The rich want cheap maids, cheap FT so NO to minimum wage rule in Singapore?
High dependence on cheap maids and cheap foreigners in Singapore: one reason why government will not implement the minimum wage rule? and othr matters
[pict source: Singapore's defence burden - Something no maid can carry]
[pict source]
Because there are already too many foreign workers in Singapore? Because too many 'rich' families will be inconvenienced?
According to - 'Measures to improve welfare of Foreign Domestic Workers'[93.8live, 12Mar2010]: "Presently, there are about 196,000 foreign domestic workers (FDW) in Singapore."
According to 'Salaries of new Indonesian maids to rise to S$450' [CNA, 18Jan2011]- S$450/ month is the salary of an Indonesian maid in Singapore.
What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Perhaps the govt knows that SG economy will certainly collapse overnight when many of foreign workers and maids see overnight salary increments in line with the implementation of such a minimum salary policy.
Perhaps if the Singapore government is so intent on lavishing its rich with the luxury of 'subsidised' maid services and its business corporations through the exploitation of cheap foreign labour; then wouldn't it be quite reasonable to request that the Singapore government treat all it's own citizens a more equally rather than with evasive excuses such as "When I talk to my grassroots leaders, I just did a walkabout in my constituency, we also have to send another message, which is that, only about 50 per cent of Singaporeans pay taxes." K Shanmugam 'Looking out for the young and old' [CNA:12Mar2012] Aren't GST and property tax are indeed taxes too?
Shouldn't the GST credit scheme be renamed the salary top up scheme in lieu of the absent minimum salary scheme?
Also, shouldn't the foreign domestic worker levy (currently: btw S$170 - 265) also be increased given that in both services and construction sector worker's employment levies will go up to $600/month?
Since foreign domestic workers also add to the total population of foreign workers residing in Singapore, why should those who employ maids be allowed to pay lesser levies as compared to other employment sectors- and conversely, aren't Singaporean manual (domestic) workers getting short changed given to the fact that anybody can employ a foreign domestic worker at a relatively low levy as compared to other sectors under the work permit scheme? Is the SG government trying to send the signal that it is more desirable to have a maid in tow than to employ a foreign worker other than as a maid in tow? That it is desirable for someone else to have do your domestic chores for you? Are Singaporean women really so calculative that they need to be bribed with cash handouts and discounts on work permit levies just to entice them back to work- how much more handouts then should the disabled/ the handicapped receive?
Also, I cannot fathom why the S-pass is cheaper than a work permit to attain since making work permits harder to attain would encourage employers to employ more Singaporeans in lower skilled jobs, wouldn't a relatively more expensive S/ employment pass encourage employers to train-up and employ more Singaporeans in these higher paying positions? Is Singapore's desire for a status and a high GDP too intense for its own long term good?
In commenting about the short fall in government revenues after 2016 in 'New ways to raise revenue needed, says DPM Tharman' [TDY; 02Mar2012][pict]; it might perhaps be good for Mr Tharman to also ask himself how long more the rich should be allowed their foreign maids at subsidised levies whilst Singaporeans working as maids and nannies are being deliberately paid less due to the relatively cheap FDW maid levies.
Once again, Singapore's overpaid ministers have shown themselves to be good only in adding steroids to the Singapore economy. No wonder they were the first to tag their own with the pinnacle of all Singaporean salaries.
Reference(s):
- 'Foreign worker levies to increase, says MOM' [CNA; 21Feb2011]: "There are nearly 1.1 million foreigners employed in Singapore as at end-2010. Out of the 871,000 work permit holders employed in Singapore, 248,000 are in the construction industry....The next big consumer of foreign workers is the services sector. Its present levy structure of S$170 to S$450 will go up to between S$300 and S$600. ...Employers of S Pass holders can expect an average increase of S$240 in the monthly levy between now and 2013. The current levy of between S$110 to S$150 will go up to S$300 to S$450 in two years time."
PS: For those really in need of the assistance of a FDW: Aged (w handicap), disabled or with young children: perhaps a levy subsidy can be given according to need/ affordability however the FDW levy shouldn't be in first instance so excessively cheap to the extent that it becomes an embarrassment as compared to other levy- ditto the S-pass and employment passes: a foreign banker/ lawyer is no more valuable then a foreign construction worker if he were to quibble over the same $300-600monthly levy every month given his ostensibly high salary to start with. If the banker/ lawyer cannot afford the $300-600/mth levy, then neither can the construction worker... and the MOM ought appreciate that well too.
High dependence on cheap maids and cheap foreigners in Singapore: one reason why government will not implement the minimum wage rule? and othr matters
Because there are already too many foreign workers in Singapore? Because too many 'rich' families will be inconvenienced?
According to - 'Measures to improve welfare of Foreign Domestic Workers'[93.8live, 12Mar2010]: "Presently, there are about 196,000 foreign domestic workers (FDW) in Singapore."
According to 'Salaries of new Indonesian maids to rise to S$450' [CNA, 18Jan2011]- S$450/ month is the salary of an Indonesian maid in Singapore.
What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Perhaps the govt knows that SG economy will certainly collapse overnight when many of foreign workers and maids see overnight salary increments in line with the implementation of such a minimum salary policy.
Perhaps if the Singapore government is so intent on lavishing its rich with the luxury of 'subsidised' maid services and its business corporations through the exploitation of cheap foreign labour; then wouldn't it be quite reasonable to request that the Singapore government treat all it's own citizens a more equally rather than with evasive excuses such as "When I talk to my grassroots leaders, I just did a walkabout in my constituency, we also have to send another message, which is that, only about 50 per cent of Singaporeans pay taxes." K Shanmugam 'Looking out for the young and old' [CNA:12Mar2012] Aren't GST and property tax are indeed taxes too?
Shouldn't the GST credit scheme be renamed the salary top up scheme in lieu of the absent minimum salary scheme?
Also, shouldn't the foreign domestic worker levy (currently: btw S$170 - 265) also be increased given that in both services and construction sector worker's employment levies will go up to $600/month?
Since foreign domestic workers also add to the total population of foreign workers residing in Singapore, why should those who employ maids be allowed to pay lesser levies as compared to other employment sectors- and conversely, aren't Singaporean manual (domestic) workers getting short changed given to the fact that anybody can employ a foreign domestic worker at a relatively low levy as compared to other sectors under the work permit scheme? Is the SG government trying to send the signal that it is more desirable to have a maid in tow than to employ a foreign worker other than as a maid in tow? That it is desirable for someone else to have do your domestic chores for you? Are Singaporean women really so calculative that they need to be bribed with cash handouts and discounts on work permit levies just to entice them back to work- how much more handouts then should the disabled/ the handicapped receive?
Also, I cannot fathom why the S-pass is cheaper than a work permit to attain since making work permits harder to attain would encourage employers to employ more Singaporeans in lower skilled jobs, wouldn't a relatively more expensive S/ employment pass encourage employers to train-up and employ more Singaporeans in these higher paying positions? Is Singapore's desire for a status and a high GDP too intense for its own long term good?
In commenting about the short fall in government revenues after 2016 in 'New ways to raise revenue needed, says DPM Tharman' [TDY; 02Mar2012][pict]; it might perhaps be good for Mr Tharman to also ask himself how long more the rich should be allowed their foreign maids at subsidised levies whilst Singaporeans working as maids and nannies are being deliberately paid less due to the relatively cheap FDW maid levies.
Once again, Singapore's overpaid ministers have shown themselves to be good only in adding steroids to the Singapore economy. No wonder they were the first to tag their own with the pinnacle of all Singaporean salaries.
Reference(s):
- 'Foreign worker levies to increase, says MOM' [CNA; 21Feb2011]: "There are nearly 1.1 million foreigners employed in Singapore as at end-2010. Out of the 871,000 work permit holders employed in Singapore, 248,000 are in the construction industry....The next big consumer of foreign workers is the services sector. Its present levy structure of S$170 to S$450 will go up to between S$300 and S$600. ...Employers of S Pass holders can expect an average increase of S$240 in the monthly levy between now and 2013. The current levy of between S$110 to S$150 will go up to S$300 to S$450 in two years time."
PS: For those really in need of the assistance of a FDW: Aged (w handicap), disabled or with young children: perhaps a levy subsidy can be given according to need/ affordability however the FDW levy shouldn't be in first instance so excessively cheap to the extent that it becomes an embarrassment as compared to other levy- ditto the S-pass and employment passes: a foreign banker/ lawyer is no more valuable then a foreign construction worker if he were to quibble over the same $300-600monthly levy every month given his ostensibly high salary to start with. If the banker/ lawyer cannot afford the $300-600/mth levy, then neither can the construction worker... and the MOM ought appreciate that well too.
Last edited:
