<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Jobs Credit a 'strategic' move, says labour chief
=> As in national reserves are used to subsidize FTrash's pay to secure their votes in the next GE?
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>It would achieve more than a CPF cut, and enhance tripartite trust </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Goh Chin Lian, Senior Political Correspondent
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
</TD><TD vAlign=bottom>
-- ST FILE PHOTO
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->LABOUR chief Lim Swee Say yesterday rebutted criticisms that the Government should have cut the employers' Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution rate instead of having the Jobs Credit wage support scheme as a way to save jobs.
The latter would achieve more than a CPF cut, he said, and it would also strengthen the trust that now exists among the tripartite partners - the Government, workers, and employers.
This was because the labour movement, together with the Government, spent the past 20 years urging workers and companies to move towards a flexible wage system in which some components are variable.
Cutting the employers' CPF contribution rate now before trying other cost-saving measures would only break the tripartite trust, he said.
He defended, in particular, the Government decision to draw on past reserves to introduce the $4.5 billion Jobs Credit scheme as a 'strategic' move.
The scheme pays employers 12 per cent of the first $2,500 of each month's wages for each resident worker. This is equivalent to a 9 percentage point CPF cut.
Mr Lim, who is Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, made these comments yesterday at a conference for civil servants, in the wake of former permanent secretary Ngiam Tong Dow's criticisms of the decision not to cut CPF in this downturn.
The Government had made the cut in the 1985 recession, a move which Mr Ngiam described as 'strategic' in a talk to African policymakers at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies and condensed in an article published in this newspaper last Saturday. By comparison, Jobs Credit was a 'tactical' one to prevent massive unemployment, he said. It simply gave uncompetitive enterprises a short reprieve.
Without referring to Mr Ngiam by name, Mr Lim said: 'There's a school of thought...that a CPF cut is a strategic move. Jobs Credit is a tactical move. I disagree.'
Workers have been told that cutting employers' CPF may produce 'unequal' results and are urged to move towards a flexible wage system that combines fixed and variable monthly payments, as well as a year-end bonus, he said.
The employers' CPF share has also been reduced over the years from 25 per cent to 14.5 per cent, he noted.
He said: 'Having told our workers that the flexible wage system is a better way to go... (if) we go back to cutting the CPF without even trying the other measures, do you think workers can trust the union, and the union can trust the employers?
'The answer is obviously no.'
Added Mr Lim: 'In my view, Jobs Credit is a very strategic move because it will create the effect of more than a CPF cut. But more important, it actually further strengthens the trust among the tripartite partners, and the trust between the Government, the union, the employers with the workers.'
He was speaking at a two-day conference on organisational learning, organised by the Civil Service College.
Its dean, Mr Lionel Yeo, noted the timeliness of the conference as the public service tackles the impact of the economic crisis and positions Singapore to emerge stronger. He told the 800 delegates from more than 50 public sector agencies: 'The need to facilitate learning across boundaries and to generate creative solutions, both within and across public sector agencies, has never been more pertinent.' [email protected]
=> As in national reserves are used to subsidize FTrash's pay to secure their votes in the next GE?
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><TR>It would achieve more than a CPF cut, and enhance tripartite trust </TR><!-- Author --><TR><TD class="padlrt8 georgia11 darkgrey bold" colSpan=2>By Goh Chin Lian, Senior Political Correspondent
</TD></TR><!-- show image if available --><TR vAlign=bottom><TD width=330>
</TD><TD width=10>
-- ST FILE PHOTO
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->LABOUR chief Lim Swee Say yesterday rebutted criticisms that the Government should have cut the employers' Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution rate instead of having the Jobs Credit wage support scheme as a way to save jobs.
The latter would achieve more than a CPF cut, he said, and it would also strengthen the trust that now exists among the tripartite partners - the Government, workers, and employers.
This was because the labour movement, together with the Government, spent the past 20 years urging workers and companies to move towards a flexible wage system in which some components are variable.
Cutting the employers' CPF contribution rate now before trying other cost-saving measures would only break the tripartite trust, he said.
He defended, in particular, the Government decision to draw on past reserves to introduce the $4.5 billion Jobs Credit scheme as a 'strategic' move.
The scheme pays employers 12 per cent of the first $2,500 of each month's wages for each resident worker. This is equivalent to a 9 percentage point CPF cut.
Mr Lim, who is Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, made these comments yesterday at a conference for civil servants, in the wake of former permanent secretary Ngiam Tong Dow's criticisms of the decision not to cut CPF in this downturn.
The Government had made the cut in the 1985 recession, a move which Mr Ngiam described as 'strategic' in a talk to African policymakers at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies and condensed in an article published in this newspaper last Saturday. By comparison, Jobs Credit was a 'tactical' one to prevent massive unemployment, he said. It simply gave uncompetitive enterprises a short reprieve.
Without referring to Mr Ngiam by name, Mr Lim said: 'There's a school of thought...that a CPF cut is a strategic move. Jobs Credit is a tactical move. I disagree.'
Workers have been told that cutting employers' CPF may produce 'unequal' results and are urged to move towards a flexible wage system that combines fixed and variable monthly payments, as well as a year-end bonus, he said.
The employers' CPF share has also been reduced over the years from 25 per cent to 14.5 per cent, he noted.
He said: 'Having told our workers that the flexible wage system is a better way to go... (if) we go back to cutting the CPF without even trying the other measures, do you think workers can trust the union, and the union can trust the employers?
'The answer is obviously no.'
Added Mr Lim: 'In my view, Jobs Credit is a very strategic move because it will create the effect of more than a CPF cut. But more important, it actually further strengthens the trust among the tripartite partners, and the trust between the Government, the union, the employers with the workers.'
He was speaking at a two-day conference on organisational learning, organised by the Civil Service College.
Its dean, Mr Lionel Yeo, noted the timeliness of the conference as the public service tackles the impact of the economic crisis and positions Singapore to emerge stronger. He told the 800 delegates from more than 50 public sector agencies: 'The need to facilitate learning across boundaries and to generate creative solutions, both within and across public sector agencies, has never been more pertinent.' [email protected]
