• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Law to compel employers to re-hire workers who turn 62 in 2012, what's that?

FuckSamLeong

Alfrescian
Loyal
With cheap foreign labour policies, who is going to hire an old hag? To pay him $400 a month salary? Another election paying lip service ploy? In the Straits Times report, Maths teacher Lee Soo Miang 61, propaganda mouthed that he realised his $100,000 savings will not be enough to last if he were to live for another 20 years. How many Singaporeons has $1000,000 in savings at 61 years of age like him?

Home > Breaking News > Singapore > Story
Sep 11, 2009
Hold on to older workers
By Ang Yiying

A CALL has gone out to companies to keep their older employees on the payroll instead of waiting for the law on this to take effect in 2012.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Office Lim Boon Heng said that some of these older workers may need retraining, but they are a source of labour going untapped - even as small- and medium-sized enterprises tell him about their difficulties in finding enough Singapore workers.

It is thus time to push harder for the retention and re-employment of older workers, he said.

Among workers aged 55 to 64, 57 per cent are still working, he noted, but this is a long way off from having 65 per cent of them employed by 2012.

In that year, the law will compel employers to re-hire workers who turn 62.

Speaking at an award ceremony yesterday to honour age-friendly employers, Mr Lim had this to say to those waiting for the law to kick in: 'My advice is: Don't wait. Start working on it now. You have only just over two years to get ready.'

He told reporters later that some employers were 'trapped in the mindset' that older workers have outlived their usefulness.

But the older worker will be a fixture in a work force in a rapidly greying population. In slightly more than a decade, 19 per cent of the labour force will be 55 or older - more than double the 8.3 per cent a decade ago.

The Straits Times reported last month that only 1 per cent of the more than 100,000 businesses here have committed themselves to introducing re-employment policies.

This is despite the fact that they stand to receive grants from the Workforce Development Agency's Advantage scheme if they hire, retain or re-hire those who have hit retirement age.
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
>In the Straits Times report, Maths teacher Lee Soo Miang 61, propaganda mouthed that he realised his $100,000 savings will not be enough to last if he were to live for another 20 years. How many Singaporeons has $1000,000 in savings at 61 years of age like him?>

I don't believe this...most teachers I know in the past owned landed properties, own cars..own...this & that, live on a good pension...MOST OF THEM...this must be damn looser...and worst of all a MATHEMATICS teacher, who can not even do his sums right...I believe he is lying...unless the Singapore Teacher's Union...had screwed the teachers...
 

ChaoPappyPoodle

Alfrescian
Loyal
This law is going to huirt older Singaporean workers really hard.

This law will provide further incentive for employers NOT to hire older Singaporeans. With the pappies open-backside policy towards FTs, employers will rather hire FTs than a 40-50+ worker - forget about those in the 60s.

FTs come here to work and by the time they are in their 40s, they can go back home and live a very comfortable life back in their own land. The open-backside FT policy means that there wil always be a continuous influx of young FTs to fight for jobs against an ever aging Singapore population.

As it is now, it is difficult for Singaporeans aged 40+ to be hired and they talk about re-hiring 62? Hello! This policy will make older Singaporeans less attractive to employees. Even younger Singaporeans have problems competing against no-CPF FTs and lower pay expectations from FTs and for males there is the NS liability. This policy is a nail into the coffin of common Singaporeans.

I truly wonder how dumb the pappies can be but then again all this could serve to push older Singaporeans to take on the CPF Life plan as older Singaporeans realise that getting a job is a pitiful endeavour. The 154th will of course provide 'nation-building' anecdotes of this policy's success so no point looking for statistics or true-value studies on the implications of this policy.

Whatever the outcomes are of this policy, at the end of the day, Singaporeans voted this government and they deserve what they get. The only way out of these rubbish policies is to vote the pappies out once and for all.

It is clear as night against day that their policies are not to the benefit of the general population. It's even detrimental!
 
Top