contributions to MediSave instead of bigger lump-sums at year-end. Government, as the service buyer, is on track to pilot CAYE from Q1 2020. We will provide more details later this year.

The Workgroup had also highlighted the lack of options for SEPs to protect themselves from loss of income when they are unable to work due to illness or injury. To plug this gap, we worked with insurers to introduce Prolonged Medical Leave (PML) insurance products. NTUC Income and Gigacover have started to offer them as standalone products. Previously, there was none.

We also raised awareness among taxi and platform operators to address this concern. Grab and GoJek have been progressive by recently providing free PML insurance coverage for their regular drivers. ComfortDelGro Taxi is also considering options. These are promising developments.

Mr Patrick Tay and Ms Sylvia Lim raised concerns about underemployment. Mr Zainal Sapari wrote about it last year. Indeed, this is an area we should keep watch over.

Internationally, the only form of underemployment which has a recognised statistical definition is time-related, defined as part-time workers who are willing and able to engage in additional hours. In Singapore, the resident time-related underemployment has been declining over the past decade. At 3.3% today, it is lower than in many other developed countries.

MOM is interested in tracking other forms of underemployment, such as skills-related underemployment. But, today, there are no internationally recognised ways of doing so. We are, therefore, working closely with the International Labour Organisation to develop suitable methodologies.

One possibility is to use wage or qualification-based indicators, such as employed in the Ong Teng Cheong Labour Leadership Institute study that Ms Lim cited. However, we must be cautious about interpreting the study’s findings. It was based on a relatively small sample of 1,600, with only 70 respondents identified as “underemployed”.

In fact, generally, interpreting wage- or qualifications-based indicators is not straightforward. Some graduates may receive lower allowances while training for high-earning jobs, such as lawyers on training contracts. Others may have chosen to forgo a higher salary in order to invest their time and energy in their families, businesses or their passions. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling will speak about our efforts to provide support for graduating students, so that they can be meaningfully employed.

Ultimately, the best way to reduce the risk of underemployment is to keep the labour market tight. When the labour market is soft, most people will consider it better to have some job rather than no job. They may also become SEPs, but involuntarily. Therefore, every time we tweak labour market policies, we must always remember not to go overboard. We should avoid weakening the labour market inadvertently. This is why the decision to tighten foreign worker policy was very carefully considered.

In the end, we decided we need a stronger push to restructure and be more manpower-lean. This will sustain business growth for our companies for the longer term and help to improve job quality for our workers over time. In the longer term, with these measures, it will make our labour market more resilient. Many MPs spoke on this. The notable exception was Members from the Workers’ Party. I wonder why, given how important this is for workers? I am really interested to know. Do you support it?

In adjusting foreign worker policy, we tried to avoid sweeping changes. First, it is in the services sector where most restructuring is needed. Second, beyond moves already set in motion, we are not making further changes to quotas in other sectors and levies this year.

As Singapore Business Federation CEO Mr Ho Meng Kit pointed out, while there is pain, it is mostly felt by businesses already at the quota ceiling. Businesses that have found ways to rely less on foreign workers are not affected. Compared to previous rounds of tightening, we are also giving employers more time to adjust, with the changes spread out over two small steps and up to 2021.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked if MOM can allow an employer to retain an existing foreign worker if it exceeds the new quotas. I understand why employers might want to do so. In fact, employers will be able to retain an existing S Pass or Work Permit holder until the current pass expires. At the point of work pass renewal, we will have to be fair to all employers and require them to meet the new quotas. If this were not so, employers can avoid being impacted by “stocking up” to the current quota. If an employer really wishes to retain a specific foreign worker instead of another whose work pass expires later, he should terminate the latter’s work pass to free up the quota so he can renew the former’s work pass in good time.

Members have expressed concerns that some Services sub-sectors will not be able to cope, and are reliant on foreign manpower because locals are unwilling to join them. There is no question in my mind: we will continue to need foreign manpower in Services. But over-reliance carries risks and is not sustainable. As their home countries develop, will all foreign workers today always be willing to take up these jobs in Singapore? More critically, should we, as a society, accept that many jobs in Services are unattractive to locals? Should we, as a society, accept that? So many jobs. Every one of them not acceptable to locals? What does it say? Should we not invest effort to uplift some of these jobs to be more appealing to locals? I am glad some Members believe we should.

Some firms are already leading the way. They have re-examined where routine work can be reduced, for example, stock-taking in retail businesses. Nowadays, with RFID – a quick scan and stock is taken. They may also reduce headcounts in back-end functions but keep people deployed in front-end roles so as to maintain good customer service. As they need fewer staff, they may be able to pay each worker more.

On the Government’s part, we will continue to support firms in their transformation journey, for example, through the Lean Enterprise Development (LED) scheme. This includes the enhanced and extended Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) that Minister Chan Chun Sing talked about in his COS speech. Since 2015, we have helped more than 14,000 companies of all sizes and across sectors. If a firm commits to a transformation project that will make it more manpower-lean but needs extra workers in the transition period, we are prepared to help. We will also support firms in their efforts to build up their local pipeline through our Adapt and Grow Initiative that I spoke about earlier.

From time to time, we hear about employers hiring locals just to meet the quotas. The local workers are not asked to do very much. I hope most people will agree with me. It is up to the workers to decide if they wish to take up such jobs. Some may feel it is acceptable because we do not know their circumstances. They may not feel that they are up to other kinds of work. But for the purposes of meeting the quotas, MOM applies a simple test and that is whether the job pays above a certain level. We call this the local qualifying salary. As the wages of locals rise, the local qualifying salary must also be regularly adjusted. Given wage trends, the local qualifying salary will be raised from $1,200 currently to $1,300 in July 2019.

4.15 pm

As in the past, when the Local Qualifying Salary was raised by a similar amount, the cost impact is expected to be small. As announced at last year's COS, the minimum qualifying salary for S Pass holders will also be increased to $2,400 from 1 January 2020.

Some Members have concerns whether our businesses can still compete globally. This is why, even as we update our foreign workforce rules, we must remain open. There will always be expertise or specialist skills that are in demand globally but in short supply in Singapore. Our policies must enable Singapore-based companies to assemble the best international teams to compete on the world stage and create more quality jobs for our people while we build the local pipeline.

This is why we piloted the Capability Transfer Programme (CTP), which Mr Patrick Tay asked about. It aims to help firms quickly develop and transfer new capabilities in growth areas to our local workforce. More than 100 companies are expected to benefit from CTP-supported projects. These include industry-level and company-specific projects in areas, such as precision engineering, logistics, lift maintenance, waste management and air transport.

An example is Royal Insignia. This is a traditional family-run business that creates medals and decorations for royal families. While their business was doing well, their customer base was small – not surprisingly, none in Singapore. Royal Insignia hoped to break into the luxury consumer market by producing new ornaments that require advanced enamelling techniques. Enamelling is the art of applying powdered glass to metal surfaces. As this was a rare technique, they had to consult with Russian universities and review many portfolios before they found the right expert, Daria.

Over the course of three months last year, Daria trained 15 of Royal Insignia's local employees in advanced enamelling techniques, such as the creation of 3D forms and colour gradients. As a result, the company’s product range has expanded and it is now more competitive.

As we keep our doors open, we must also find ways to raise quality. Members will recall that qualifying salaries for Employment Passes were raised in 2017. As a result, numbers have come down because of exits at the lower end. The effects of these changes will continue to be felt in 2019. We are not planning more moves for now, but will review the need to regularly.

In the meantime, we continue to be very serious about the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF). It is to ensure local PMETs are given fair treatment in terms of hiring. From July last year, we expanded the FCF requirement. More firms must advertise more jobs to locals before MOM will accept the Employment Pass application.

Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Pritam Singh asked for an update on the FCF Watchlist. There are currently 350 employers from across all sectors and firm sizes on the Watchlist. The top five sectors are: Administrative & Support Services, Education, Infocomm, Professional Services and Wholesale Trade. We identified these firms as their workforce profile suggested nationality bias. The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) also investigates feedback from the public about possible discrimination against Singaporeans.

For employers found wanting, their Employment Pass (EP) applications are closely scrutinised. Since 2016, a total of 2,300 EP applications have been rejected or withheld by MOM, or withdrawn by the employers – 2,300.

While we take a firm stance against these companies, TAFEP also works with them to improve their HR practices and support local hiring. These efforts have helped. So far, 260 firms have improved their HR practices and exited the FCF Watchlist. In addition, firms on the Watchlist have hired more than 3,800 Singaporean PMETs to date – 3,800.

One such firm operates in the Architecture and Engineering field. When it was placed on the FCF Watchlist in June 2017, the firm was not interested to work with TAFEP. So, repeated attempts to engage the company failed. What could we do? We curtailed its work pass privileges. This got their attention. The HR manager sent in multiple appeals to her MP to be taken off the Watchlist – in fact, called at the MP's Meet-the-People Session, which every one of us do. The company claimed that the EPs were critical because they were needed for a public project.

So, MOM looked into the case. We consulted with the agencies overseeing the project. The company had barely tried to improve local hiring when it could have. You look at the kind of jobs that they are hiring for, and you asked "Are there Singaporeans who can do these jobs? Let us look at our jobs bank; let us look at our applicants." Yes, there are. Therefore, we had to reject their EP applications and also the MP's appeal.

In the end, the firm realised that there was no short-cut. It reached out to WSG on its training programmes and made plans to take on interns from local Polytechnics and Universities. As a result of its efforts, it hired an additional 14 locals over a period of one and a half years.

I know such actions by TAFEP are not popular but I hope Members will back us up even if these companies appeal to you. I can assure you that TAFEP is not vindictive. It only seeks to ensure that our PMETs' interests are properly safeguarded. Employers who are fair to locals need not worry. But if they are not, please understand why we do not accept it.

Members can also be assured that we deal firmly with employers who try to be funny. For example, we keep a lookout for employers on the Watchlist who use related entities to apply for EPs to bypass our controls. For such cases, we can and have curtailed the work pass privileges of all the related entities.

While we take unfair employers to task, we must also recognise fair and progressive employers. They make it a point to develop a strong local core, which is what we look for in the Human Capital Partnership (HCP) Programme. In 2018, we recognised about 130 new HCP firms. This brings the total number of HCPs to about 540, 40% of whom are Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).

HCP firms' commitment to human capital development not only benefits their employees, but also allows them to better attract and retain local talent. Today, they employ more than 190,000 locals, which is about 8% of the total workforce. Local PMETs account for about 90% of HCP firms’ total PMET workforce. Even at the senior to top levels, more than 80% are locals.

BreadTalk is an example of such a progressive company. It invests heavily in human capital development through its in-house BreadTalk University. Its local training programmes include online tutorials on food and workplace safety, Coursera subscriptions for its staff, and even curated courses with local Universities. The company has also implemented role-specific career progression roadmaps for some of its frontline roles, which chart the skills they need at every level. Its progressive HR practices make it an attractive place to work in.

Mr Chairman, let me now turn to the very important topic of supporting senior employment.

Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked about the WorkPro Scheme which offers the Job Redesign Grant (JRG) and the Age Management Grant (AMG) to help employers make their workplaces more age-friendly. Over 1,750 companies and about 20,000 older workers have benefited from the Workpro, Job Redesign Programme since it was enhanced last year. Under the Workpro AMG, over 250 companies and 3,800 older workers have benefited.

Progressive employers are making it easier for seniors to work. Take for example, Mdm Lim Swee Choon, who is in her early 60s. She chooses to work flexi-hours on weekdays from 8.30am to 3.30pm at Sushi Express, a progressive employer that implemented job redesign and flexible work arrangements. A former housewife, Mdm Lim returned to work after her four kids grew up. This is her first job and she enjoys being with her colleagues, many of whom are seniors as well. As everyone is well-trained in all roles, they take turns covering each other's duties and rotating between stations every week. What does she do after work? She enjoys her free time with her friends, doing volunteer work at the temple, singing karaoke or line-dancing at community club!

The current WorkPro funding period will end by June 2019. We believe it remains useful. We are reviewing it and will share the results when ready.

Beyond WorkPro, there is scope to review policy. Our employment rate for seniors has, in fact, risen steadily over the years. We had raised the Retirement Age (RA) before. In 2012 , we introduced re-employment after Japan started the practice. On reaching the current Retirement Age of 62, a worker must be offered annual re-employment by his employer up to 67, even though the job and salary may change. In practice, well over 90% of workers eligible for re-employment and who also wish to continue working are offered re-employment every year – well over 90%. These policy changes over the years to Retirement Age and Re-employment Age have helped our seniors work longer. They have also helped our businesses tap a wider workforce. Compared to OECD countries, we now rank third for our employment rate for persons aged 65 and above.

Some people and even Assoc Prof Daniel Goh have called for the removal of the Retirement Age, but labour Members have not done so. Why is there a difference?

When a company removes the retirement age from its HR policy manual, it is good news for its workers. It means the company gives a commitment it will not retire any employee at any age for as long as the employee wishes to continue working. That is what it is, at the company level.

But if the retirement age is removed from the law, it is bad news. It means the employers no longer have any obligation to keep their workers up to any age. In other words, any employer can retire any worker at any age.

Labour Members have studied the law and understand this crucial difference. The statutory minimum Retirement Age of 62 is actually protection for the workers. Until 62, employers are not allowed to retire or, in other words, dismiss a worker on account of his age. This is why NTUC calls for the Retirement Age to be raised, not removed. This will give workers protection up to an older age.

Besides considering the wishes of workers, we should also understand what employers want. One reason Singapore has been able to keep employment high and unemployment low is labour market flexibility. This flexibility ultimately benefits workers, because it does not discourage employers from hiring them. This does not mean we do away with rules completely. When rules are inadequate, workers’ interests may be compromised. But when rules become too onerous, employment may suffer which is also not in workers’ interest. The Singapore way is therefore always to strike a balance, to be pro-worker and pro-business in all that we do.

4.30 pm

On key issues which concern both workers and employers, we must build a tripartite consensus that is also sustainable for the future. This is why in May last year, I formed the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers. Among other things, the Workgroup has been reviewing the longer-term relevance of the Retirement Age (RA) and Re-employment age (REA). In many other countries, it has been very hard to move on these issues. Deep distrust and division prevent people from focusing on the future. They keep harping on the past. Why certain changes should not have been made. Why is it now compromising us? They are always still talking about what happened five years ago, 10 years ago, and they cannot get past that debate to move to the future. We must try and avoid that and do better.

The Workgroup therefore consulted widely. It heard the views of workers and unions. It has also been meeting with employers, particularly the Singapore National Employers’ Federation (SNEF). It tries to balance views from both sides. It must also consider what is right for our country. At many points in the process, there were differences. The key question was, should we only raise REA beyond 67 but not RA beyond 62? The answer was, in the beginning, not at all clear.

Recently, the Workgroup updated me on their thinking, they provided the same update to NTUC Secretary-General Brother Ng Chee Meng and SNEF President Brother Dr Robert Yap. All three of us are Advisers to the Workgroup. The Workgroup needs a few more months before putting up their detailed recommendations. But, we have a clear tripartite consensus. I am glad that the Workgroup believes we should raise both RA and REA. [Applause]

I agree with the Workgroup and I will try my best to make it happen.

Let me share now share their three-point agreement, which explains why. First, the Retirement Age (RA) remains relevant and should go up beyond 62. This is because our people enjoy more years of good health and remain productive at work well into their 60s. A higher retirement age will motivate both workers and employers to invest in skills upgrading and job redesign for their older workers.

Second, the Re-Employment Age (REA) remains useful and should also go up beyond 67. Although most workers who are eligible get re-employed in the same job at the same pay, the flexibility to reset jobs and terms help employers cope with business uncertainties. Employers are more willing to employ older workers because of it.

Third, the increases in RA and REA should be implemented in small steps over time. This is because employers will need to make considerable adjustments. They must plan ahead and step up efforts to make workplaces more age-friendly.

The Workgroup cautions that even as RA and REA are raised over time, it is critical to ensure flexibility of employment arrangements. Our economy is diverse, both in terms of business models and operational needs. Workers too have different preferences and health conditions. We must therefore avoid being overly prescriptive when setting new rules. I am heartened by the progress made by the Workgroup. I also agree that we should carefully consider the timing and pacing of these moves. In fact, countries looking to raise their retirement ages typically make their intentions known five to 10 years in advance. And each move is relatively modest.

For example, Denmark’s retirement age is set to go up from 65 to 68 by 2030, over 11 years. For Singapore, we started talking about re-employment in 2007 before it became law in 2012. Five years. In the next phase of its work, the Workgroup will build a tripartite consensus on how far and how fast the RA and REA should be raised. The CPF contribution rates for older workers will also be a topic of their consideration. They will balance the need to help improve retirement adequacy and sustain employability for our older workers.

However, one thing is clear, even when RA or REA are raised, the CPF payout eligibility age of 65 will remain unchanged at age 65. CPF members will be able to withdraw their payouts any time from age 65. Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Png Eng Huat and Ms Sylvia Lim have asked about financial security, flexibility in use of CPF savings and CPF top-ups. Retirement adequacy is improving, for both older and younger Singaporeans.

In 2018, more than six in 10 active CPF members turning 55 have at least the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS); this proportion will grow with each successive cohort. In 2018, over 96,000 members received about $2 billion in top-ups to their CPF accounts.

We are also stepping up outreach. Since the start of this year, all members turning 65 can get a personalised one-on-one CPF Retirement Planning Service at our Service Centres. One-on-one, personalised, with an infographic that tells you what you have and what you can do with it. Not what other people have, what you have. So, Ms Foo, your residents, we hope will take advantage of this service and be more like Mdm Tan, who only got to know what she could do with your help. And we want to replicate what you have been able to do for Mdm Tan to everyone who wants it.

We will address the issue of retirement adequacy more holistically when we discuss the Workgroup’s recommendations on CPF contributions for older workers.

To sum up, I am very pleased that we have developed a tripartite consensus to raise the RA and REA. I hope Members realise what a significant milestone this is. The next phase of working out details is equally important. I look forward to receiving the Workgroup’s final recommendations later this year. Mr Chairman, please allow me to conclude in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, as our life expectancy increases, MOM will endeavour to provide more comprehensive support for senior workers.

As a matter of fact, in the past 10 years, the employment rate of seniors has increased substantially and is quite high compared to developed countries. In Singapore, two in three seniors aged between 55 to 64 years old continue to work. Amongst seniors above 65 years old, one in four is still working.

In my view, we can do more and do better. If we can fully develop the potential of our older workers and make good use of their potential, we can turn it into our advantage. This is why I set up the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers last May, to look into reviewing the statutory retirement age (RA), re-employment age (REA) and CPF contribution rate of older workers.

Before implementing any changes, the Government will consult various stakeholders such as unions and businesses, and endeavour to achieve a win-win outcome.

Last week, the Workgroup reported its progress to NTUC Sec-Gen Ng Chee Meng, Dr Robert Yap from SNEF and myself. It will take the Workgroup a few more months to conclude the review. Nevertheless, members of the Workgroup have reached consensus in three important areas.

Firstly, they agree that over the longer term, there is a need to raise the statutory RA. This will enhance job security for workers after the age of 62, and encourage employers and employees to upgrade skills more actively in order to maintain the efficiency of older workers.

At the same time, the current REA of 67 should be raised. This will ensure that employers have some flexibility in adjusting the job scopes and salaries of workers who have reached the retirement age, after taking into account the overall economic situation and the performance of their respective businesses. Employers could then have peace of mind when re-employing older workers.

Thirdly, the Workgroup also agrees that even after the RA and REA have been raised, we must continue to ensure that our workplaces remain flexible and are able the meet the various needs of employers and the work force.

I found the initial conclusions of the Workgroup to be fairly comprehensive and balanced. After all, some trade-offs are inevitable when we try to balance the needs and interests of both employers and employees.

The timing, pace and other details with regards to raising the RA and REA will have to be considered carefully, so that employers have enough time to make the necessary adjustments.

The Workgroup will also review the CPF contribution rate of older workers carefully, so as to ensure that the final recommendations will help older workers in building up retirement savings without impeding their employment prospects. I look forward to the final recommendations from the Workgroup.

We have strong tripartism at work in Singapore. This is why we can have constructive discussions on many labour issues and achieve a win-win outcome for workers and businesses. The close relationship between tripartite partners is rare worldwide, and has put Singapore in a good position to help workers and businesses seize the opportunities of global development.

When businesses try to seize these opportunities, one consideration is how to maintain sustainable growth. Many local SMEs, especially those in the services sector, have been relying on foreign workers to supplement the local workforce. There is a need to change this practice.

As other economies continue to develop rapidly, over-reliance on more and more foreign workers is not without risks.

The Finance Minister has announced that the dependency ratio ceiling (DRC) for services sector will be tightened from next year. The purpose is to reduce reliance on foreign workers in the services sector and spur companies in the sector to transform.

This time round, the tightening of DRC will only affect the services sector because some areas in this sector are still very labour-intensive.

The DRC for other sectors will remain the same. The Government also did not raise foreign worker levies nor amend the conditions for employment passes.

The Government has not taken this decision lightly. I fully understand that this decision will impact the services sector.

Some businesses may ask, "Minister, transformation is easier said than done!" I can understand their concerns but I am worried that if they do not transform now, would it not be harder to do so, when they face more challenges in the future?

Some other companies may say, "Minister, the work is very tough in this industry. Which Singaporean would want to do it?"

To be honest, as our country and society develop, it is only natural that people will have higher expectations.

My concern is that for those jobs which Singaporeans are unwilling to take up today, will there forever be foreign workers who are willing to do it? Will the day come when even foreign workers would not want to do these jobs? Where can our companies get their workers then? Hence, should we not redesign some of these jobs so that they become acceptable to local workers, and at the same time, spread out manpower risks?

Hence, if we consider this from a longer term perspective, we have had no choice but to accelerate the pace of transformation.

I have this to say to the SMEs: let the Government help you, and walk with you on this transformation journey. We will help you improve productivity, and assist you in redesigning some of the jobs to attract Singaporeans.

In fact, there are many solutions in the market which are applicable for the services sector, and can help businesses transform successfully.

I believe that as long as we combine the tenacity and fighting spirit of our companies and the multi-pronged assistance from the Government, our SMEs will be able to progress further and emerge stronger in the future.

4.45 pm

(In English): With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the handouts?

The Chairman: Sure. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.] Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad.

The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, earlier, I spoke about how MOM uplifts the wages and skills of our lower-income workers through a mutually reinforcing system of different support measures, while maintaining a tight labour market.

We also want to nurture an inclusive and caring society that will enable all workers to thrive and have meaningful opportunities at work. And I will touch on four areas.

Firstly, supporting the integration of persons with special needs into the workforce, improving the well-being of lower-income workers, safeguarding the well-being of foreign workers, and lastly, making conditions safer and healthier for all our workers.

With your permission, Mr Chairman, I will have the Clerks place a handout on Members' seats.

The Chairman: Okay. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]

Mr Zaqy Mohamad: We desire for a more inclusive society, where persons with special needs are given opportunities to make meaningful contributions as part of the workforce.

Mr Patrick Tay, Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, and Dr Intan Mokhtar have asked about initiatives to integrate persons with special needs into the workforce, and how successful they have been. Dr Intan and Ms Denise Phua also asked whether there could be more support for employers hiring persons with special needs, such as wage support, recognition or incentives to implement flexible work arrangements.

Members would be pleased to know that employers of Singaporeans with special needs receive the Special Employment Credit (SEC) that provides wage offsets of up to 16% of the employee's monthly income, regardless of age. With the Additional SEC (ASEC), employers of Singaporeans with special needs aged 67 and above receive wage offsets of up to 22% of the employee's monthly income. These rates are already two times the highest rates of the mainstream schemes. So, the SEC and ASEC for Singaporeans with special needs will also be extended for one more year until 2020 and reviewed for the longer term, alongside the mainstream schemes, as announced at Budget.

On recognition for employers, SG Enable has been organising the Enabling Employers Awards, which is a nationally recognised award that honours and recognises the efforts of employers in hiring and retaining employees with special needs. Since 2011, more than 100 employers have been recognised for their inclusive efforts and excellence.

Miss Chan asked about interventions to assist students with special needs to prepare for employment. Efforts include the School-to-Work Transition programme for Special Education school graduates to receive on-site job training from job coaches for up to a year, as well as internship and mentoring programmes for students from Institutes of Higher Learning.

Under Workforce Singapore's (WSG) Adapt and Grow initiative, there are services and programmes to integrate persons with special needs into the workforce, namely the Open Door Programme (ODP) and Career Trial. These programmes cater to both the PMET and rank-and-file jobs. In the past three years, more than 1,600 persons with special needs have been placed through these programmes.

I will now share about my visits to two companies that have benefited from the ODP. Administered by SG Enable, ODP gives employers access to recruitment and job support services for persons with special needs. Grants for job redesign and training are also available to better support their integration.

So, referring to the first image in our handout, Sassax Pte Ltd is a global energy and commodities SME founded and managed by Ms Cheang Tsu-fei.

When I met Tsu-fei, she shared with me how, through ODP, she hired Mr Erwayne Teo, who sustained spinal injuries after a motorbike accident, as an Operations Executive.

Tsu-fei tapped on ODP's Job Redesign Grant, which supports 90% of job redesign costs, of up to $20,000 per employee with special needs. And what she did was to make several thoughtful workplace modifications. I saw that office partitions were removed to make it easier for Erwayne to move around with his crutches. The manual-lock of the office door was also replaced with a digital-lock, as Erwayne had difficulty bending down to open the door.

So, Erwayne told me that he is grateful for the job opportunity and for what Sassax has done. And he shared that such an opportunity is very precious for those with special needs, and this motivates him to work harder, and to quote him, to "excel just like, or do even better than a person without special needs".

Tsu-fei shared that she was very pleased with Erwayne's performance, when he was just three months into the job. Hence, she entrusted Erwayne with more responsibilities, such as the power to make some commercial decisions involving shipping and cargo operations. She also gave him a pay raise after a year.

So, I would like to commend Tsu-fei for being an exemplary employer. She embraced the need to make changes at the workplace in order to support and bring out the best in her employee. She has also, by the way, hired a senior who is 62 years old, in addition to a person with special needs. So, there are just three of them in office. So, in her own words, Tsu-fei calls on fellow employers to give more opportunities to these "hidden gems".

Some of you may have gone to this other company called J.CO Donuts & Coffee. I buy donuts from there too. It is another company that has participated in ODP.

So, last year, J.CO hired Mr Chia Tuck Ming who has mild intellectual disabilities, as a part-time Baker Assistant to decorate donuts.

Tuck Ming enjoys this job, as his personal interest is painting. So as Members can see in the second image, Tuck Ming created the artwork for the tumbler that he is holding.

So, during my visit to J.CO, Tuck Ming gave me a demonstration and I was quite pleased to see his confidence and joy when he was decorating the donuts. However, this was not without initial challenges. His mentor said that he had difficulties mastering the donut piping techniques and memorising the various donut names. But to help him, what J.CO did was they broke down the job into smaller tasks, and they gave him time to learn. So, Tuck Ming persevered and eventually succeeded with the guidance and encouragement of his mentor and job coach.

It was, in fact, very heartwarming to hear from J.CO’s HR Manager, Ms Jocelyn Wong, that, "It has been a journey discovering Tuck Ming's abilities, not disabilities". I think that is really a spirit of it. It is really to discover his abilities and not disabilities and that is what I hope more employers will take time to do. And that Tuck Ming is adapting well and he has been given more responsibilities to guide new employees like him.

So, we want more employers to be inclusive, like Sassax and J.CO. However, not all employers have had interactions with persons with special needs. And some employers may be unsure if a person with special needs can perform on the job. Co-workers may be also unsure on how to work with them. So these are real concerns affecting companies' decisions to hire persons with special needs.

To address these, Career Trial provides opportunities for employers and persons with special needs to try out each other and make a better assessment of job fit. During the trial, which can be up to three months, job-seekers will receive a training allowance from the Government. And to encourage hiring and retention of persons with special needs, employers receive salary support after the trial, while persons with special needs who are hired and stay for at least three months receive retention incentives.

Ms Denise Phua and Mr Chong have also asked why hiring targets for persons with special needs have not been set for companies as well as Public Service. We have not done so for three reasons.

First, it introduces labour market inflexibility and may invite competing calls for targets for other workforce segments such as older workers. Second, companies may offer menial or low-paying jobs to meet the targets. Third, it may signal to companies that they only need to meet the targets when, in fact, they could have the capacity to take on more.

Hence, our goal is really to build a supportive system to get buy-in from employers to embrace and promote gainful and sustainable employment for persons with special needs. And I think creating a culture and an environment where companies willingly accept, adapt, and redesign jobs for persons with special needs is much better than one that is forced on them, which could lead to tokenism instead. So, in this respect, Mr Patrick Tay and Dr Intan asked if more can be done.

MOM and SG Enable will be releasing a Job Redesign Guide by the first half of this year. The Guide will provide companies with information on how to apply job redesign to better integrate persons with special needs, for instance, common workplace modifications, changes to working arrangements, and the use of assistive technology devices.

Ms Denise Phua also asked the Ministry to consider looking at resourcing and supporting inclusion managers. This is a new concept and something which we will have to study and consult with MSF, SG Enable and MOE.

MOM and WSG will continue to work closely with MSF and SG Enable to scale up efforts to build employers' capabilities in hiring and managing persons with special needs under the Third Enabling Masterplan. As Mr Patrick Tay has raised, we will also continue to study the successes of overseas models to build a strong framework in Singapore. But to achieve a more inclusive society, we will need the private and people sectors to partner us.

While there are existing Government-funded schemes to support hiring of persons with special needs, the awareness, unfortunately, may not be as high. So, therefore, I urge fellow Members to spread the word on our initiatives such as the ODP because we are happy to partner you. And certainly, if you are keen, let us know and we can go to your constituency for briefing sessions for those who are interested, including Nee Soon South – for once, I am poking fun.

Mr Patrick Tay and Miss Chan also spoke about employment support for persons with mental health conditions or special educational needs such as dyslexia or ADHD. In addition to our efforts for persons with special needs, there are several initiatives to support the employment of those with mental health conditions. For example, the Job Club by MOH and the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) assists job-seekers with employment needs, while managing their mental health conditions. The Job Club helps persons with mental health conditions assess their strengths, acquire job-seeking skills, arrange for vocational training, and network with employers for job placements. In the past three financial years, the Job Club achieved an average job placement rate of 60%. For persons with special educational needs, support is also provided in schools to help them transit into the workforce as elaborated by Second Minister Ms Indranee earlier.

As a society, it is also important to care for our workers’ well-being, especially vulnerable workers such as our lower income workers. In addition to enhancing our lower income workers’ wages and employability, I agree with Mr Zainal Sapari and Dr Intan that care should be extended to their working conditions and how they are treated at work.

5.00 pm

Take, for example, access to proper rest areas which Dr Intan raised. Workers need safe and conducive environment for their rest breaks, such as their meals. Yet, we have encountered cases of cleaners having to use makeshift rest areas at stairwells and in open public areas. Such situations can be improved and going forward, MOM will look into companies’ practices in giving workers access to proper rest areas. We will start with the cleaning sector.

I am happy to share that NEA has made available proper rest areas such as the Cleaners’ Room in all of the seven new hawker centres. This is a place where cleaners can take breaks, have meals, and safe-keep their belongings. I strongly encourage all service buyers and employers to do the same.

Fellow Singaporeans, we need to do our part too and treat our lower income workers with dignity and respect. Some of the simple and practical ways to uplift them include returning our own trays at the hawker centres, thanking them for their work and giving them time to rest during their breaks. Ultimately, society must view our lower income workers also as persons of worth and deserving of our respect.

Mr Zainal also asked MOM to review whether a scheme could provide financial or subsistence relief to help rank and file workers who are owed salaries due to company closure. The Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) can order employers to pay owed salaries to employees. If employers fail to do so because the company has closed down, employees can commence debt recovery by applying to the State Courts for a Writ of Seizure and Sale (WSS). MOM will assist lower income claimants through the WSS process, including providing financial aid.

If lower income workers are unable to recover their claims via WSS, they can receive financial assistance from the Short Term Relief Fund (STRF). The Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) will also refer them to MSF and their Social Service Offices for assistance on ComCare if needed.

Similarly, the same way we protect our lower income workers, we should also safeguard the well-being of our foreign workers. They share a common purpose in contributing to our society, through building our homes and schools, working in our hospitals and factories, and keeping our environment clean. As we moderate the intake of foreign workers, treating them with respect can help us retain skilled and experienced workers, as some Members have asked for. Ms Ong suggested to extend MOM’s regulatory reach to overseas employment agencies. She also asked if MOM can take a more resolute action against employers taking kickbacks from workers, whether transacted in Singapore or overseas.

Within Singapore, MOM prohibits employment agencies in Singapore from charging workers beyond the stipulated fee cap. We actively enforce against errant agencies. However, we do not have the jurisdiction to act against agents taking kickbacks in other countries. This is not a matter that we have a choice over. This includes foreign employment agencies that tie-up with local agents, or the overseas operations of local employment agencies.

Nonetheless, we will do what we can here. Since 2012, employers are prohibited from collecting kickbacks from foreign workers in consideration for employment. Employers who do so can be liable to a maximum fine of $30,000 or up to two years’ jail, or both. So, in 2018, 46 agencies and employers were taken to task for kickback-related offences. And Mr Leon Perera asked about MOM 's hotline. We received 102 calls last year, of which we followed up and investigated 49 calls. The rest were just enquiries and there was no follow-up required. But one thing I want to assure Members is that let us know, and we will investigate each of these cases seriously if there are credible leads. Additionally, whenever our investigations reveal suspicious or irregular practices by overseas agents, information is shared with our foreign embassies to enlist their help to combat any malpractices in their respective countries.

As Mr Melvin Yong rightfully pointed out, we need to educate employers on their obligations to foreign workers. For example, MOM regularly updates the work pass obligations of employers in employers’ copy of the In-Principle Approval letter. Employers are also kept informed of new and existing work pass requirements through direct mailers and on MOM’s website.

Ms Ong and Mr Melvin Yong suggested that we improve the employment system to retain skilled and experienced foreign workers.

Given the constraints on the number of foreign workers we can bring in, we want to ensure that each worker we bring in counts, and their skills and experience can be retained in Singapore. So, this reinforces the capability, productivity, and safety. For instance, more experienced construction workers were less likely to suffer work injuries.

MOM has supported the recruitment and retention of experienced foreign workers in the following ways: Traditional Source and North Asian Source Work Permit holders are not subject to a maximum period of employment. For Non-Traditional Source and PRC Work Permit holders, MOM has, over the years, extended the maximum period of employment to encourage companies to retain their trained and experienced workers, to raise overall workforce productivity. In response to industry feedback, MOM last increased the maximum period of employment by four years in all sectors in 2018. The period of employment can now extend up to 26 years for skilled Work Permit holders in selected sectors.

For foreign workers in the Construction and Process sectors, they can be transferred to another employer, upon the agreement of their existing employers, or the expiry of their work permits. They are given about a month to look for new employers. We also allow all foreign workers to find another employer if they have valid claims. While they are given two weeks to seek new employment, we have given short extensions on case-by-case basis.

Mr Yong hoped to see greater assistance for foreign workers involved in disputes with their employers. Majority of these foreign workers came from the Construction sector, about nine in 10. To improve their job facilitation outcomes, the Singapore Contractors Association Ltd (SCAL) has made available the Foreign Construction Worker Directory System (FCWDS) that facilitates their search for new employers. In 2018, about 34,000 workers in the Construction and Process sectors were successfully transferred to another employer. It is not a small number. They were able to use the system. Additionally, about 900 workers with valid claims also successfully found new employers, and continued to work in Singapore after their claims were resolved. I would like to assure Mr Melvin Yong that MOM will continue to work closely with the Labour Movement, Migrant Workers’ Centre (MWC), and SCAL to improve job facilitation outcomes for foreign workers involved in disputes.

Making workplace safer and healthier for all. Every life is precious. As a society, we must therefore strive to make work conditions safer and healthier for our workers.

Singapore has made good progress in our Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) performance. Our workplace fatality rate declined from 2.2 per 100,000 workers in 2010 to 1.2, or a record low of 41 fatal cases, in 2018, last year. Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked how our progress compares to other developed countries. Singapore’s three-year average fatality rate relative to OECD countries’, has improved from 18th place in 2010 and we are now seventh in 2018.

Such progress was made possible by a major shift in WSH culture, mindset, and practices, enabled by strong tripartism. Take last year for example: The WSH Council, comprising employer and union representatives, worked closely with Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs) to tackle the leading causes of workplace fatalities. This included the “Target Zero Falls” campaign, where SCAL encouraged industry partners to conduct senior management walkabouts for work-at-heights activities. For MOM, we continued to maintain a strong enforcement presence, especially in higher-risk industries.

But we must do better, so that our workers can return home safe and healthy. Our goal is to further reduce and sustain our workplace fatality rate at below one by 2028. This is an ambitious goal, but an achievable one. Only four countries, amongst the OECD countries, have achieved it so far. Four. We must also keep an eye on non-fatal injuries. Compared to 2017, we saw a 3% rise in numbers in 2018. One in three working residents have either diabetes, high blood pressure, or high cholesterol, which can affect safety as well if the condition is not managed well. We agree with Mr Melvin Yong that a greater emphasis on workplace health is indeed necessary to address its potential impact on safety.

I see three main ways to improve further.

First, we need company management to be committed to improving WSH within their companies. Top management, including at the Board level, is best-placed to influence the company’s WSH culture, as they control its resources, policies, and practices.

A good example is Lendlease, an international property and infrastructure company with operations here in Singapore. A Board member chairs its Sustainability Committee that is responsible for setting the WSH policy and strategic directions for Lendlease. In addition, WSH performance is discussed at all Board meetings, with the CEO and top management all held accountable. In the fourth image, members can see Lendlease’s Paya Lebar Quarter project. This is one example where the leadership has taken ownership to champion progressive WSH practices, such as a near-miss reporting regime, WSH data analytics, as well as Building Information Modelling (BIM) techniques. With WSH as a top business priority, Lendlease’s strong WSH track record has served as a competitive advantage in helping them to win repeat business. So, they see workplace safety and health as a competitive advantage against competitors.

Second, we need greater emphasis on workplace health. To address the potential impact of poorly managed health on workplace safety, the WSH Council partnered Health Promotion Board (HPB) to introduce Total WSH. Total WSH involves injury and occupational disease prevention, together with occupational health promotion, through health screening, physical activities, healthier diet initiatives, and adjustments in work processes so that those with chronic conditions can continue to work safely. We agree with Mr Melvin Yong that more can be done, and we encourage the Labour Movement to partner us to encourage more companies to adopt Total WSH.

Third, WSH is another aspect where we can win with technology. Companies can leverage on technology advancements such as sensors, predictive analytics, and the Internet of Things to more effectively manage WSH risks. Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked for examples.

Woodlands Transport and SIA Engineering Company have taken part in MOM’s WSH Tech Challenge to test-bed a fatigue detection and management device among their vehicle drivers. As Members can see in the fifth image, this device uses sensors and image processing technology to track the micro-movements of a driver’s head, eyes, and facial expressions to detect fatigue. Those who show signs of fatigue will be alerted by an alarm from a buzzer and seat vibration. 93% fewer fatigue episodes were detected among drivers whose vehicles were equipped with the device, when compared to the baseline.

Mr Melvin Yong also spoke about leveraging technology to make WSH training more productive and realistic and I agree. I recently tried virtual reality training that simulates working at height. As Members can see in the sixth image, I experienced a virtual fall from a height of 14 storeys. I can tell you it is quite realistic. You stand on the ledge and then fall off. This ingrained the importance of following safety procedures as they could make a difference between life and death. Mr Yong suggested forming a National Training Academy that consolidates training resources, and ensures high and consistent WSH standards. Skills Future Singapore has set a consistent standard for WSQ training providers in terms of curriculum and training methods. But we will consider how to improve training further, and will study this idea further with our tripartite partners.

Mr Melvin Yong had another suggestion to have a tiered insurance premium framework for work injury compensation, where companies with poor WSH records will have to pay higher premiums. We agree, and we are looking into ways to facilitate this.

Mr Yee Chia Hsing shared businesses’ concern that MOM would introduce safety requirements after every fatal accident. He used the example of three workers having to change a light bulb to highlight the need to balance requirements. I initially thought this was a riddle – some of you may know the riddle, "How many people do you need to screw a light bulb?" But then, the light bulb flashed and I suddenly got a certain insight.

If you look at the other end of the scale, Mr Melvin Yong also asked to introduce more WSH requirements for better worker protection. So, there is this balance that you have to manage between protecting workers and what businesses consider as too many requirements.

5.15 pm

The contrasting views by both Members show the tension between having more regulations that could be overly prescriptive versus being too lax such that WSH is compromised.

This is why we have adopted a balanced approach under the Workplace Safety and Health Act's outcome-based regime. Companies and individuals are responsible for taking reasonably practicable measures to ensure workers’ safety and health. This gives stakeholders the flexibility to adopt cost-effective WSH measures.

Let me clarify the misconception in Mr Yee’s light bulb example. There is no need for a worker to hold a ladder if it is securely fixed and stable, such as a platform ladder with guard-rails. If the ladder is not securely fixed, I suggest have someone hold it, because as Speaker mentioned earlier, it is also for safety. There is also no need for the supervisor to be present all the time if the workers have been informed earlier on safety measures.

Therefore, with the right equipment, the ladder is not costly, and with the right measures, only one worker is needed to change the light bulb. Being safe need not hamper productivity. We welcome employers who need advice to consult MOM and the WSH Council.

Rather than mandating all workplaces to have a WSH representative, as Mr Yong suggested, our philosophy is to bring about WSH gains without adding rules willy-nilly. Better results can often be achieved through strengthening WSH ownership within company management. Uncommitted companies may hire a trained WSH representative to meet the letter of the law, but not follow through with internal systems to support the WSH representative in identifying and preventing hazards. Only with ownership, would companies be self-motivated to adopt WSH practices without us prescribing more requirements.

Mr Chairman, allow me to recap that the enhancements to the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] To ensure that lower income workers can progress together with the other workers, we have improved their lives through the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme that tops up their salaries and helps them save for retirement.

More Singapore workers will benefit from Workfare from January 2020, when we raise the Workfare qualifying income cap from $2,000 to $2,300 per month; and increase the maximum annual payouts by up to $400. Close to 440,000 Singaporeans, including self-employed persons, will benefit from this enhancement.

Most Workfare recipients also receive other forms of government support to help meet their living needs, for example, Mr Gunasegaran, a 49-year old cleaning supervisor. He lives in a three-room flat with his wife and three children. Apart from Workfare, he also receives GST Vouchers and U-Save rebates to help offset his daily household expenses.

His two daughters receive financial assistance from the Ministry of Education – they receive free textbooks and school attire, and public transport credit. His youngest son in pre-school receives the Kindergarten Financial Assistance or KiFAS, and Mr Guna only needs to pay about $1 monthly.

Our approach of providing multi-layered support is more responsive to the varied needs of Singaporeans. Let us further strengthen these successful efforts, and continue to work hard to improve the lives of Singapore workers.

(In English): In conclusion, the Government is committed to fostering an inclusive and caring society. To this end, we will continue to integrate persons with special needs into the workforce, improve the well-being of lower income workers, safeguard the well-being of foreign workers, and make work conditions safer and healthier for all workers.

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower (Ms Low Yen Ling): Chairman, Minister Josephine Teo and Minister of State Zaqy spoke about our efforts to provide better support and assurance for our workers, and how we can walk the tech journey together.

As we strive to improve our workers’ skills, wages and employability, workplaces should also be progressive and inclusive, so that each segment of the workforce is valued and can realise their potential. As Deputy Secretary-General Heng Chee How mentioned in his Budget speech, "Every Worker Matters to the overall good of our economy, our society and our country." We agree. We will press on with our efforts to help young graduates get off to a good start in their careers. We will continue to support women so that they can fulfil both career and family aspirations. We will also do more to help ex-offenders find meaningful employment.

Young Singaporeans are the future of our nation, and we want to maximise their opportunities for them to take up meaningful jobs and careers. Among those graduating from our post-secondary educational institutions, more than eight in 10 who are actively seeking employment, are able to find employment within six months after graduation. However, some may need more help in improving their job search skills to find suitable employment, as for most young people, it is their first time applying for a job.

Mr Patrick Tay asked how graduating students can benefit from the Career Starter Programme, which I first announced last year.

The Career Starter Programme, which is part of Workforce Singapore’s (WSG) Adapt and Grow initiative, is supported by the ITE and Polytechnics. The Programme has three components:

First, a Career Starter Pack. This is a resource pack that equips graduating students with useful information for their job search. About 28,000 graduating ITE and Polytechnic students have received the Career Starter Pack since January this year. Within the pack are useful tips and advice on what graduates should consider when applying for a job, where to find work opportunities, how to ace job interviews, and how to manage their money when they start work, disseminated to 28,000 graduates this year.

Second, there are interactive Career Booster workshops to improve our young graduates’ job search strategies and skills. These workshops are designed to provide more hands-on help, such as good resume writing techniques, and approaches to the job search that can uncover different career opportunities.

Third, the Career Starter Programme offers personalised career coaching and other tailored support for graduating students who may require more in-depth assistance provided by career coaches from WSG’s Careers Connect.

I now move on to our efforts to equip and re-integrate ex-offenders.

The labour market is changing rapidly, with technology advancing and industries transforming. Those who have been out of the workforce for a significant period of time, like ex-offenders, are concerned about gaining relevant skills and re-integrating into society.

Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked how we are supporting ex-offenders in employment. I am pleased to inform them that WSG works closely with the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (or SCORE) to help ex-offenders find gainful employment. Research conducted by the Singapore Prison Service has shown that when ex-offenders are meaningfully engaged in their jobs. It eases their re-integration into the community which, in turn, helps to lower recidivism.

To arm ex-offenders with skills and improve their chances in employment, we have two programmes under the Adapt and Grow initiative – namely Project Phoenix and Career Trial. Since 2007, Project Phoenix has been providing training and employment assistance to ex-offenders to prepare them for re-integration into the workforce. More than 1,200 ex-offenders found jobs through this last year.

We hope that more employers will step forward to offer job opportunities to ex-offenders who can prove to be valuable workers when given a second chance. The tight labour market and slowing workforce growth also present compelling reasons for employers to tap on every available worker.

Chairman, as we look to better support young graduates and ex-offenders, we are also committed to making our workplaces more progressive and inclusive for women.

Today, we have a healthy employment situation for women in Singapore. Our female employment rate for those aged 25 to 64 has increased in the past decade. It rose from 65% in 2008 to 72% in 2018. In terms of women in full-time employment, we are now ranked 7th against 36 OECD countries. But our proportion of women in part-time employment is still below OECD average. We recognise that there is still much that we can do to better support women at workplaces. MOM’s Adapt and Grow initiative offers a suite of job matching services and other programmes to help jobseekers, including women who wish to return to the workforce. As Minister Josephine has announced, the Career Trial scheme will be enhanced to include part-time jobs as well, and this will expand the opportunities for those who are only able to work part-time.

We understand that most women juggle multiple roles, including the women parliamentarians in this Chamber – at home and at work and also our own aspirations. I completely agree with Prof Lim Sun Sun and Deputy Secretary-General Heng Chee How that women need not be forced to choose between career and family. It does not have to be binary. Career and family really need not be binary options. Instead, with the right workplace support, women can fulfil our career aspirations while meeting our family responsibilities.

This was the key thrust of my speech in this Chamber at the recent parliamentary motions on Ageing with Purpose and Support for Care-givers. Back then, I spoke about the Government’s resolve to develop a workplace culture that is supportive of Flexible Work Arrangements (or FWAs) and the promotion of greater adoption of FWAs. Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Chong Kee Hiong will be pleased to know that as compared to five years ago, more workplaces in Singapore are offering FWAs.

About seven in 10 of employees in Singapore now work in companies that offer at least one formal FWA, and about nine in 10 workers today are in companies that provide at least one ad-hoc FWA. What does ad-hoc FWA mean? It either means unplanned time-off or ad-hoc teleworking.

The trend of higher FWA adoption across the board is not only good news for employees, it is also positive for companies. Among workplace practices, the provision of FWA has the greatest impact on staff retention which benefit companies with experienced and engaged workers.

We want to keep the momentum of FWA adoption going. In Parliament last month, I mentioned that the Work-Life Grant has received healthy application numbers since its launch, and the Government is exploring increases to the Work-Life Grant budget to make FWA adoption more pervasive. I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of Manpower will increase the Work-Life Grant budget to a total of $100 million, from the current $30 million. This will allow more companies to benefit from the grant to sustain their employees’ FWA adoption, including job-sharing by PMETs.

As job-sharing is less well known and practised amongst employers today, MOM and Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) are developing a job-sharing implementation guide for employers. The guide aims to raise awareness on job-sharing, and educate employers on the nuts and bolts of implementing such a scheme. Job-sharing would not only expand the range of FWA options, it can enhance trust, commitment and work satisfaction between employees and employers. The job-sharing implementation guide will be launched by the first half of this year.

We are optimistic that more employers are recognising the value FWAs bring. Since the Tripartite Standard on FWAs was launched in October 2017, responses have grown. As of end January 2019, about 1,300 employers employing 400,000 employees have adopted the Standard. Key adopters of the Tripartite Standards include those in the public sector.

Our public service agencies are committed to creating a conducive work environment that allows officers to achieve good work and personal goals. This includes providing public officers with suitable FWA options. Take for example the Accountant-General's Department (or AGD) in the Ministry of Finance. Two of its employees, Ms Lim Yu May and Ms Emily Kao were given a job-sharing arrangement in cash management and payment processing. This suited the two mothers well as they appreciated the newfound flexibility to look after their family needs. Yu May took the morning shift so she could be home for two Primary school children. Emily, on the other hand, preferred to work in the afternoons while her toddler took his afternoon nap under her mother’s watch.

To ensure a smooth handover, Yu May and Emily would spend their overlapping hour at noon to exchange information and discuss what needed to be followed up. They kept abreast of each other’s progress via an excel spreadsheet that was constantly updated. Their successful job-sharing arrangement lasted for about one and a half years from December 2013 to June 2015. When Emily had her second child, she was granted extended maternity leave. Yu May took no pay leave for one and a half years to care for her children.

5.30 pm

I am happy to learn that both Yu May and Emily continue to serve in the AGD today. They have kept pace with their careers and training opportunities that the organisation offers. We hope more employers will step up their FWAs and gain from the experience and loyalty of committed staff.

To spread the adoption of FWAs, we will work closely with our tripartite partners to reach out to trade associations, businesses, chambers and employers about the Work-Life Grant and the Tripartite Standard on FWAs.

Encouraging more FWAs will also support the employment of older workers, which the Minister for Manpower, Ms Josephine Teo, spoke about earlier. As our seniors age, there will be a growing need for greater flexibility in workplaces so as to meet their diverse needs and preferences. Many of them may wish to remain in the workforce but with reduced or differing work intensity.

As we move towards a more inclusive work culture and mindset, we will be better placed to make the best of our talents. With family-friendly workplaces, employees can contribute their fullest potential without compromising their responsibilities to their loved ones. And age-friendly work practices let our seniors pass on valuable experience and knowledge as they work at their preferred pace and intensity.

At this juncture, could I seek Mr Chairman's permission to spend a few more minutes to completely respond to the cuts of the Members?

The Chairman: As we are running a bit ahead of schedule, I will give you a few more minutes, provided you do not speak in more than four languages.

Ms Low Yen Ling: I will do my best, Chairman. Thank you so much for your indulgence. Chairman, as we try to harness the full capabilities of our workforce, I agree with Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Desmond Choo that workplace harassment is an area that deserves greater attention. A safe workplace allows employees to work optimally. For that to take place, both employers and employees must have an interest and responsibility in preventing and managing workplace harassment.

There are two broad categories of workplace harassment and they are dealt with differently.

One, egregious cases for example, like the outrage of modesty and stalking, belongs to the class of conduct which constitutes offences under the Penal Code and the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). This kind of harassment will be addressed by the Courts or the Police and an affected employee may also seek civil remedies directly through the Courts, such as a Protection Order against the harasser.

The other type of harassment pertains to behaviour that may not fall under the legal threshold for criminal investigations or civil recourse under POHA, but nonetheless distresses and affects employees. For example, actions without the intention to cause, and are unlikely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a specific employee, but which may still cause discomfort and affect other employees.

Now, for cases that may not come under POHA, we want to ensure that companies have a robust grievance handling process to deal with such claims of workplace harassment. We also encourage companies to take clear steps to prevent and manage workplace harassment. These include:

(a) being explicit about what is considered unacceptable behaviour at the workplace.

(b) making clear the disciplinary actions that would be taken against perpetuators of workplace harassment;

(c) having in place safe avenues for affected employees to surface their complaints to management for recourse; and

(d) providing adequate support for affected employees, for example, giving them time off or the flexibility to work from home during the investigation and/or recovery.

In this regard, I am pleased to announce that the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) will now be a help and resource centre for workplace harassment for both employers and employees.

First, TAFEP seeks to help companies put in place robust processes to manage workplace harassment complaints. Besides providing advice, TAFEP will provide a host of resources on its website that includes: a new introductory video on how to manage workplace harassment; a sample Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy that companies can incorporate in their HR policies; and a list of training providers employers may engage to train their supervisors in managing workplace harassment.

Second, TAFEP will also be an avenue for employees who face workplace harassment to seek advice and assistance. Affected employees can call this number: 6838 0969, or approach TAFEP, write to TAFEP – we will be there to follow up.

Should they wish to share their case in confidence, TAFEP will certainly respect their request and not alert their employers. TAFEP is also working with relevant Government agencies and partners, including the Police, the Courts, and AWARE to set up a referral process so that TAFEP can have sight of all workplace harassment cases. We will take a Whole-of-Government (WOG) approach to support affected employees.

As pointed out by Mr Desmond Choo, some affected employees may need counselling services, TAFEP will help advise employers on where to obtain such support services and put them in touch with relevant agencies. Companies that put in place programmes such as peer support or counselling will help their staff cope better with the stress and effects of harassment.

Chairman, preventing and addressing discriminatory and unfair employment practices are key to making workplaces more inclusive and progressive. I wish to assure Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Faisal Manap and Mr Melvin Yong that MOM takes a serious view of any form of workplace discrimination or unfair employment practices. Employers should abide by the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices, which set out principles for fair and merit-based employment practices. Employers should not ask job applicants for information unrelated to the employee’s ability for the position, such as pre-existing medical history, including mental health conditions. Even as we constantly reach out to employers to educate them about the Guidelines, I want to ensure the Members that we will, and we have taken actions against employers who are found to have engaged in discriminatory employment practices.

I would also like to assure Mr Melvin Yong that there have been instances where we have asked employers to remove or refrain from enforcing unreasonable contractual terms. Employers have generally responded with their cooperation.

We want employees to know that there is help available for those with unreasonable clauses in their employment contracts, or are unfairly discriminated against. They can approach their unions, TAFEP or MOM for assistance.

Chairman, please allow me to take one minute to just say a few words in Mandarin. It will be one minute.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Today, the global competition for talents is stiff and technology is developing rapidly. For our workers to be future-ready, MOM is committed to uplift our workers' skills and employability, and will ensure that our employment practices are fair, inclusive and progressive. On the one hand, it will help all workers, including young graduates, women, older workers and ex-offenders find suitable employment; on the other hand, it will help companies’ grow competitively and tap on a wider pool of capabilities.

For many years, MOM has been promoting FWAs so that employees can fulfil both career and non-work responsibilities . To make FWA adoption more pervasive, MOM will increase the Work-Life Grant budget from the current $30 million to $100 million.

In addition, the application period for the Grant will also be extended by three years until June 2022. I hope more companies can benefit from the Grant and support their employees’ FWAs adoption including women, older workers, care-givers, and PMETs on job-sharing.

(In English): Chairman, with for nation with no natural resources, every Singaporean is an important asset.

With increasing competition for scarce talent having progressive and inclusive workplace will enable companies to tap on a wider pool of capabilities. To do so, we need a whole-of-society effort where workers, young and old, employers from all sector, and the community at large play their parts. Only then, can we realise our collective potential together as a nation.

The Chairman: Clarifications? Mr Patrick Tay.

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Chairman, there is point of clarification for the Minister. Earlier in my cut, I mentioned about PME union representation, in particular, the review of section 17(3) of the Industrial Relations Act as well as the review of the Tripartite Guidelines. I wanted a response from the Minister if the tripartite partners can look into this.

Mrs Josephine Teo: The answer is yes. The tripartite partners will be looking into it.

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Thank you, Chairman. I thank the Minister for the response. I wish to make a clarification and I have two clarifications to seek.

The clarification I want to make is this: I do believe in the statutory protections, to protect the workers from being summarily dismissed. But I think that the protection should be delinked from the retirement and have no age limit. But I guess that is an argument for another time.

So, I am going to seek two clarifications based on the Minister's response.

The first clarification is on the statutory protection, specifically on termination with notice, valid reasons for termination are misconduct, poor performance and redundancy. So, I want to confirm that employees terminated with notice can go to MOM to file a complaint for invalid dismissal and MOM will help to reinstate the employee. My concern is that employees might think that termination with notice is valid dismissal just because notice period is given, and therefore this becomes some kind of loophole and makes the current statutory protections until retirement age meaningless, as employers can then prematurely retire employees using the termination-with-notice clause.

The second clarification is the last time the re-employment age was raised to 67, the then Minister of Manpower, Mr Lim Swee Say, said that the tripartite partners hit a wall on raising the retirement age because employers objected to the further increase in business impact on the bottom line. And, more importantly, younger workers objected because they do not want their career progression to be stalled. So, without revealing the number of years you are going to increase for re-employment age, how have the work-group members overcome this particular objection, especially from the younger workers, in terms of career progression?

Mrs Josephine Teo: I thank the Member for his clarification questions. I will take the second one first. How did the work-group overcome the concerns of the younger workers? The Member is right in pointing out that the younger workers did have a concern about whether there would be impediments to their own progression. But I think what eventually was able to swing the thinking of all the workers is that all of us will get there. The younger workers today will eventually at some point in time, not be so young. And they would like the enhancements to apply to themselves too.

But there is still a very important consideration which is that in terms of how employers and businesses are going to manage their workforce, they are going to need flexibility in moving people around, meaning that employers are quite conscious of the importance of freeing up certain positions so that the younger ones have a chance to gain the experience and also have the opportunity to progress in their career. That is why it is still very important to give employers certain flexibility in managing their workforce and not try to impose too many rules on them. So, that is the second question.

On your first question, I am a little bit puzzled why the Member would consider that when a notice period is required and indeed, forms part of the termination, then it is considered meaningless protection. Employees too can serve notice and tell the employer, "I am done". It is reciprocal. So, it is not meaningless. But in any case, the short answer to the Member's question is yes, MOM will investigate. As to whether the outcome of the investigation and as to whether it will order a reinstatement, in most cases the worker does not want reinstatement either, because the relationship has soured and they would rather move on.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Chairman, I have two clarifications for the Minister. First, is there any plan to rebrand the Services sector to make it more sexy and more attractive to local workers, especially the younger workers? The second clarification, will the Minister reconsider my suggestion of letting SMEs, especially the smaller SMEs to retain their S Pass holders so that they do not need to send back their workers who are already well trained and know the job well, and hence affect their operations. And this is not just for Nee Soon South. It is also for Bishan Toa Payoh GRC and Hong Kah GRC and the rest of Singapore.

5.45 pm

Mrs Josephine Teo: I was afraid you were going to say Batam and Johor, too!

Mr Chairman, to the second question, if the company has a commitment, they want to find ways to become more lean and they are prepared to come under the Lean Enterprise Development (LED) Scheme, we will be very willing to see how to help.

To the first question on rebranding, absolutely yes. MOM is not alone in doing this. All the sector agencies that are involved in any of the services sector industry transformation, in fact, have it very much a priority. They are aware that, with this tightening, there would be some firms that will be affected and they would want to take advantage of this opportunity, not just to rebrand. It is not just the rebranding effort. The actual job quality, the content of the work, the way the work is carried out, the work conditions, the hours and also the terms – all these must improve. The Chinese say 换汤不换药. If the substance of it has not changed, I do not think job seekers are unable to tell the difference. Ultimately, everyone wants to progress in their careers and we should try our very best to ensure that, whichever sector they are in, they do have the opportunity to advance.

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Chairman. I rise to reply to the question that was asked by the Minister for Manpower. A similar question, I believe, was asked by Minister of State Zaqy during the Budget debate and I rose at the end of that debate to say that the Workers' Party supports the Budget but subject to our opposition on the GST.

Let me be clear about the position on the Dependency Ratio Ceilings (DRC) once again. As a matter of principle, we support the lowering of the DRC for services, as we feel that we should reduce our over-reliance on foreign manpower where we can. This is so that we can look to raise and improve the job prospects of Singaporeans.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, I thank the Member Mr Pritam Singh for this clarification. It is important and it is appreciated.

What the Member has said is felt by all of us. Let us work together, let us make the workplace, let us make work, let us make job quality our priority, and let us make work satisfying to as many people as possible.

Assoc Prof Walter Theseira: Chairman, thank you. Minister, I was heartened to hear that retirement adequacy is improving rapidly for the current generation of workers, and for women in particular. But I think we are both still concerned about the retirement adequacy of women who spend significant amounts of time out of the labour force. So, can we study ways to more formally recognise the contributions that they are making towards strengthening our families, for example, through CPF credits for care-giving?

This year's Budget has already given top-ups which are targeted more or less at such women, and we already spend considerable amounts of money on tax relief for working women. So, we can possibly do more for women who are out of the labour force and who are doing important work at home.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, I believe that there was a Motion on Care-givers and I am not sure whether this subject was discussed then. It is certainly an area that will continuously be reviewed. But, perhaps, to address the Member's question on the retirement adequacy for women in general, not just those who are involved in care-giving roles, in fact, over the last 10 years, the average CPF balance for women has been growing slightly faster than for men. For women, it was 8.3%. This is per year. So, if you compound it over time, compared to the men's 7.6%, the gap is closing.

We, of course, already have tax incentives to encourage cash top-ups and made it easier for members to transfer their CPF savings to their spouses, parents and grandparents, many of whom are women. So, in this way, we hope to help the women build up their retirement adequacy.

There is one data point that is quite useful. We looked at the members who received top-ups, and after they received the top-ups, they reached the Basic Retirement Sum. Actually, 60% of them were women. So, it is a good thing. Thank you.

Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): First of all, I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for sharing on the progress of the flexible work arrangements.

I would like to ask a follow-on question. Beyond just offering flexible work arrangements, from the employee’s point of view, from the businesses’ as well, what efforts are being done to help them better leverage flexible work arrangements in the totality of the new work arrangements that we are seeing, beyond just offering flexbile work, but really in the way work spaces are used, in the way technologies are used, because there are lots of effort in helping companies be productive, and also getting more productivity from the workers; and, in line with that, new skills that workers need to thrive in this new environment as well as the terms under which work then gets measured and also protected.

Ms Low Yen Ling: Chairman, I want to thank the Member Ms Jessica Tan for her passion on this topic and her clarifications. Earlier on, I did mention that, currently, our female employment rate is high. We ranked seventh out of 36 OECD countries.

Currently, our female employment rate for those aged 25 to 64 is at 72%. Even though there are now more women in the workforce, MOM will not let up in our efforts to enhance the support system. Actually, you really need a whole eco-system to work, to help women better balance our work and also family responsibilities.

We do so in a few ways. The first one, I spoke extensively about flexible work arrangement (FWA), and it is not just about Work-Life Grant. It is also about sharing with employers how it is also win-win.

There are actually three ways to look at FWA. It can be flexi-time, flexi-place and flexi-load. I think Ms Tan is quite familiar with that. For example, flexi-time. Some mothers will say that they have to whip up lunch for their kids. So, they work out an arrangement with their boss for them to come in at 10.00 am. But they will stay back till about seven o'clock. That is flexi-time. Flexi-place is telecommuting, a bit more common. An example of flexi-load is job-sharing where we want to focus a bit more effort because it involves job redesign, sometimes also workplace redesign. This is where Ms Tan is absolutely correct. We can now leverage on technology as an enabler to help us redesign jobs for both rank-and-file and PMET jobs. This was why the Work-Life Grant was enhanced last year to provide better support for job-sharing at PMET-levels.

Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): I have a clarification for the Minister. We heard very good updates on self-employed persons (SEPs), especially the fact that it is not growing and that many are still in the traditional sector. I would like to ask the Minister for her opinion about a visibly growing number of PMD users, cyclists, motorcyclists serving as food delivery as a vocation. Is that a concern for MOM and is this a growing trend? Is it an indication there is under-employment or is this an interim transitional thing?

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, my observation is that I have seen some of these Deliveroo, Grab Eats service people. Some of them look very young. They look like they are students. And when I have asked, they are taking this on to earn some pocket money. I have also seen some other people do this on weekends. When I have asked them, not all of them are doing it on a full-time basis; some of them are earning something extra.

In terms of boosting a person's income, in terms of giving him options, if that is what our individual wishes to do, they certainly should be entitled to decide for themselves.

We will have to continue to monitor the trends. As it is, as the Member pointed out again that the SEP numbers went down, I would be very concerned if the numbers grew very quickly. As it looks right now, over all, the numbers have not changed.

One other thing that we have noticed, and I shared with the House last year, is that SEPs are quite flexible. Their self-employment can take various forms. There were occasions where we noticed that people had chosen to switch into driving private hire cars because the incomes that they got was better than, for example, selling real estate, because the real estate market is quieter. So, there is some movement amongst the different occupations within self-employment.

Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Thank you, Chairman. Just a question for the Minister. I am happy to know that the PEA is not going up. But would the Minister consider lowering the PEA and let the member decide, because the trade-off, if you have an early withdrawal, you are going to get less, and if you delay your withdrawal, you are going to get more? Let the member decide. It means having the PEA at 60.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Actually, this is not new. Workers' Party has called for it previously and the Government has also taken pains to explain what the considerations are. Essentially, it is to do with extended longevity, and also being mindful of what other countries are doing.

So, I happened to have addressed this question quite recently in Parliament, and my answer has not changed. So, with your permission, Mr Chairman, I suggest we move on.

But Mr Png actually also made some other references to CPF in his earlier cut. Mr Chairman, I wonder if you would allow me to address them since I did not have time to address them earlier?

The Chairman: Very briefly, please.

Mrs Josephine Teo: I will try my best. Actually, Mr Png, you compared CPF savings to something like a fixed deposit, meaning whenever you want, you should be able to take it out. Am I right?

Mr Png Eng Huat: At the end of your maturity date, you should be able to take out with interest—

Mrs Josephine Teo: At the end of the maturity date, you should be able to take it out with interest? Thank you. That is exactly what the practice is. Members can withdraw their payouts anytime from 65. When the member is about to reach 65, we remind him. If he does not instruct us, we roll over his FD because it earns him more money. Then we write to him again and we remind him, year after year. If we do not do that but, instead, the moment he turns 65, I terminate his FD and let his savings go into the Current Account, which earns much less interest, it will cause him to earn less money.

So, Mr Png, which bank will you be more happy with? The one that rolls over for you automatically because it earns more, or the one that quickly terminates it and let it earn less?

The Chairman: Mr Zainal Sapari.

Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Chairman, my question is for the Minister of State Zaqy. I am glad that MOM will encourage building owners to provide rest areas for outsourced workers. But the reality is that many building owners, they need to carve out existing areas to be rest areas, and this would involve increasing their gross floor area, and there will be a developmental charge. I am proposing, maybe in his capacity in MND, to consider waiving this developmental charge for areas, if it is being carved out, to be rest areas. For the Minister of State's consideration.

Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I believe that should be an MND cut though. But having said that, it is good that Members are concerned with this area. But as I have mentioned at the start, we will start with cleaners first because we know that it is the right thing to do. But it is not going to be easy for everyone. So, that is why even for hawker centres, we start with the new ones first. And the old ones, as they retrofit, they upgrade, we will work with NEA to see how we can provide those.

And, certainly, for buildings, I can also understand some of the difficulties. But, certainly, if the Member files a cut under MND, we will take a look at that.

The Chairman: We got time for two more. Ms Anthea Ong.

Ms Anthea Ong: Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Minister. I am very heartened to see that more efforts are being made by MOM to promote more workplace well-being, like increasing the Work-Life Grant from S$30 million to S$100 million, and also the increased adoption of FWA. All these contribute to, obviously, employee well-being.

This may be more a question of updating our workplace health and safety to embrace total health and safety that includes psycho-social well-being because we are already doing it but the Workplace Safety and Health Act is still very much skewed towards the physical health and safety. Could Minister please give clarification on that?

6.00 pm

Mr Zaqy Mohamad: At this moment, we do a lot of promotional work around mental well-being so I am not sure exactly which aspect of workplace safety and health do you want to include that in but a lot of the work we do today looks at safety issues, occupational diseases. At this moment, mental health injuries or injuries that result in mental health issues is something we will study in future. So, if the Member is specific in the areas that she thinks we could work on, we are happy to work with you and consult you on this one.

The Chairman: We have time for one more. Ms Foo Mee Har.

Ms Foo Mee Har: Thank you, Sir. I have two clarification questions for the Minister. The first is, I asked during my cut for the lower income seniors where they have little family support, they qualify for Silver Support, they do not own a property to unlock, and I know the previous answers were if the CPF is very low, they get Silver Support. So, I would like to ask – and I asked in my cut – if you combine those who qualify for Silver Support and their CPF, how far are they from the $700 of basic retirement sum per month. I asked that question because I take $700 as what is deemed sufficient – that is the aim at least. If you add up the CPF monthly payout plus the Silver Support, how much would they get?

The second clarification question is, the good thing about this group of seniors is 76% of them have property. And, therefore, it is very important when CPF talks with them about planning, they can speak about unlocking value in the property. I know probably it is not immediately in the remit of CPF so I would like to ask how would that be addressed in helping them to understand the value in their property if they want a much more comfortable retirement and they wanted to unlock that value.

Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, on helping members understand what they can do to unlock the value of their property, I think it is not just CPF Board that can, through the retirement planning service, make this known to the members. In fact, HDB also provides quite wise counsel to HDB flat owners. So, there is room for these kinds of services to be improved. Usage levels, I think, can go up. But it appears to us that quite a lot of people also feel that they have the knowledge and they are quite confident about making decisions for themselves. The question is, are there people who would benefit from such services but are not aware that they are being offered. So, that is an area we need to work on.

Your other question is a question of data and I am afraid I do not know have that with me right now.

The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: I would like to thank Minister Josephine Teo, Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling for more than two hours of responses and a lot of clarity given. If I may just sum up in three tag lines. After hearing the last four-and-a-half hours of sharing. I think the first tag line is we want our workers to be not just employed, employable but also empowered, engaged and equally treated. And for employers to embrace transformation before transformation embraces them. And, finally, every worker matters and every tripartite partner matters too.

So, on that note, I would also like to place on record my thanks to Permanent Secretary Aubeck Kam, Deputy Secretaries Poon Hong Yuen and Augustin Lee, CPF Board Chief Executive Ng Chee Peng as well WSG Chief Executive Tan Choon Shian, and the entire MOM team powering this COS, and, of course, my fellow Members of this House who have contributed in all their cuts and all the clarifications. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,910,685,500 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $67,940,200 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.