Lim Swee Say: Making the economy and workforce cheaper
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
That is a fair argument since he did elaborate on the cost-effectiveness of the workforce and economy. Hence you are right that "Cheap" is a pretty bad choice of words.
"Cheap" coming from the labor chief comment on labor has a bad connotation of "cheap labor." If that means driving down wages, then I think he's got the strategy wrong.
But as it appears, he does "say" that the emphasis will be on cost effectiveness, and would push towards more retraining. This is a positive effort towards upgrading the skills of the work force.
There is two polar ways of achieving cost effectiveness, and a spectrum in between. On one end is in reducing the costs. That would mean labor costs will have to go down. On the other end is increasing productivity. Either way, it is the ratio that is of interest.
However, lowering labor costs or wage cuts would be absolutely horrible when standards and costs of living are rising. Hence, the only alternative is to lean towards increasing productivity by upgrading the workforce and industries. In other words, LSS 's speech would be agreeable if his interpretation of "Cheap" was to increase cost effectiveness without wage cuts.
the "cheap" here implied a cheap way of working, certainly not on wages which most think of, if you produce one in 1 hour, can you produce 1.5 in hours, or you can be multi skilled and therefore able to do multi-tasking, eg the OMO, one man operation Bus, the bus driver was renamed as bus captain, get more paid for being productive in saving the cost of a Conductor, he learns how to operate the bus alone, about the software, he clean his own bus, he learn about handling emergency and how to handle passengers. All these are upgrading in a way that make him more important, skillful and build self confident.
But having said that, Cheap in term of multi-tasking and productive can be exploit by employers who look at it as their advantages, so, if a waiter, now have to do washing plates, learn bartending, sweep and clear rubbish, wash dishes etc etc and yet given the same paid, that is exploiting of multi tasking and productivity, in another words, the employers can alway turn around and said to the waiter, these is what you labour chief said, dun blame me, you need to be productive, if you dun like it, you can leave. Therefore, the govt and labour have to ensure that reward for productivity peoples must be recognised and prevent employers from taking productivity as a tool for exploitation.
-
..............in angel7030 theory only......but in practical employers all want one worker to do manager ,planner,engineer,supervisor and production operator all in one.or at least 3 jobs in one person.u pick any which 3....
so how???go complain to police?MOM?dad??
-
perhaps.............the employers need to face with bankcrupcy order irregardless of financial status for misusing of resources....but that would be too extreme.
so...its best they put money into MOM or government section.....so if there is a complain.....the money would go into government as a fine............perhaps its ineffective.as i was busy today i have yet to make plans where both sides would not misuse it.
its quite hard really unless the person working can stand up and say>>>>>>>i quit!and then u cant find anyone else to do the job.but gov has let in millions of people from malaysia,india,china into spore to werk......so when u say i quit to boss,boss would laugh atcha and get next werker in 3 days!
its like an army.....u need good weapons to werk for every soldier.and the commander must take care of their own loyalsoldiers.but if unlimited mercenaries are brought into the army just on cash incentives and the loyal soldiers made to feel they are cannon fodder.............then expect yer army to come apart when it is faced with every tough battle...every recession and every strikes thats made by yer mercenaries the commander in charge brought over.
most mercenaries will say its not our battle,,,,,this isnt our country...u havent paid us yet...etc etc.
hard to explain n understand if person has no leadership and dont feel like thinkin deep.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
the "cheap" here implied a cheap way of working, certainly not on wages which most think of, if you produce one in 1 hour, can you produce 1.5 in hours, or you can be multi skilled and therefore able to do multi-tasking, eg the OMO, one man operation Bus, the bus driver was renamed as bus captain, get more paid for being productive in saving the cost of a Conductor, he learns how to operate the bus alone, about the software, he clean his own bus, he learn about handling emergency and how to handle passengers. All these are upgrading in a way that make him more important, skillful and build self confident.
But having said that, Cheap in term of multi-tasking and productive can be exploit by employers who look at it as their advantages, so, if a waiter, now have to do washing plates, learn bartending, sweep and clear rubbish, wash dishes etc etc and yet given the same paid, that is exploiting of multi tasking and productivity, in another words, the employers can alway turn around and said to the waiter, these is what you labour chief said, dun blame me, you need to be productive, if you dun like it, you can leave. Therefore, the govt and labour have to ensure that reward for productivity peoples must be recognised and prevent employers from taking productivity as a tool for exploitation.
I remember a Hong Kong actress who came to Singapore to star in one of our dramas was commenting that in Hong Kong, they have people specialized in getting ready the costumes, the make-up, etc. But in Singapore, the artistes basically have to do almost everything themselves
A jack of all trades, a master of none. That's the problem with Singapore's way of thinking.
It is good to be self-sufficient, but NOT at the expense of your skillset. If increased productivity means having to take over work that is of no value to you, then it simply means exploitation of the individual.
That's why Singapore media industry will NEVER beat Hong Kong or Taiwan. Our artistes cannot focus on their skillset. That's why our jobs are threatened by foreigners as well. We diversify too much so much so that the core focus is not strong enough.
Notice, I say we diversify too much. Some diversification is good, but over diversification will result in loss of focus (and core skillset). That's why many businesses at most diversify to 3 main revenue streams. Having too many will stretch their expertise too thin.
-
actors do not go and put makeup on face,,,,rather they get chance to direct.......and contribute to movie....leave the makup and hair to professionals.
maybe actors in spore are considered a joke and not essential to spore's economy.wont be surprised actors end up sweeping floor at work and cooking lunch for people at work.
-
perhaps it all stems from the desperation of the actors themselves?
first they try to be the best makeup artist without getting the real people in order to make themselves more valuable to company.when that happens they keep their job at theirtown expense!..............
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
I remember a Hong Kong actress who came to Singapore to star in one of our dramas was commenting that in Hong Kong, they have people specialized in getting ready the costumes, the make-up, etc. But in Singapore, the artistes basically have to do almost everything themselves
A jack of all trades, a master of none. That's the problem with Singapore's way of thinking.
It is good to be self-sufficient, but NOT at the expense of your skillset. If increased productivity means having to take over work that is of no value to you, then it simply means exploitation of the individual.
That's why Singapore media industry will NEVER beat Hong Kong or Taiwan. Our artistes cannot focus on their skillset. That's why our jobs are threatened by foreigners as well. We diversify too much so much so that the core focus is not strong enough.
Notice, I say we diversify too much. Some diversification is good, but over diversification will result in loss of focus (and core skillset). That's why many businesses at most diversify to 3 main revenue streams. Having too many will stretch their expertise too thin.
Well, you look at the advice they give to people looking for jobs.
After working for a few years in one industry and you get retrenched, they tell you to start all over again in another new industry by retraining yourself. If you get retrenched again a few years down the road, they tell you to retrain and move to yet another new industry where they created jobs from and you start from scratch again paywise. How much value add can the worker provide to her employer who sees her working in various industries every 2 years doing totally different things if she had followed what the government told her to do.
On paper it sounds good because you "have" a job and the government can claim they have "provided" jobs for the people. But in reality, your pay will be low and stagnant at entry level as you hop from industry to industry because the government keeps creating new "hubs" out of nowhere (and claim people don't have the skillsets to do the jobs in the new industry, thereby telling people to retrain again).
This then leads to more foreigners imported to do these new jobs that Singaporeans are not "qualified" or "not willing" to take up because of low pay. Vicious cycle.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Well, you look at the advice they give to people looking for jobs.
After working for a few years in one industry and you get retrenched, they tell you to start all over again in another new industry by retraining yourself. If you get retrenched again a few years down the road, they tell you to retrain and move to yet another new industry where they created jobs from and you start from scratch again paywise. How much value add can the worker provide to her employer who sees her working in various industries every 2 years doing totally different things if she had followed what the government told her to do.
On paper it sounds good because you "have" a job and the government can claim they have "provided" jobs for the people. But in reality, your pay will be low and stagnant at entry level as you hop from industry to industry because the government keeps creating new "hubs" out of nowhere (and claim people don't have the skillsets to do the jobs in the new industry, thereby telling people to retrain again).
This then leads to more foreigners imported to do these new jobs that Singaporeans are not "qualified" or "not willing" to take up because of low pay. Vicious cycle.
haiz. life is tough
-
Soon we be a slave nation! Oh wait, we already are one. hmm.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
I remember a Hong Kong actress who came to Singapore to star in one of our dramas was commenting that in Hong Kong, they have people specialized in getting ready the costumes, the make-up, etc. But in Singapore, the artistes basically have to do almost everything themselves
A jack of all trades, a master of none. That's the problem with Singapore's way of thinking.
It is good to be self-sufficient, but NOT at the expense of your skillset. If increased productivity means having to take over work that is of no value to you, then it simply means exploitation of the individual.
That's why Singapore media industry will NEVER beat Hong Kong or Taiwan. Our artistes cannot focus on their skillset. That's why our jobs are threatened by foreigners as well. We diversify too much so much so that the core focus is not strong enough.
Notice, I say we diversify too much. Some diversification is good, but over diversification will result in loss of focus (and core skillset). That's why many businesses at most diversify to 3 main revenue streams. Having too many will stretch their expertise too thin.
Diversity is one thing, but in productivity, innovation and creativity can also help to produce more faster and better product if not cheaper, there is this french wine company called One Rabbit, instead of traditionally putting their wine into bottles, they pack it up like those milk and fruit packages and market it, it was a success in French, because it good for outing, easy to carry, non breakage, not heavy, simple to pour, and can be keep nicely. As for the production side, no more bottles, more faster in producing, less weight to carry, more compact, a lorry will do instead of 3, friendly to environment, and most important, can fill up more and sell cheaper leading to more sales.
-
http://www.frenchrabbit.com/home.html. check it out.
So, in a sense, if we can make thing look simple, we might just be able to producing think more cheaper, faster and better.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Diversity is one thing, but in productivity, innovation and creativity can also help to produce more faster and better product if not cheaper, there is this french wine company called One Rabbit, instead of traditionally putting their wine into bottles, they pack it up like those milk and fruit packages and market it, it was a success in French, because it good for outing, easy to carry, non breakage, not heavy, simple to pour, and can be keep nicely. As for the production side, no more bottles, more faster in producing, less weight to carry, more compact, a lorry will do instead of 3, friendly to environment, and most important, can fill up more and sell cheaper leading to more sales.
urm, how does this come to our discussion on making employees perform low-value tasks out of their job scope in order to cut costs?As I said I don't disagree with you on being more productive, but being too diverse erodes a person's value.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
http://www.frenchrabbit.com/home.html. check it out.
So, in a sense, if we can make thing look simple, we might just be able to producing think more cheaper, faster and better.
Why will a Taiwanese "hum" persist with its public display of its stupidity ?
With its reputation as a "hum" - no one will be surprised with its low morals in offering itself to be cheaper ?
How fast can a "hum" perform to earn quick money ?
Can the performance of a "hum" be any better when done "faster" even though it may offer itself "cheaper" ?
The Taiwanese "hum" should exist in the pages of Sammyboy, instead of being consistently irrelevant with its attempt to be intelligent as a "hum".
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
the "cheap" here implied a cheap way of working, certainly not on wages which most think of,
hahahahahahahaLike that most companies certainly didn't get their meaning correct.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Well, you look at the advice they give to people looking for jobs.
After working for a few years in one industry and you get retrenched, they tell you to start all over again in another new industry by retraining yourself. If you get retrenched again a few years down the road, they tell you to retrain and move to yet another new industry where they created jobs from and you start from scratch again paywise. How much value add can the worker provide to her employer who sees her working in various industries every 2 years doing totally different things if she had followed what the government told her to do.
On paper it sounds good because you "have" a job and the government can claim they have "provided" jobs for the people. But in reality, your pay will be low and stagnant at entry level as you hop from industry to industry because the government keeps creating new "hubs" out of nowhere (and claim people don't have the skillsets to do the jobs in the new industry, thereby telling people to retrain again).
This then leads to more foreigners imported to do these new jobs that Singaporeans are not "qualified" or "not willing" to take up because of low pay. Vicious cycle.
The way I see it, our govt does not have the guts to focus on a few pillars and make them absolutely solid.
Instead, they choose to follow the tide. What the world wants, we do, and when the world changes its mind again, we follow. End up, a jack of all trades, master of none. Creation of jobs at the lowest of levels so that there are lesser opportunities for those that aspire to reach the top. Instead, retrain and retrain and retrain. The solution to the lack of higher level jobs? Tell Singaporeans that after 40, we become stupid and must accept lower pay.
In 4 years of my life in university, how many times I hear the govt change their minds, from being an engineering hub to an IT hub to a bioscience hub? That's too many changes in a short span of 4 years
-
We have now become the hub of hubs.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
We have now become the hub of hubs.
More likely a totally confused hub. -
Originally posted by soul_rage:
More likely a totally confused hub.This is a marketing plot you can only get to pick 2 out of 3
Cheap
Good
Fast.
You want Cheap and Good is never FAST.
You want Cheap and Fast is never Good.
You want Fast and Good is never Cheap.
So Far Singapore model took the Cheap and FAST route so is never Good.
-
To Add:
We paid minister millions of dollar in salary.
Do we expect them to create Penny result or result equate to that of Avatar.....?
-
Originally posted by Arapahoe:
This is a marketing plot you can only get to pick 2 out of 3
Cheap
Good
Fast.
You want Cheap and Good is never FAST.
You want Cheap and Fast is never Good.
You want Fast and Good is never Cheap.
So Far Singapore model took the Cheap and FAST route so is never Good.
In Cheap, we must be more productive than others inorder achieve the economy of scale leading cheap, but that does not mean anyhow produce, it need to be Good, meaning good quality that satisfy or delight customers, as for the Fast, we have to move faster than our competitors inorder to capture the market, stay vigilant and also be the first to react.
-
Originally posted by Arapahoe:
To Add:
We paid minister millions of dollar in salary.
Do we expect them to create Penny result or result equate to that of Avatar.....?
Everytime Ministers' pay, ministers' salaries, ministers' bonuses...how to discuss further?? -
Originally posted by angel7030:
Everytime Ministers' pay, ministers' salaries, ministers' bonuses...how to discuss further??
wat's there to discuss when they expect everyone to bite the bullet but fatten their own bank account not by a little, but obscenely?i know u own some business, try this:
Cut your employees' pay/withhold their bonus today by telling them business is bad, then buy a new Ferrari and drive to work tomorrow. See how they react.
-
Originally posted by Chyeo1979:
wat's there to discuss when they expect everyone to bite the bullet but fatten their own bank account not by a little, but obscenely?i know u own some business, try this:
Cut your employees' pay/withhold their bonus today by telling them business is bad, then buy a new Ferrari and drive to work tomorrow. See how they react.
well govt also have a 20% paid cut mah, let be objective here, keep talking about their paid and all these is not going to solve any of your problem, poor or rich in any society, there must be, if you belong to the rich, you want to be more rich, if you belong poor, you keep blaming the rich, that is life. But no matter how you go about it, blaming here and there, biting bullet or swallowing it is not going to shift your status from poor to rich, set your direction and dream, what you want to be in 10 years time, then move toward it, if you think you want to be rich, you can achieve it, but if you keep talking about other getting rich thru high paid and all these nonsense, you will be doing the same thing 10 years from now, by then the rich will be richer and you may be deem more poorer.By the way, our poors are same level as many other countries middle class ya. Some countries poor are really poor until living in slam with dogs. So, what is poor in Singapore??
Business is business, personal is personal, you got to have that professionalism to understand it. In economy sense, business is an entity by itself, a living system that churn profits, me is me, if i wanted to buy the whole of Singapore pubs and yet want a pay cut on my staff paid, so be it, but i got to be justify it before doing it, and if i go buy a ferrari for myself, that is nothing to do with my business pay cut.
Because peoples in Singapore are too red eyes to see other enjoy their fruit of success, they tend to harbour an inferior anger that is hard to release. If people wants of buy what, that is people problem, if an employee of mine drive a ferrari in, I also do nothing and go on as usual.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
well govt also have a 20% paid cut mah, let be objective here, keep talking about their paid and all these is not going to solve any of your problem, poor or rich in any society, there must be, if you belong to the rich, you want to be more rich, if you belong poor, you keep blaming the rich, that is life. But no matter how you go about it, blaming here and there, biting bullet or swallowing it is not going to shift your status from poor to rich, set your direction and dream, what you want to be in 10 years time, then move toward it, if you think you want to be rich, you can achieve it, but if you keep talking about other getting rich thru high paid and all these nonsense, you will be doing the same thing 10 years from now, by then the rich will be richer and you may be deem more poorer.By the way, our poors are same level as many other countries middle class ya. Some countries poor are really poor until living in slam with dogs. So, what is poor in Singapore??
Business is business, personal is personal, you got to have that professionalism to understand it. In economy sense, business is an entity by itself, a living system that churn profits, me is me, if i wanted to buy the whole of Singapore pubs and yet want a pay cut on my staff paid, so be it, but i got to be justify it before doing it, and if i go buy a ferrari for myself, that is nothing to do with my business pay cut.
Because peoples in Singapore are too red eyes to see other enjoy their fruit of success, they tend to harbour an inferior anger that is hard to release. If people wants of buy what, that is people problem, if an employee of mine drive a ferrari in, I also do nothing and go on as usual.
Some people might be capable and with some luck, they probably can achieve something for themselves, a better life even if not filthy rich.
For majority of the people however, they are just average joes wanting to lead a stable life. But look at the living standards now and the reducing job securities with so many "cheaper, better & faster" foreigners. Trust me that most employers look at the first criteria first.
If you dun realized that lives are indeed getting harder and harder for them due to the many govt policies now, you are probably living in your own ivory towers also like those MIW.
Dun compare to those worse off countries like wat the people on top like to do, for wat?! Anything to their favour, they will say compare this compare that. When you talk abt their salaries, they will say we dun compare ourselves to others haha. Joke.
If you want to compare, compare with our own people in the late 80s to 90s. People's salaries at that time might be a bit lower (Note: A BIT) than now, but those are the times when people really can see themselves retiring with their CPF money. They can pay their housing loans in full in 10 yrs, and those money accumulated in their CPF after that are truely retirement money!
But now, you probably dun even live to get back half of wat's remaining in your CPF, if any, with the never-ending increment of the withdrawal age. And stop those bullsh*ts that HDB flats are heavily subsidized when we know they're not.
For the example of your business part, you are not wrong to say that it's your right to buy a ferrari even if you cut your employees' pay. What I want to mean is that you try doing that and see whether they will still sit down and "listen" properly to your words after that, or will they treat watever you said as bullsh*t from that point onwards. It is precisely the same kind of insensitive "so be it" attitude that angers many people now. Business is business, but are the govt running a business (Yes, actually they are) or leading a country now?
You cannot blame people for repeating the ministers' pay saga because watever they said are just not convincing as compared to wat they are doing.