Phey Yew Kok
Singapore
“Sir, before I withdraw the amendment, I would like to clarify one point. Just now when I mentioned CASE as being a paper tiger, I was not saying that the NTUC, of which I am the President, considers CASE a paper tiger. I do not consider CASE a paper tiger. I say that the coffee shop owners' association considers CASE as a paper tiger.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I find it very difficult to agree with the Minister of State that because the affiliates of the NTUC have been winning most of the secret ballots we should not change this regulation. May I refer to another case which is published in today's New Nation.”
“I am of the firm view that the situation can be easily rectified if an amendment is made to the Regulations, either requiring all employees who are entitled to vote in the secret ballot for recognition so to vote in the secret ballot unless they are sick or abroad or have reasonable excuse, or making the results of the secret ballot to be…”
“Sir, may I bring up another point. There were a number of occasions when unscrupulous employers used undue influence to pressurise the workers not to go and cast their vote.”
“Sir, in view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Phey Yew Kok - (7) That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code M C-02 of the Main Estimates.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the amendment to the Central Provident Fund Act. The 10,000 bus workers and SILO which represents these employees of SBS welcome the announcement by the Government to turn SBS into a public company. We are glad to learn that a percentage of shares will be set aside for our bus workers.”
The complete record
Every one of 119 lines we hold for Phey Yew Kok, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 3.
“the non-bargainable category of executives and confidential staff constitutes some 14% of the total workforce and have received almost 44% of the total amount of annual wage supplement or bonus paid. Perhaps the Minister for Labour and this House would like to know that the Chairman of this Company's Board of Directors is a top civil servant. I must say that not all the top civil servants really practise what they preach. In this company there are not less than 888 employees. The company classified 127 employees as "managerial" staff. In other words, the ratio of managerial staff in this company is 1:8. I must compliment this top civil servant who really trains managerial people in this company and who really pays the company's managers well. The total annual wage supplement paid by the company is about $1.4 million and the managers and the confidential staff got more than 44%. This I submit, Sir, is unjust to the bargainable employees who fall within the ambit of the Employment Act, while the non-bargainable employees who are not covered by the Employment Act enjoy enhanced benefits. I suggest, Sir, some acceptable limit should be imposed on the quantum payable to such employees. One other matter that is a cause for concern is that pertaining to the practice of granting a half-day off on the eve of important festivals. Here again, I must say that the civil servants do not practise what they preach. It is common practice for employers of white-collar workers to grant a half-day off; and no one raises an eye-brow when this is freely granted to them. But I note with some wonderment that when blue-collar workers request for a half-pay off on such occasions they face difficulties.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1003*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs. Cheong Yuen Chee, P. Govindaswamy, Ivan Baptist and Tan Cheng San). The law prescribes limits to the payment of annual wage supplement. This is desirable and, indeed, imperative in an economy such as Singapore's where our progress is dominantly dependent on inducements to prospective investors to invest in Singapore, and to ensure that our manufactured goods are competitive in overseas markets. The rationale behind the law is, therefore, perfectly understandable and one with which our trade union movement will go along. A balance, however, will have to be struck between what has been paid before and what is to be paid now so that the workers will not lose out. But it would seem that the law is heavily weighted against bargainable employees in relation to the non-bargainable employees particularly those who, because of their positions, become non-bargainable. These are junior executives and others who are categorised as confidential staff and who, because of the type of work they perform, may be labelled as confidential or managerial, in many instances, at the discretion of the management. I am not suggesting that such employees should not be paid the annual wage supplement or bonus, but when the disparity between what they are paid and what the workers receive becomes acutely significant, then one wonders why the non-bargainable group should be paid significantly more than the bargainable group of employees. I know of many cases. I would like to quote one instance where, according to my analysis.”
“The SMA editorial was, therefore, an assumption of the existence of another assumption which in fact was not there at all. Mr Speaker, Sir, the National Productivity Board should not just continue, as in the past, to promote the concept of productivity. The Board should concentrate more on working out productivity measurement techniques for industries and show, plainly to those faltering minds in our midst, that tangible results are achievable. 3.51 p.m.”
“I would like to cite an example to underscore what I have said. The recent NWC recommendations gave rise to a welter of interpretations, counter-interpretations and misinterpretations and confusion ran galore, so much so that a call had to be made to reconvene the National Wages Council. It is true, Sir, Labour representatives were signatories to the recommendations which, in any case, could only spell out broad guidelines. But the rub was that implementing them became a problem because the present officials, most of whom had, as I would put it, no previous "labour background", could not differentiate between the wood and the tree, or more precisely were and still are unable to reconcile practice with policy and to translate policy into practice justly and equitably. The third area I would like to touch on is productivity. There are disparate views on what productivity is, how productivity measurements are to be worked out and who should carry the productivity "baby". A clear indication of lopsided concepts is the editorial in The Manufacturer, of January 1977, a publication of the Singapore Manufacturer's Association. This editorial illustrates the inadequate perception of Singapore's economic intricacies and the complexities surrounding the productivity issue. The basic premise of the editorial is that "there appears to be a basic assumption that manufacturing productivity in Singapore has already reached optimum levels". Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as the trade unions are concerned, no such assumption has ever been made by them, On the contrary, Labour leaders consistently emphasise the need to help our industries reach full production capacity. They know that it is only when industries are strong the workers will benefit.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I, at this stage, be permitted, to quote Dr Goh Keng Swee, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of defence, who states in his article "A Socialist Economy that Works" published in the book Socialism that Works: The Singapore Way, at page 837 thus: "Collectively, workers formed the most important organised social group. This must be so in any free society in which every citizen enjoys voting rights. Organised labour is important simply because it represents the majority of the electorate. The response of organised labour to the challenges and opportunities in the newly independent Republic are described in detail elsewhere ... Here it suffices to say that the labour movement took an enlightened long-term view of their group interests. They were willing to give the growth policy a chance to succeed." And so we will, Mr Speaker, Sir. What I would like to stress here is that the contributions of organised labour, in the past, and in the coming years must not be forgotten. The second area I would like to comment upon, Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Addendum to the Presidential Address on the Ministry of Labour, In the matter of industrial relations. I am glad to note that the Ministry will take steps to further improve its industrial relations services and set up a departmental service to build up a corps of experienced labour and industrial relations officers. Prevention and settlement of industrial disputes are not just matters of law and forms. It requires a deeper insight of the philosophy of industrial relations, of winning the confidence of the parties involved and producing eventually, acceptable and reasonable settlements. Not only experience but an attitude of equanimity must be developed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Motion of Thanks moved by the Member for Ulu Pandan. The President's speech clearly outlines the prospects and problems facing us today and the framework of the general policies and measures the Government intends to pursue during the five-year term of the Fourth Parliament which has the solid support of the people of Singapore. All of us know that "soft-options" must go overboard and that realism must be the cornerstone of the Government's policy. There are, however, three areas on which I would like to comment. Firstly, I would like to point out that the last 1 2 years have not been easy ones. In 1 965 the economic and labour climate was extremely distressing. But Labour realised that the only road to economic salvation and national prosperity was joint endeavour by the three major partners - Government, Labour and Management - for the common interest of the country; and that none could progress unless everyone progressed. By and large, this has come to pass, thanks to the Government's initiatives and Labour's positive response. The last few years were decidedly difficult years, particularly on the economic front, with global inflation accompanied by a slowdown of the economy. The labour movement and the workers responded well to the call of the country and contributed, in no small measure, to cushion the deleterious effects of the times, unlike trade unions elsewhere, particularly a few of those in the developed countries where they ignored national interests and pursued destructive policies which generated economic disarray and heavy unemployment. Our realism averted such a situation.”
“Sir, I regret to hear from the Senior Minister of State that at this moment he is not prepared to entertain my request, But I must say that if Singapore is to continue with our industrialisation, it is very important to us that our secondary school children should know the ABC of our Employment Act so that when they leave school they have the right attitude and are more disciplined. I would also say that I am sure that unless the Senior Minister of State thinks that the children in schools are really overloaded, as mentioned by quite a number of my colleagues here, I feel that this is more important than asking our school children to save in the Post Office Savings Bank.”
“I would like to tell him that subjects on trade unions and labour laws are taught in high schools in some countries. For instance. I am told that in Japan high schools teach students these subjects and one of the end results is the well-known skill amid disciplined dedication of the Japanese worker. I believe that we can instil in our youngsters the right attitudes and values by including in the secondary school curriculum such subjects. For in the ultimate the value of a person, whether he is a worker or a business executive, is measured by what he can give in a disciplined manner to our economic and social progress and prosperity.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the trade union movement in Singapore clearly recognises that the social and material well-being of our society is irrevocably linked with our total development. This is a lesson which we have learned, unlike trade union movements elsewhere, many of which have become enmeshed in economic, social and political concepts and practices which are irrelevant to the harsh and naked realities of today's troubled world. What we have built so far must be sustained and strengthened for the future lies in the hands of our young people who should be equipped with a deeper and more profound understanding of the facts of life. I would commend to the Ministry of Education to consider including in the curriculum of secondary schools, both at Secondary IV and pre-university levels, a subject on the trade union movement in Singapore, embracing such topics as its history, its economic role and function in a modern society, its responsibilities and obligations and on labour laws and our industrial relations machinery. Many of our youngsters after leaving school will find their way to industrial and commercial enterprises, while some of the more fortunate and bright ones will, after tertiary education, enter into business or become managers and executives. Whether they become workers or executives, they will be better able to understand and appreciate their respective roles in the world of commence and industry, develop a greater sense of industrial and social discipline through the subjects that I have mentioned and thereby be able to contribute to the betterment of our society by directing their ambitions and values to larger and higher social ends. If anyone raises his eyebrows in dismay or dismisses this suggestion as trivial.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I should say that the workers are not thinking in terms of getting a day's wage without work. May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether the employers should be penalised or punished for this. This one day's wage could be donated to the Workers' Fund set up by the Ministry of Labour which, I would like to say, is most welcome. The two biggest affiliated unions of the NTUC, i.e, the PIEU and SILO, have donated $10,000. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary can be assured that the workers are always prepared to tighten their belts. If justified, the workers are prepared to sacrifice provided safety measures are taken. Mr P. Govindaswamy rose -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Ministry directs a stoppage of construction work at the worksites, it is to ensure that all precautionary measures are taken by the employers. The workers should, therefore, not be penalised as a result of this action. It is different from other stoppages of work such as industrial action. The employers should be punished, and if the Ministry of Labour makes the employers pay for the daily wages, they will definitely try to take every precautionary measure to make sure that work can be resumed immediately.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would also like to join in congratulating the Ministry of Labour for its success over the last two years in reducing the number of industrial accidents and taking all the necessary measures for our workers' safety. Last year work at a number of building construction sites was stopped by the Ministry of Labour because of the occurrence of fatal accidents. I should say that this is most welcome. But, on the other hand, when work at the worksites stopped to enable all the precautionary measures to be taken, the workers lost their daily wages. Will the Ministry of Labour consider that, in future, when action is being taken against the employers and there is a complete stoppage of work at any worksite, whether the workers will continue to be paid?”
“(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1105.”
“But just as workers have every right to expect, as taxpayers, capable leadership and good planning from the Government of Singapore, they have the same right to expect, as employees, efficient management and good example from their employers if Singapore is to overcome its problems in the next few years. 5.42 p.m.”
“It is generally the rule that where workers have the benefit of favourable salary scales or wage scales, their fringe benefits are nothing out of the ordinary. But where workers do not enjoy the benefit of good salary scales or wage scales, there is a tendency for deficiency in their wages to be made up in the form of fringe benefits. such as the funeral allowance cited by the Minister for Finance. The National Wages Council was established in 1972. Most, if not all the various kinds of fringe benefits secured by Unions for the benefit of their members were done after the Industrial Arbitration Court was established after the passing of the Industrial Relations Ordinance.1960. So, I say that there might have been some attempts to circumvent the NWC recommendations after 1972 but the House must remember that it was to a very limited extent, because most of the fringe benefits were obtained before 1972. The proposal to consolidate the various allowances and have them integrated into the salaries is a matter to be sorted out by the Unions and the Employers concerned, with the assistance of the Labour Ministry. In any event, this House can rest assured that the NTUC and its affiliated trade unions will seriously lock into the whole question of wages and fringe benefits with the view to drawing up a rational policy in the light of the circumstances disclosed and analysed in the 1976 Budget Statement. The workers of Singapore are appreciative of the need for their employers to remain in business in order to pay them their wages and to provide more employment for their children.”
“No rational person, whether inside or outside this House, can fault the emphasis given in the 1976 Budget Statement to the development of skill-intensive projects and the training of skilled manpower as well as the continued promotion of Singapore as a financial centre for the region. All these projects and proposals can but only be intended for the general benefit of all Singaporeans in that it seeks to make our economy remain viable through creating sufficient employment opportunities for our increasing workforce in the next few years. It is with this consideration in mind that I speak with confidence that the workers of Singapore will give their fullest support and cooperation to the efforts of the Government to safeguard the economy of Singapore. By doing so, I must hasten to correct whatever misimpression may have been formed over certain comments made by the Minister for Finance in the 1976 Budget Statement. To the extent that the apparent proliferation of non-wage items in collective agreements and contract of service has served to make the cost of labour in Singapore prohibitively high in relation to that prevailing in certain other countries in the region, the attention drawn by the Minister to the problem must be appreciated by workers in the spirit in which the comments were made. But at the same time comments by the Minister have given rise to sniggering remarks by employers about unreasonable claims by trade unions such as the payment of $1 .000 by way of funeral benefit. It is, however, desirable that Members of this House should have a correct perspective of those fringe benefits commented upon by the Minister for Finance.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, the 1976 Budget Statement has been received with a sigh of relief by many who expect the 1 976 Budget to reflect the chain of unsettling events during the past year. But while the budget does not contain any drastic changes in the tax liability for Singaporeans, the sombre tone of the whole budget hardly gives cause for rejoicing. From the Singapore workers' point of view, the only note of optimism struck in the 1976 Budget Statement is the disclosure that the rate of inflation has been successfully stabilised during the past year. But the question of inflation is only of secondary importance in relation to the general health of our economy. As analysed in the 1976 Budget Statement, events during the past year have brought about a change in the availability of markets for the manufactured products in Singapore and in the availability of funds for investments in Singapore. It would also appear in the 1976 Budget Statement that the prospects for a more favourable economic condition in Singapore are matters of hope rather than of expectation. The workers in Singapore have the advantage of being forewarned by the Secretary-General of the National Trades Union Congress to brace themselves for more stringent economic conditions during the next two years. The Government of Singapore, by making constructive plans to overcome the difficult circumstances confronting Singapore during the next few years, has effectively demonstrated its qualities of capable and decisive leadership which has been largely responsible for the rapid economic development of Singapore in less than two decades.”
“As I have said, the proposed provisions affecting the Students' Union can only serve to prevent abuses in the conduct of students' affairs whether by the whole students' body under the name of the Students' Union or whether by a sectional group of students under the name of one of the Students' Clubs. For the vast majority of students, there cannot be any valid and cogent objection to any proposal for a more equitable and objective distribution of funds on the basis of a number of students participating in the activity to be financed. It is a more democratic procedure than the present basis of allocating common funds to any activity according to whether a handful of students think the activity is desirable. If it is seriously contended, as it has been done in certain quarters, that the Students' Union constitutes an integral part of the educational process rightly associated with a University, then it is more urgent that the students should get their lessons correct. If a few students have repeatedly shown themselves unable or unwilling to discipline themselves to shoulder the monotonous routine of catering for the welfare and interest of the general body of students, it does not mean that this House should also shirk the unpleasant but necessary task of restraining a handful of students from dramatically exploiting their stewardship of the Students' Union for their own heroics. For these considerations, I strongly support the Bill moved by the Minister for Home Affairs and Education. 5.02 p.m.”
“The moment a student is admitted to the Singapore University, he automatically becomes a member of the Students' Union and his membership subscription is automatically and regularly checked-off or collected by the University on behalf of the Union for so long as the student is enrolled in the University. Sir, may I take this opportunity to request the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs and Education to persuade the Minister for Labour to make an amendment to the Trade Unions Act and extend this privilege to the unions? I would recommend my NTUC colleagues to make the Minister for Home Affairs and Education a Friend of Labour! If the provisions of the Bill affecting the Students' Union are seen from the point of view of the minority of students who seek to continue to use the name of the passive majority of the students' body for their own ends, it is obvious that the provisions are unpalatable and constitute a threat to their sectional interest. But if the same provisions of the Bill are approached from the point of view of the general body of students, it is patently clear that the provisions are necessary for the protection of the welfare and interest of the general body of students. The merits of this portion of the Bill should not be gauged from the volume of noise made by a vociferous minority of students but should be judged on the basis of whether the protection conferred by the Bill on the general body of students outweighs the reduction of scope for abuse by a minority of students.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill which seeks to amend the University of Singapore Act to bring it up to date and to make it more flexible. In so far as the Bill seeks to do away with or to modify statutory provisions which were enacted for purposes which have been achieved or to suit circumstances which are no longer valid, I do not think there can be any question as to the need for the Bill. The provisions of the Bill relating to the Students' Union, however, may give rise to a certain amount of confusion compounded by emotions and sentiments. I do not doubt the usefulness of a Students' Union or the desire of the students themselves to run their Union with the minimum amount of supervision by the University Authority or any other authority. As it is, most University students have left the running of the Students' Union and the various Students' Clubs to a relatively handful of students. There is certainly cause for anxiety when the few students who are supposed to promote the welfare of their fellow students can freely make use of their office for other activities making not the slightest bearing on the welfare of students. To those who like to invoke the fashionable slogan on the sanctity of academic freedom, they should also consider the fact that University students have no freedom of choice regarding the membership of their Students' Union. The Students' Union, even after the adoption of this Bill, enjoys a privilege which has always been denied to trade unions in Singapore, and that is the privilege of being a closed shop union.”
“Any fear that young persons and children, because of their tender years, may lend themselves to exploitation by trade unions with ulterior motives, may be put at rest by the imposition of conditions that young workers below the age of 18 years may not participate in the management of a trade union or in the conduct of any industrial action. As it is, if this Bill is adopted by this House without a corresponding amendment to the Trade Unions Act to reduce the minimum age of trade union membership from 18 years to a lower age, a situation may arise which may lend itself to exploitation by unscrupulous employers. There is nothing, for instance, in this Bill or in the Employment Act to prevent an employer from retrenching or terminating the service of young workers as soon as they have attained the age of 18 years. In this way, an unscrupulous employer may assure himself a constant supply of sweat-shop labour which cannot be organised into trade unions. In making this request to the Minister for Labour to consider more seriously the reduction of the statutory minimum age for trade union membership, I have been encouraged by the provision of clause 13 of the Bill which seeks to rule out the participation of advocates and solicitors in proceedings before the Commissioner for Labour and which seeks to assure a trade union the right to represent its members in such proceedings. 3.38 p.m.”
“But it should not be forgotten that under the Employment Act apprentices have been accorded the right to be represented by a trade union, even if such representation may be confined to safeguarding the safety and welfare of apprentices. The concern of NTUC is not directed so much to the young persons and children who enjoy the benefit of a training scheme or apprenticeship scheme duly approved by the Ministry of Education or the Industrial Training Board, but to those young persons and children who are employed in small private establishments without the benefit of any proper training scheme or any apprenticeship agreement. Such young persons and children would be completely at the tender mercy of their respective employers. I have no doubts that the Ministry of Labour may include suitable provisions in the proposed Regulations and instruct the Labour Inspectorate especially to look after the interest and welfare of such young persons and children. It would, however, make matters easier for all concerned if the trade unions are permitted also to look after the interest and welfare of such young persons and children. As the law now stands, it prohibits trade unions from representing workers below the age of 18 years. But with the enactment of this Bill, it is envisaged that the number of workers between the ages of 12 and 18 years may considerably increase in proportion to the total number of workers in the Republic. It is, therefore, desirable that such workers should be allowed to be represented by trade unions.”
“The provisions of the various sections to be repealed by the Bill have become outdated and their continued retention may work against, rather than for, the general interest and welfare of young persons and children. In that respect the relevant provisions of the Bill are to be welcome. I do not think that any person, whether inside or outside this House, can validly object to any statutory provision to make it easier for young persons and children to receive proper training and acquire suitable experience to become skilled artisans or technicians under the supervision of either the Ministry of Education or the Industrial Training Board. From the trade union's point of view, the provisions of the Bill governing the training or apprenticeship of young persons and children are desirable in themselves, except for the nagging anxiety regarding the question of trade union representation for young persons and children. It may be contended that any training or apprenticeship scheme duly approved by the Ministry of Education or the Industrial Training Board would not lend itself to abuse by employers and that the terms of an apprenticeship agreement are incompatible with the principles of collective bargaining. If it is the fear of any person, inside or outside this House, that representation by trade unions would upset the proper conduct of any apprenticeship scheme, I can assure him that the NTUC would not tolerate any attempt by any of its affiliated unions to meddle with the terms of service set out in an apprenticeship agreement duly approved by the Ministry of Education or the Industrial Training Board.”
“A more serious situation may arise where an employer may be willing and can afford to pay a more generous annual wage supplement or an additional sum of money to his employees, so long as they are not represented by any trade union. A trade union, of course, in anticipating the reaction of such an employer against the representation of his employees, can claim for higher wages to offset whatever loss its members may suffer by way of annual wage supplement or any other additional payments. The snag is that the workers may allow themselves to be provoked or irritated by insinuations that they would not have lost such benefits if they had never joined a trade union. As I see it, one of the more serious defects of this Bill is that it seeks to prohibit employees from asking for payment of and to prohibit employers from paying any sum of money over and above the prescribed limits of annual wage supplement or annual bonus. But there is nothing in the Bill to prevent an employer, who is unwilling or unable to afford to pay over and above the prescribed limits for annual wage supplement or annual bonus, from falsely claiming that he is willing or can afford to pay over and above the prescribed limits only if it were not for the Employment Act. Such malice or mischief by some unscrupulous employers can have a demoralising effect on workers. The provisions of clauses 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the Bill seek to make it easier for young persons and children to be gainfully employed in the Republic. Though the Government is repealing certain provisions for the protection of the interests and welfare of young persons and children, I have no doubts in my mind that the Government will reproduce corresponding provisions in the Regulations to be made under the Bill.”
“In other words, an employer who desires to pay more than one month or three months of annual wage supplement, as the case may be, must obtain the permission of the Minister for Finance to do so. That requirement, in itself, is not a radical departure from the present law regulating the payment of annual wage supplement and other benefits. If an employer is willing and can afford to pay over and above the prescribed limits of annual wage supplement under the Employment Act, it is a simple matter for such an employer to write to the Minister for Finance for the necessary permission to do so. For such an employer and his employees, the provision of the proposed subsection (13) of section 46 may not make any practical difference. But where an employer is not willing to pay or admits that he cannot afford to pay and seeks to embarrass the trade union representing its employees, the provision of the proposed subsection (13) may provide him with an opportunity to create mischief and misunderstanding at the expense of the trade union movement. It is not too difficult to imagine a situation where such an employer would protest to the union in negotiations over wages and other terms and conditions of service that he would like to pay more than the prescribed annual wage supplement except that he is prevented from doing so by the Employment Act. And as a gesture of his sincerity, he would even send a letter to the Minister for Finance, carbon copied to the union, but it would be so worded as to convey the impression that the application is made with reluctance.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Employment (Amendment) Bill affects, among other things, the provisions of section 46, 46(A) and 46(B), which were first enacted to give effect to the implementation of the recommendations of the National Wages Council. The NTUC is not only a party to the NWC's deliberations but it has also actively worked for the setting up of a system of regulating orderly increases in wages. In making my comments on the present Bill, I have discussed with my colleagues in the NTUC, namely, the Members for Moulmein, Telok Blangah, Bukit Ho Swee, Kallang, Toa Payoh, Aljunied and Potong Pasir, and they have agreed with what I am going to say. My concern, whether as a Member of this House or as the President of the NTUC, is that certain provisions in this Bill may be unduly prejudicial to the interest of the trade union movement and to the rights of workers to be organised into trade unions. It is appreciated that the present Bill is consequential to the earlier amending Act of 1972 and seeks to clarify and define further the respective rights of workers and employers in relation to payment of annual wage supplement, annual bonus and annual wage increases now contained in the Act. My fear is that certain provisions in the Bill may, without the intention of the Government, work to the serious disadvantage of the trade union movement. The provisions of the Bill I am referring to are those set out in clauses 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Bill. Clause 2 of the Bill proposes to include a new subsection (13) to section 46 of the Employment Act, making it obligatory for an employer to apply to the Minister for Finance for written permission whenever he desires to pay any sum of money additional to the prescribed annual wage supplement.”
“Sir, I am very unhappy. But in view of the lengthy explanation, though unsatisfactory, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn Mr Sia Khoon Seong: Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 3030. Sir, I notice that under this subhead we are making a contribution to the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society as well as to the Royal Asiatic Society. Firstly, I wish to inquire what this Society is all about, and secondly, why do we contribute to the main body which is the Royal Asiatic Society and then contribute again to the Malaysian Branch of the Society.”
“Sir, I would like the Minister to enlighten me on one point.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think it is unfair for the Minister to say this. I have consulted the Director of the People's Association and I have pointed out to him that Boon Teck constituency is in urgent need of a community centre.”
“Yes, no need for a community centre. Perhaps my constituents can share the use of the community centre at Toa Payoh. But, nevertheless, my constituents feel that there is a need for a community centre because more than 75% of them live in one-room flats. A community centre will not only provide the social and cultural activities for the lower income group but it will also be used by students to study there. I think this is more urgent and the Minister for Culture should convince the Minister for Finance to increase the sum of $300,000, which I consider is very unrealistic. The next point is if there is no discrimination, why is Boon Teck constituency given $150,000 against Henderson's $400,000? I am sure the Member for Kim Keat will support me, but unfortunately lie is in the People's Association and he cannot stand up to support me. Boon Teck constituency has a community centre housed in a rented shop premises which has been converted into a temporary community centre. May I request the Minister to enlighten me?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like the Minister to clarify this point. The Member for Henderson should be happy to receive $300,Q00. The Member for Toa Payoh will also be getting $300,000. Boon Teck is also a new constituency, and it is the smallest of all the 65 constituencies. It has only one road. An hon. Member: No need for a community centre.”
“Yes, the price might go up. Thirdly, I am sure that in my prepared speech I did not say that in areas where there are no community centres they can claim a maximum of $300,000. I said "subject to a maximum of $300,000." There are two situations involving community centres in the constituencies. One is where you do not have a community centre at all. Another is where the community centre occupies a rented premises. I told the Director of the People's Association that if this was the case I had better close my community centre, which premises is a rented one, for six months, and could I then claim for a maximum grant? I should say that what we ought to be interested in is not to ask for a grand community centre with air-conditioning and so on, but a community centre which provides all the necessary facilities as in any other community centre. I am sure I did not mention that the question of a dollar-for-dollar donation is no good. I say this is encouraging, and I am prepared to go along with this idea. I am sure all Members of Parliament accept that this is a good way to develop civic consciousness among our constituents.”
“Sir, the Minister for Culture has not answered most of my questions. First, I would like to know from the Minister whether priority will be given to the building of a community centre in an area where the majority of residents are in the lower income group. Secondly, does the People's Association consider it good to have a standard type of community centre, as recommended by them? This has been pointed out by the Minister and so do most of my colleagues. The minimum cost is $500,000. An hon. Member: The price might go up.”
“On the face of it, this seems reasonable but the rub is that some constituencies which have no permanent centres are housed temporarily in rented HDB flats and are insufficiently and inadequately equipped. They are temporary make-shift arrangements, and it is inequitable to allocate a maximum of only $150,000 in such cases. It is not right to treat them on the same basis as those which already have permanent community centres. They should logically be allocated the maximum of $300,000 to enable them to put up a permanent building. However, I would consider it reasonable to expect a permanent community centre to raise the necessary funds in order to introduce facilities additional to those already provided.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of item (b) of subhead AAA 3020. Sir, the People's Association has undoubtedly contributed towards community development in Singapore. However, there are certain shortcomings that must be remedied if community centres are to serve more fruitfully the civic, cultural and other needs of the community they serve. While community centres are sufficiently well equipped and provide reasonably good facilities, others are not so fortunately placed. In densely populated housing estates where the residents are predominantly in the lower income group, the need to have proper facilities is relatively more important. it is in such areas that more attention should be paid to develop a sense of community consciousness and cohesion. It is in my view vitally important for the People's Association to, coordinate with the HDB and other authorities concerned that in future housing development programme adequate provision is made for the building of community centres as well. It would perhaps be preferable to have standard designs for community centres so that some facilities exist in all community centres. In regard to the People's Association's policy pertaining to the allocation of funds, there are some disturbing inconsistencies. The general policy is that the People's Association will match its contribution on a dollar-for-dollar basis, that is to say, if the community centres raise $100,000 the People's Association will contribute an equivalent amount, subject to a maximum contribution of $300,000 where no community centre exists in the constituency, and a maximum of $150,000 where a constituency which has already a centre wishes to rebuild it.”
“I thank the Minister and the Minister of State for their replies. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“I suggest that the provision of proper bus terminals should be given urgent consideration, and that consideration should also be given in development projects for the provision of bus terminals with reasonably sufficient facilities for canteens and sanitary needs. 3.30 p.m.”
“Though, all in all, the improvements have been generally satisfactory, I would call upon the management to also take cognisance of the fact that the mechanics, timekeepers, bus drivers and conductors are the people who are directly involved in keeping the fleet of buses running well on time and earning revenue for the company. They are, in other words, collectively responsible for the smooth and efficient operation of the bus services, and they shoulder great responsibilities. The management should, therefore, consider them on an equal footing with other employees. There are still a few other areas which require consideration. During peak hours, bus workers have to work under great stress and strain. When buses are full, it sometimes happens that buses will have to overshoot bus stops to prevent commuters gathered in large numbers from pushing their way in. The commuters ,have also ,to develop a sense of discipline by queuing up at bus stops and refraining to enter buses which are full when requested to do so by the conductor. In such circumstances, it is unfair and unjust for anyone to pin the blame on bus conductors and drivers who arc responsible for the safety and comfort of the passengers. There are also instances when any commuters are uncivil to bus conductors. These are probably the normal hazards of the job, hut they can be made tolerable if greater understanding is shown. In respect of bus terminals, the situation is far from satisfactory. In other cities large bus terminals with adequate facilities exist. Apart from the Toa Payoh bus terminal, there are no proper bus terminals in Singapore where buses can be parked in clearly demarcated bays or various routes. This would facilitate the proper identification of buses and orderly boarding by commuters.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1901. Sir, I chose to remain silent in this Parliament for the last 24 years and to listen to all the constructive criticisms as well as a few unfair criticisms about our bus workers, but I am sure you will agree with me that the time has come for me to say a few words of encouragement for the ROV, the new management, as well as the 8,000 bus workers of SBS. There have been searing criticisms in the past against our bus drivers and conductors about their conduct, performance and inadequate care of vehicles. These were valid criticisms, but the rut that set in had quite a lot to do with the poor organisation and mismanagement as well. It became evident that to bring order out of chaos, drastic measures had to be taken to relieve commuters from the deplorable inadequacies and inconveniences which they had to face. The Government stepped in and with the advent of the Government team of officers there have been significant improvements. Close cooperation between the Ministry of Communications, the union and the new management has cleared up a messy situation with the active participation of the workers. The contribution of the union with the support of the bus workers must not go unheeded. From a ragged lot, the bus workers have found a new dignity as co-partners in improving the public bus transport system. Terms and conditions of employment have also improved and the new management has taken cognisance of the welfare of the workers.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in view of the satisfactory reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Ammendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“The Central Provident Fund Act provides powers to the Minister to make regulations in this regard and I would ask that consideration be given for introducing such regulations. 6.00 p.m. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]”
“It is, however, heartening to note that the Labour Ministry is reorganising its conciliation machinery by setting up an Industrial Relations Division to provide conciliation services as well as preventive mediation to eliminate areas of industrial friction. Preventive mediation is the corner-stone of industrial relations. This was recognised in the past, but in the last few years the Labour Ministry has not given due attention to this area. Far too often the emphasis has been on the letter of the law. I am not suggesting that the law should not be observed. There should not, however, by any insistence that the legal procedures should be followed when immediate and urgent action should be taken to prevent a dispute from blowing up into something serious. The NTUC and its affiliates have always recognised the importance of preventive mediation for industrial peace and stability and we, therefore, welcome the Ministry's policies in this regard. On the subject of CPF contributions, I would like to make further observations. The Central Provident Fund Act has been in existence for a long time, and the contributors to the Fund have always been workers and their employers. The time has now come to consider the enlargement of the scope of the Fund which has become a major source of savings. The savings generated by the scheme have both economic and social connotations which have brought benefits to all classes of people in our society and not only the workers. This being so, I do not see why certain privileged classes of our people, such as those who derive income from a trade, business, profession or vocation, should not contribute their share in boosting national savings from which they are all already accruing benefits.”
“Why should these workers be left high and dry in their old age? And why should the contractors escape from the liability, as other employers do, to contribute to the CPF? There is no reason why the actual earnings of these workers for the period they have worked should not form the basis of CPF contributions. If it is argued that there are administrative difficulties and problems in implementing a system to ensure this, such an argument is, in my view, untenable. Surely it is not beyond our ingenuity or the capacity of the Ministry of Labour to devise a scheme for the registration of all contractors and contract workers and to ensure that contract workers are supplied from a registered pool of workers. This would facilitate keeping track of the distribution of contract workers by employers, their wages and their earnings. I must emphasise, Sir, that contract workers comprise a significantly large group of our workers and that they, through hard and gruelling work in trying circumstances, contribute so much to the development of Singapore, evidence of which can be so clearly seen in the modern, high-rise buildings all over Singapore. There are, in addition, some labour contractors, who have on their rolls, large work forces, who have worked for them continuously for long periods of two, three or more years. And yet they are called temporary workers and denied the opportunities to join trade unions and enjoy the various benefits prescribed in our labour laws. And the contractors concerned get away scot-free from their obligations. I am somewhat surprised at the silence of the Ministry of Labour in dealing with such labour contractors.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1105. Singapore boasts of progressive labour laws and an industrial relation system that has, by and large, brought benefits to our workers. The beneficiaries have, in the main, been organised workers who enjoy the protection of the democratic trade union movement and the various benefits that the labour laws confer on them. But there is a large group of unorganised contract workers who do not enjoy any benefits. According to the Labour Force Survey of Singapore 1974 there is a total of about 42,500 persons employed in the construction industry alone, of whom some 34,800 or nearly 83% earn under $399 per month. There is also a large number of contract workers in the shipbuilding and ship-repairing, transport and other industries. In the absence of any statistical information, the total number of contract workers in all industries in Singapore is not exactly known. Contract workers, by the nature of their work, are termed casual or temporary workers because of the fact that their job is either insecure or seasonal. They are further not employed by the principal contractors but by sub-contractors, or even sub-sub-contractors. They work in the open - particularly in the construction industry - and are victims of the vagaries of the weather. When it rains, for instance, they cannot work which means that they are not paid for the period they are unable to work, because of circumstances beyond their control. Further, they work extremely long hours and are not paid overtime rates, nor do they enjoy such benefits as holidays, rest days and annual leave. And above all, whilst other workers enjoy the benefits of CPF contributions, the contract workers are denied this benefit.”
“Such a scheme, apart from providing monetary assistance, could also embrace the payment of school fees for their children where this is necessary or the provision of free education, the supply of free textbooks and the waiving of medical charges at outpatient clinics. I am not suggesting that a social security scheme should be introduced but that rather any assistance provided should be treated as a loan which would be reimbursable by the worker when he withdraws his CPF contributions at the age of 55. The next point I would like to touch upon is a matter which is gravely disconcerting and disturbing. Recent developments in Singapore clearly indicate that there are elements in Singapore, many of whom are non-citizens who are silently and surreptitiously, and some very openly - dabbling in our internal affairs. Some of these ugly adventurers, who have no loyalty for Singapore and who, in any case, we are not obliged to look after, hold offices of responsibility in associations or clubs of an indigenous nature. I concede that where associations or clubs predominantly or solely cater for the special social needs of a transient overseas group of people different considerations should apply. But in the case of indigenous associations or clubs it is only fit and proper that restrictions should be imposed to ensure that only Singapore citizens should hold office. As far as trade unions are concerned, such restrictions are imposed under the Trade Unions Act. I therefore do not see why similar restrictions should not be imposed on associations and clubs. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would stress that urgent consideration should be given to this matter. 3.44 p.m.”
“We can no longer take things for granted and stick on to lingering old habits and attitudes. Many of our young workers who have no family commitments or responsibilities fritter away their retrenchment and other terminal benefits, which are quite substantial in some cases, by care-free spending in coffee houses and in other imprudent and unwise ways, instead of setting aside the money they have received to tide them over until they find alternative employment. I suggest that, in order to help them, the NTUC together with the Ministry of Labour, might set up a Fund into which all monies received as retrenchment benefits should be paid. From this Fund, a stipulated percentage of the normal monthly wages of these workers could be paid out to them each month. In my view, Sir, this is possibly one of the best ways to help these workers to help themselves. On the other hand, Sir, there is the special problem of the older workers who are 50 years old and over. The chances of these older workers to find alternative employment after retrenchment are somewhat bleak. I would suggest that in the case of such workers, particularly those who do not get retrenchment benefits, and who have families with school-going children, special consideration should be given. Some may have the notion that the Central Provident Fund could be used to help them but I would say that the CPF should not be used as the purpose of this Fund is to provide retirement benefits. I would suggest that assistance be provided to them through the formulation of a special scheme by the Social Welfare Department.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the President's Address to Parliament cogently outlines the policies of the Government with which I wholeheartedly agree. The Second Session of the Third Parliament sees us facing problems of a very difficult nature. The problems that we are facing today in the wake of global inflation and recession are beyond our control and yet the tone and tenor of the President's Speech exudes confidence in our ability as a hard-headed and pragmatic people to cope with these problems and at the same time to plan economic and social development in many spheres. In the field of foreign policy the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated in its Addendum to the Presidential Address that "ASEAN can help member states adjust to the rapid geo-political changes in the region", it is gratifying to note in this connection that our Foreign Minister has been invited to the Peoples' Republic of China. There is no doubt that his visit will be the prelude to new adjustments in the geo-political scene, adjustments which will contribute to the strengthening of stability and peace in this region. There are a number of other points I would like to raise. The economic recession that we are facing today is, perhaps, a blessing in disguise. The President has very rightly pointed out that we should not be swayed by short-term political considerations, and that we should be guided by the long-term interests of our people. This means that we have to take strong measures to remedy the present ills in our long-term interests. We have seen, in the recent past, retrenchment of workers and the chances are that we will see more retrenchments before the situation takes a turn for the better. For one thing, these developments have taught us a telling lesson.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, what I am trying to point out to the Minister is that the creche at this moment purely caters for those who work during normal office hours and not for those who work in a factory running three shifts. For instance, for this month, a shift worker may work in the morning shift, but next month when she is on night shift, she may also want to put her children in the creche. So my request is whether the hours can be lengthened so that those who work in the afternoon shift or in the night shift can also send their children to the creches. At this moment, I should say that the response in Toa Payoh is good. I must compliment the people running the creche, for they are doing a good job. What I would like to say is: can we maximise the use of these creches so that all industrial workers who are married with children can make use of these facilities?”
“Sir, I rise to support all those Members who praised the establishment of creches. I should say that wider publicity should be given by the Ministry to encourage the women to leave their children in the creches and go to work. At the moment the hours for mothers to put the children in the creches are very unrealistic. I should say that it caters purely for the majority of office workers or teachers. It is possible that some housewives would want to send their children to these creches so that they could go out to play mahjong. We have to change the hours to suit the shift workers. If we are going to encourage married women with children to work in industrial concerns on shift duty, I think we have to change the opening hours of the creche. Instead of opening at 8 am., it should be 7.30 a.m, so that they can have time to put the children in the creche and go to work. 7.15 p.m.”
“Each bus worker is getting an increase of about $42 since the formation of SBS, and the incentive payment could have induced the workers to work harder. That may coincide with the introduction of the supplementary bus service. I say that: to be kind, we have got to be cruel. If the minority of the bus workers are not discharging their duty as expected, may I request the Minister for Communications to make legislation to punish the bus workers if they fail to go into the bus lanes. I think that if we want to be kind, we have got to be cruel. But, at the same time, if commuters want to jump down at a road junction, i.e, if they want to kill themselves, I think legislation has also got to be made to punish them so that they are disciplined. The improvement has got to be all round. It is not fair to apportion most of the blame on the bus workers. But I do agree that it is a minority affair.”