Sammyboy RSS Feed
06-10-2013, 12:10 PM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
Janice Heng
Singapolitics
Sunday, Oct 06, 2013
The Manpower Ministry's (MOM) recent move to get firms to consider Singaporean hires first has come under some fire.
But are critics aiming at the right target, or should they be spending their ammunition elsewhere?
One common criticism of the Fair Consideration Framework is that it may not result in more Singaporeans beating out skilled foreigners in landing jobs. The framework requires firms to advertise a position for 14 days in a government jobs bank before they can apply to hire a foreigner on an Employment Pass.
It does not police the hiring process itself, or set limits on hiring outcomes. This, some say, leaves firms as free to hire foreigners as before.
The new framework does not guarantee that Singaporeans will be chosen over foreigners. Nor does it give Singaporeans an added advantage over foreigners.
As Acting Minister Tan Chuan-Jin himself has said: "The framework is not about 'Hire Singaporeans First, or Hire Singaporeans Only'."
What the framework aims to do is enforce fairness - not create a bias in favour of Singaporeans. And this aim is not at all surprising, if seen in the context of the Singapore Government's unwavering commitment to meritocracy.
Indeed, that very value was invoked by Mr Tan. In a blog post on the new measures, he wrote: "Together, we must reaffirm our ideals of meritocracy and fair treatment."
Later in the post, he added: "Singaporeans must continue to compete for jobs and advancement on their own merit - a value which we have always embraced."
This approach is analogous to the Government's take on education policy, where meritocracy is prized and affirmative action anathema.
Similarly, when it comes to socioeconomic achievements, Singapore prides itself on equality of opportunity. It does not seek to enforce equality of outcomes, instead preferring redistribution to address inequality.
What does this all mean in the context of the Fair Consideration Framework?
Some critics would like a "Singaporeans first" outcome - even if this comes at the expense of quality.
There are arguments that could be made in support of that view. One could argue that providing citizens with good jobs is important enough a goal that it should trump concerns of fairness and meritocracy.
One could also say that Singapore should be less demanding when it comes to the quality of its labour, and should reject foreign candidates even if they are better-qualified - as long as the Singaporean candidates are good enough.
The problem with such suggestions is that they are unlikely to fly, given that the principle of meritocracy is the foundation of policy-making here. It would be more productive for critics to focus their critiques on other aspects of the framework.
For instance, some critics have rightly pointed out that firms do not need to show that they have actually considered Singaporean candidates. This is something that could be remedied.
In announcing the new framework, the ministry said it does not want to interfere in hiring decisions. Yet, there is a wide range of options between direct interference, and the current lack of oversight of the hiring process.
One option is requiring firms to declare how many Singaporean candidates were interviewed and why they were rejected, before they can apply to hire a skilled foreigner. This would not be interfering in the firms' decisions. But it would make them a little more accountable.
If we want to criticise the new fair employment framework, we do not have to rubbish its entire premise to do so. Rather, it would be more productive to point out where the framework falls short in preserving the very values it aims to uphold.
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?165168-PAP-was-all-bs-on-the-tightening-of-hiring-of-PATANS&goto=newpost).
Janice Heng
Singapolitics
Sunday, Oct 06, 2013
The Manpower Ministry's (MOM) recent move to get firms to consider Singaporean hires first has come under some fire.
But are critics aiming at the right target, or should they be spending their ammunition elsewhere?
One common criticism of the Fair Consideration Framework is that it may not result in more Singaporeans beating out skilled foreigners in landing jobs. The framework requires firms to advertise a position for 14 days in a government jobs bank before they can apply to hire a foreigner on an Employment Pass.
It does not police the hiring process itself, or set limits on hiring outcomes. This, some say, leaves firms as free to hire foreigners as before.
The new framework does not guarantee that Singaporeans will be chosen over foreigners. Nor does it give Singaporeans an added advantage over foreigners.
As Acting Minister Tan Chuan-Jin himself has said: "The framework is not about 'Hire Singaporeans First, or Hire Singaporeans Only'."
What the framework aims to do is enforce fairness - not create a bias in favour of Singaporeans. And this aim is not at all surprising, if seen in the context of the Singapore Government's unwavering commitment to meritocracy.
Indeed, that very value was invoked by Mr Tan. In a blog post on the new measures, he wrote: "Together, we must reaffirm our ideals of meritocracy and fair treatment."
Later in the post, he added: "Singaporeans must continue to compete for jobs and advancement on their own merit - a value which we have always embraced."
This approach is analogous to the Government's take on education policy, where meritocracy is prized and affirmative action anathema.
Similarly, when it comes to socioeconomic achievements, Singapore prides itself on equality of opportunity. It does not seek to enforce equality of outcomes, instead preferring redistribution to address inequality.
What does this all mean in the context of the Fair Consideration Framework?
Some critics would like a "Singaporeans first" outcome - even if this comes at the expense of quality.
There are arguments that could be made in support of that view. One could argue that providing citizens with good jobs is important enough a goal that it should trump concerns of fairness and meritocracy.
One could also say that Singapore should be less demanding when it comes to the quality of its labour, and should reject foreign candidates even if they are better-qualified - as long as the Singaporean candidates are good enough.
The problem with such suggestions is that they are unlikely to fly, given that the principle of meritocracy is the foundation of policy-making here. It would be more productive for critics to focus their critiques on other aspects of the framework.
For instance, some critics have rightly pointed out that firms do not need to show that they have actually considered Singaporean candidates. This is something that could be remedied.
In announcing the new framework, the ministry said it does not want to interfere in hiring decisions. Yet, there is a wide range of options between direct interference, and the current lack of oversight of the hiring process.
One option is requiring firms to declare how many Singaporean candidates were interviewed and why they were rejected, before they can apply to hire a skilled foreigner. This would not be interfering in the firms' decisions. But it would make them a little more accountable.
If we want to criticise the new fair employment framework, we do not have to rubbish its entire premise to do so. Rather, it would be more productive to point out where the framework falls short in preserving the very values it aims to uphold.
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?165168-PAP-was-all-bs-on-the-tightening-of-hiring-of-PATANS&goto=newpost).