More measures needed to safeguard S’porean core

The Manpower Minister’s affirmation that Singaporeans will form two-thirds of the workforce is welcomed (“Two-thirds S’porean core in workforce a firm target”; Aug 21).

This is especially so since a Ministry of Manpower investigation into 150 companies over the past year found that a quarter of them had unfairly passed over Singaporeans for jobs (“38 firms identified for not hiring, grooming S’poreans”; Aug 14).

Conversely, one might ask if the minister’s reassurance will go far enough given three considerations.

First, it has been often publicised online that companies hire locals for lower-end jobs while reserving better-paying, senior positions for foreigners, in an attempt to maintain the overall local-to-foreigner ratio.

Second, investigations such as the recent one are both time- and resource-consuming. Thus, the majority of the thousands of companies here will probably never be scrutinised thoroughly for unfair employment practices.

Knowing that their chances of being caught are low, errant companies would continue their biased practices.

Third, the punishment the 38 companies got seems somewhat muted: They were put on a watch list, but no fines were imposed. Additional measures are therefore needed to safeguard the Singaporean core and meet our citizens’ long-term aspirations.

For instance, besides ensuring a two-thirds majority in terms of head count, the MOM should correspondingly ensure that at least two-thirds of a company’s total wages are paid to Singaporeans.

This would encourage companies to employ Singaporeans at the higher levels, rather than at the bottom, in their hierarchy. The upshot is that, over time, more Singaporeans would become qualified to take on greater opportunities and challenges.

Knowledge gleaned at these levels can help spur local entrepreneurship, as enterprising individuals would gain confidence to strike out on their own.

Another suggestion would be to adopt a zero-tolerance approach by imposing a deterrent fine on errant companies, in addition to restrictions on the issuance of future employment passes.

Lastly, the MOM should set up a channel for whistle-blowers to encourage confidential feedback about unfair hiring practices.

There should be protection of the identity of informants as well as legislation to allow for compensation in the event that the company penalises or fires the whistle-blower.

While these measures may initially turn off some fair-weather companies, the right tone would be set for future labour policies. Only companies that truly prize Singapore’s stable socio-political climate, pro-business culture and highly educated workforce would flourish here.