Economic Restructuring II: Prof Lim
-
Daddy
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_788662.html
Wage shock therapy very risky, warns Swee Say...
but Prof Lim probably knows what he is doing and saying. So... Lim SS knows more than the professor? What about the risks behind 'not doing the wage shock therapy?'
But he conceded that driving wage growth through productivity gains would take time.
ahbu then?
'We all agree we need to speed up the transformation of the economy, especially for the low-wage workers,' he said, adding that labour and business leaders would have to find ways to speed up productivity gains.
labour and business leaders would typically take the path that has least resistance and is cheapest. Meaning....there would be NO transformation of the economy unless the govt wills it. However, judging by their reactions, it's probably a no.
Former NWC Chairman Professor Lim Chong Yah, or
Labour chief Lim Swee Say
:? -
I have been questioning the mindset of:
\"Pay rise without higher productivity 'dangerous'\"
(view article: http://www.spring.gov.sg/NewsEvents/ITN/Pages/Pay-rise-without-higher-productivity-dangerous-20120501.aspx)
and I finally realized what is wrong.
The problem is not that the people are not productive. It is because businesses and employers are compromising more productive, more efficient workers with lower cost alternatives.
When revenue drops, cost-cutting are often the first to be implemented.
On the one hand, the company who engages in lower cost alternatives, such as less skill workers, may continue to survive. But productivity suffers because they have to be trained and needs time to get familiar with their job and with their environment. Before you know it, the contract of the workers are up and new workers come in and have to receive new training, and the cycle repeats once again. (I am sure those who have engaged news maids would be very familiar with this!) How can productivity be achieved, not to mention increase?
On the other hand, those workers who got laid off due to company restructuring, or those who loses opportunities to get employed due to the quality-cost compromise may not end up in the same trade any more, and have to seek job opportunities in other industries and learn new skills. The same situation is likely to occur here - picking up news skills and low productivity until one gets familiar with the job.
It is understandable if we are looking at totally new industries (maybe casino?
) BUT there are many industries such as the services lines that are existing, but employers CHOOSE to compromise more qualified people by engaging cheaper labour. How often do we walk into a retail store or restaurant or hotel and receive the answer of \"Sorry, I am not familiar/I don't know, I am new here?\" or \"Um...let me check and get back to you..\"? How we miss the knowledgeable staff who'd give you that confident reply,\"Sure, this way please!\" Or, \"This is from xxx, the quality is superior to the other one because...\" etc? The quick sale you might just get from that confidence of familiarity and efficiency is so important yet often undermined. This is but one example of the many many.
For companies which are on the verge of survival, perhaps, it is not of choice. However, when the ultimate motive is to achieve higher profits, to accumulate wealth and be stingy on paying workers who truly deserve to be paid better, then I'd say the employers deserve what they get - lower productivity.
When the time comes round, most people would, or may have changed career, maybe become lagged in their specialty, gone on to something else, like driving taxi perhaps, or trading, or tuition, or real estate, or insurance, or be SAHM, the companies would be forever reliant on someone else, someone cheaper, and hoping that productivity would increase.
Ok, I've finished. Start shooting! -
concern2:
Wow! I never quite understood that... thanks for explaining. :thankyou: :udawoman:I have been questioning the mindset of:
\"Pay rise without higher productivity 'dangerous'\"
(view article: http://www.spring.gov.sg/NewsEvents/ITN/Pages/Pay-rise-without-higher-productivity-dangerous-20120501.aspx)
and I finally realized what is wrong.
The problem is not that the people are not productive. It is because businesses and employers are compromising more productive, more efficient workers with lower cost alternatives.
When revenue drops, cost-cutting are often the first to be implemented.
On the one hand, the company who engages in lower cost alternatives, such as less skill workers, may continue to survive. But productivity suffers because they have to be trained and needs time to get familiar with their job and with their environment. Before you know it, the contract of the workers are up and new workers come in and have to receive new training, and the cycle repeats once again. (I am sure those who have engaged news maids would be very familiar with this!) How can productivity be achieved, not to mention increase?
On the other hand, those workers who got laid off due to company restructuring, or those who loses opportunities to get employed due to the quality-cost compromise may not end up in the same trade any more, and have to seek job opportunities in other industries and learn new skills. The same situation is likely to occur here - picking up news skills and low productivity until one gets familiar with the job.
It is understandable if we are looking at totally new industries (maybe casino? ) BUT there are many industries such as the services lines that are existing, but employers CHOOSE to compromise more qualified people by engaging cheaper labour. How often do we walk into a retail store or restaurant or hotel and receive the answer of \"Sorry, I am not familiar/I don't know, I am new here?\" or \"Um...let me check and get back to you..\"? How we miss the knowledgeable staff who'd give you that confident reply,\"Sure, this way please!\" Or, \"This is from xxx, the quality is superior to the other one because...\" etc? The quick sale you might just get from that confidence of familiarity and efficiency is so important yet often undermined. This is but one example of the many many.
For companies which are on the verge of survival, perhaps, it is not of choice. However, when the ultimate motive is to achieve higher profits, to accumulate wealth and be stingy on paying workers who truly deserve to be paid better, then I'd say the employers deserve what they get - lower productivity.
When the time comes round, most people would, or may have changed career, maybe become lagged in their specialty, gone on to something else, like driving taxi perhaps, or trading, or tuition, or real estate, or insurance, or be SAHM, the companies would be forever reliant on someone else, someone cheaper, and hoping that productivity would increase.
Ok, I've finished. Start shooting! -
-
concern2:
great post, concern2 ~
On the one hand, the company who engages in lower cost alternatives, such as less skill workers, may continue to survive. But productivity suffers because they have to be trained and needs time to get familiar with their job and with their environment. Before you know it, the contract of the workers are up and new workers come in and have to receive new training, and the cycle repeats once again. (I am sure those who have engaged news maids would be very familiar with this!) How can productivity be achieved, not to mention increase?
On the other hand, those workers who got laid off due to company restructuring, or those who loses opportunities to get employed due to the quality-cost compromise may not end up in the same trade any more, and have to seek job opportunities in other industries and learn new skills. The same situation is likely to occur here - picking up news skills and low productivity until one gets familiar with the job.
It is understandable if we are looking at totally new industries (maybe casino? ) BUT there are many industries such as the services lines that are existing, but employers CHOOSE to compromise more qualified people by engaging cheaper labour. How often do we walk into a retail store or restaurant or hotel and receive the answer of \"Sorry, I am not familiar/I don't know, I am new here?\" or \"Um...let me check and get back to you..\"? How we miss the knowledgeable staff who'd give you that confident reply,\"Sure, this way please!\" Or, \"This is from xxx, the quality is superior to the other one because...\" etc? The quick sale you might just get from that confidence of familiarity and efficiency is so important yet often undermined. This is but one example of the many many.
For companies which are on the verge of survival, perhaps, it is not of choice. However, when the ultimate motive is to achieve higher profits, to accumulate wealth and be stingy on paying workers who truly deserve to be paid better, then I'd say the employers deserve what they get - lower productivity.
Makes good sense to me!
-
verykiasu2010:
thanks for sharing this ~http://justice4workerssingapore.blogspot.sg/2012/05/long-interview-yeoh-lam-keong-are-we.html
take a look at this
gosh i love his vision and philosophy..
-
concern2:
load ammo and shoot.... :goodpost: :goodpost:I have been questioning the mindset of:
\"Pay rise without higher productivity 'dangerous'\"
(view article: http://www.spring.gov.sg/NewsEvents/ITN/Pages/Pay-rise-without-higher-productivity-dangerous-20120501.aspx)
and I finally realized what is wrong.
Ok, I've finished. Start shooting!
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login