JOB SEEKERS EMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE (Particulars)

Mr Charles Chong asked the Minister for Manpower for a breakdown of the number of job seekers (a) seeking employment assistance for the period January to December 2002 from (i) his Ministry, (ii) each of the five Community Development Councils and (iii) each of the four self-help groups (namely the Chinese Development Assistance Council, Mendaki, Sinda and Eurasian Association); and (b) successfully placed by the respective organisations as a percentage of the number.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Manpower (a) if he will provide a status update on (i) the unemployment situation by occupation, age group and qualification (ii) job vacancies and their distribution in the various industries and (iii) the extent and success of job creation; and (b) what other measures will the Government consider to change the mindset of (i) employers with regard to employing those above the age of 45 years and (ii) potential job seekers, especially those who have been retrenched and are above the age of 45 years.

Dr Mohamad Maliki bin Osman asked the Minister for Manpower if he will provide an update on the success of the 'People for Jobs' programme implemented by his Ministry, including the number of people who have enrolled in programmes such as the Skills Redevelopment Programme and the rate of job placement for these individuals.

Dr Mohamad Maliki bin Osman asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the number of people who have sought assistance for jobs from the Community Development Councils (CDCs) in 2002 and how many of them have successfully gained employment; and (b) what is being done to further improve the job placement rates for retrenched Singaporeans who have sought help from the CDCs.

The Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Ng Eng Hen) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, with your permission, I would like to take Questions 5 to 8 as they cover related issues on unemployment.

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: In December 2001, MOM established the "Distributed CareerLink Network". This comprises 13 organisations - the five Community Development Councils (CDCs), the five self-help groups of MENDAKI, the Eurasian Association, SINDA, CDAC and the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP), as well as the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF), National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), and the Singapore Professionals' and Executives' Cooperative (SPEC). This network was formed to improve employment assistance services to the unemployed. This Government and community organisations network would be more responsive to the needs of those looking for jobs.

Mr Charles Chong and Dr Mohamad Maliki have both asked for a detailed breakdown of individual performances by the various placement agencies. I will provide data in four broad groups because they serve different communities: that of MOM itself, the CDCs, the self-help groups and others which are made up of SNEF, SPEC and NTUC. From December 2001 to November 2002, MOM provided employment assistance services to 54,600 visits from job seekers. 62% of the job seekers were provided with at least one job referral. Approximately 15% of all job seekers were placed in jobs within three months.

In that same period, the CDCs collectively provided employment assistance to 38,310 job requests and placed about 13% of these into jobs. The corresponding figure for the self-help groups was 15,961 persons with a placement rate of 6.4%. SNEF, SPEC and NTUC together provided assistance to 8,206 job requests and placed about 19% of them.

In total, MOM and its DCN partners attended to 117,000 job requests and helped 15,701 get jobs. This is about 13%. In 2002, 47,000 Skills Redevelopment Programme training places were taken up by 33,516 workers. Given that the number of unemployed now stands at around 80,000, these figures suggest that the majority of those looking for jobs know where to seek assistance and have made repeated visits to our Distributed CareerLink Network.

Sir, at this juncture, let me correct the wrong impression that only 13% of those looking for jobs are successful. I have to clarify that the Distributed CareerLink Network caters to a select group of retrenched Singaporeans who find it harder to get jobs. In fact, our reemployment data indicates that in 2001 and 2002, 60-65% of those retrenched are able to secure a job within six months of retrenchment. The re-employment rate for the quarter ending September 2002 was 67%, the highest in the last two years. This indicates that the majority of Singaporeans who have lost their jobs are realistic. They know where to go for training and indeed are able by themselves to secure new employment. Government will continue to assist those with general enabling schemes.

And in response to Dr Maliki's request on one such scheme - the People for Jobs Traineeship Programme - I am pleased to report that more than 3,000 companies from various sectors have hired approximately 8,000 workers in 2002. This particular programme provides an incentive to encourage employers to recruit workers who are 40 years and above who may lack relevant experience for the new jobs or work environment.

The hon. Members' questions also touch on a more important concern that other Members of this House also share: "How can we help that particular group of Singaporeans like those which the DCN serves who are at higher risk of being structurally unemployed to get jobs?"

Sir, the figures I have provided indicate that access to services - dissemination of information about jobs and provision of training courses - appears adequate, but the actual placement of jobs for this group of workers - about 13% - could be improved. In other words, we have told this group of people where the fish are, we taught them how to fish, but the actual number who are catching fishes could be better. Why is this so?

Let me now ask the Clerk of Parliament to distribute a fact sheet (Tables (Cols. 2131-44) Nos. 1, 2, 3A, 3B and 4), which contains the data on the unemployment and vacancy situation sought by Mdm Ho Geok Choo. She has asked for a detailed list. I have provided it and I do not propose to go through the detailed list. Let me just summarise and say that while there were 72,000 unemployed residents at the end of September last year, there were over 17,000 job vacancies in various sectors. We also have nearly 450,000 foreign workers here to supplement our local workforce; in other words, 450,000 potential jobs held by foreign workers at this point of time. So, in that context, why should there be Singaporeans who are unemployed? Since its inception in January 2002, the Jobs Task Force has posed this question to ourselves and to our members who comprise CEOs of various industries, unionists, mayors, EDB, and as well as those looking for jobs.

Let me share with you some of the common reasons given to the Jobs Task Force for this select group of workers. First of all, the pool of jobs available is relatively smaller compared to the past. We had a tremendous run - 15 years of above 7% GDP growth that created, in essence, two jobs to every Singaporean. In that climate for 15 years, even those with less skills could wait for that `dream' job. But as we have been deliberately repeating, the world has changed. No mature economy, which we are, expects to achieve such growth rates and job creation. Instead, fewer jobs will be created which will have higher value-add. Lower skilled jobs will also be available but may be in more vigorous working conditions. It would be unrealistic and indeed frustrating to wait for the best job to come along.

In the marine industry, 30,000 jobs were created in the last five years and even now, there are about 1,300 vacancies. With overtime, the take-home pay is substantial, with a median wage of $1,800 per month, but Singaporeans shun this industry. In the retail and restaurant sectors, there are 2,000 vacancies now but these jobs are not attractive to locals. Even in the manufacturing sector, there are about 3,000 vacancies. However, some Singaporeans who qualify for these jobs do not want to work in wafer fabs because they dislike donning suits, working in clean rooms or the 12-hour shifts. Others have practical difficulties. For example, some, especially mothers with children, find it difficult to work shifts because the hours make it difficult to juggle their roles as caregivers and breadwinners. Others still find travelling to factories in certain parts of Singapore too far. Companies do provide transportation, but they have to wake up earlier to get to work on time. These are practical considerations which I empathise with. We are working with related agencies to see how to address these impediments.

We have also had feedback that some Singaporeans looked at wages and calculate the take home pay minus CPF, transport and meals. If the wages are low compared to what they used to earn, they may decide that it may be better to wait for better times. Perhaps some can afford to do so since the average retrenchment benefit in our last survey was 5-6 months, and they have some savings to live on. But we cannot count on the luxury of waiting for a better and higher paying jobs to appear soon.

MOM will continue to work with its partners at Spring, EDB and DCN agencies and the MPs to help workers adjust to the new environment to alleviate unemployment. We will continue to upgrade job matching and referral services, market training programmes, and disseminate labour market information to job seekers and also residents who want to retrain themselves for higher-skilled jobs and help workers adjust to the new economic conditions.

A recent survey conducted for full-time Skills Redevelopment Programme graduates who have completed their courses between May and August of last year showed that one in two of those who participated in the course secured a job within three months. These figures are encouraging and indicate that those who upgrade themselves do enhance their employability and get meaningful jobs.

Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines): Sir, I was indeed surprised to learn that there are so many job vacancies available. Could I ask the Minister to enlighten this House as to how he has arrived at these numbers and the specific reasons why Singaporeans reject these jobs which are now available?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, I have provided detailed figures, in terms of the job vacancies, and these are data collected from current job vacancies. HR personnel and other related streams of information tell us that these are the jobs available. So, these are hard figures. As to how to make Singaporeans take up these job vacancies, there are many factors why they do not in the first place, and you have to address them one by one. Some Members may have come across a number of mind-changing initiatives that we have tried to undertake to help them adjust to new job market conditions. And as I have said, we will continue to tackle these issues by working with industry and our related partners to try to increase their acceptability.

Mr Charles Chong (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, I requested detailed figures of the individual breakdowns of the various organisations. The Minister of State has not provided the detailed breakdown yet. Could the Minister of State confirm that the Ministry of Manpower has the individual figures, and he would provide them to me, if not now, then in a separate note?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, I did not choose to nit-pick and give details of 13 agencies, not because we do not have the data, we do have the data. But I wanted to be clear, to send the signal, which I think the question implied more than what was asked. I am sure that the hon. Member is not obsessed with details. What I wanted to show was the four groups, which tend to different sectors of workers, have different results, and you can see from even within the four groups that there are different measures of success, if you like. I also wanted to emphasise that in the overall universe of those who were retrenched, that it was about 67%. In other words, the majority of people who lose their jobs know where to look for the information and get it. More importantly, I wanted to emphasise the point that it may be wrong, and we would arrive at erroneous conclusions by comparing different members in different agencies, because the people that they tend to are different - different employability, potential, different educational and training skills.

Another point which I also want to emphasise is that while it is useful and, indeed, it should be commended, that there are efficiencies to be gained from enhancing our job-matching skills, we should not exaggerate the potential of that impact. The answer to job creation is to make our economy more attractive so that we can increase the overall pie. MOM and its DCN partners must, of course, continue to work in this current climate, to make sure that where there are jobs available, we should help people to get them and, indeed, as Mr Sin says, there are jobs available, about 17,000 vacancies.

When I read about the initiatives of Mr Charles Chong and Mr Ahmad Magad, and his Tampines GRC MPs, I was cheered, because of their job programmes which have 1,500 vacancies. I think such measures are to be commended. MOM is willing to work with MPs who would want to serve their constituents better, and give them the information that they need. But we should not exaggerate the impact of that potential. There are jobs available. We will try to increase our efficiency and where we can, we will continue to work at that.

Mr Sin Boon Ann: Would the Ministry be prepared to publish specific details about these jobs that are available to the CDCs and advisers on the ground, so that at least they will know where these vacancies are and perhaps write directly to those who are making the offer, rather than cite statistics here of these jobs which are available, which to many Singaporeans are just as elusive as ever?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: I would strongly debate the point with Mr Sin that these figures are elusive. He may not be aware of the conditions on the ground. We have an aggregated job link, which means that the various CDCs' and MOM's pool of jobs is computerised on-line. In other words, with all the CDCs and the self-help groups, and the DCN is an aggregated job bank on-line, the information is there. It is not that the information is not there.

The fact that we have 117,000 visits to our DCN partners means that access is not such a big problem. Even if you assume one person makes two visits, you have 50,000 unemployed who go there. And as many MPs know on the ground, when they approach you for job assistance, the path to the DCN partners or the path to the Mayors is not strewn with impediments. Most of them do get to DCN quite simply and to the CDCs especially, and they are very responsive, if I may say so. Job information is certainly one area. But it is certainly more than that. As I have said, I have enumerated many reasons, and we will continue to work at that. But where there are efficiencies to be derived, we will continue to update the job bank and specific aspects, in terms of matching. We are trying to enhance the matching capability, as it were, and this is another phase of our job career development.

Mr Charles Chong: Sir, a point of clarification, first. Mr Ahmad Magad and I are not in Tampines GRC, we are in Pasir-Ris-Punggol GRC.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: My apologies.

Mr Charles Chong: Would the Minister of State not agree that we should find out which particular organisation has the highest successful placement rates and learn from them and level up, rather than level everybody down and hide behind one composite figure?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Absolutely. I agree completely with the MP that we should level up and not level down. There was no intention ever to level down. If Mr Charles Chong and his Pasir Ris-Punggol MPs can level up the system, it is wonderful for all of us! We will learn from him. Among the various CDCs and self-help groups, there are varying results. Yes, we should share the information. I have already asked my Ministry's members to contact those agencies which have been more successful than others and, indeed, that will be the direction to go.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong (Tampines): Can I ask the Minister of State why did he not answer Mr Chong's question about the four self-help groups, because it is useful to know how effective they are in job placements?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: I did answer, but not in detail as he wanted. I mentioned the result of 6.4%, which is about half the average of the entire Distributed Careerlink Network. I did not want to go into the specifics of each group because I think that they would detract from the problem, and it is not quite fair because they are dealing with different groups. What is the message that you want to send to them? They will know it internally. What is the message that you want to send to the public? Don't go to this group? So, I think we have to be careful in our nuancing, in terms of what efficiencies there are. As I said, the overall population of retrenched workers (67%) gets jobs within six months. In other words, the personal responsibility of a person who gets retrenched must continue to be enhanced. Government cannot replace that role.

We will provide the training opportunities. We will provide where efficiencies are. But the fact that nearly 70% do get jobs means that many people know how to do it. There will be a select group which will be harder, and this group will change with the various characteristics. That was the reason to have a Distributed Careerlink Network in the first place, because we knew that there were differences in different sectors of society. Where there are efficiencies to be enhanced, as Mr Charles Chong has said, we will learn from those who have been more efficient. But, even then, we will compare why they have been successful, and there may be different reasons. Certain CDCs are more efficient in that sense, because they are geographically located nearer certain sectors.

So, I do not think we want to micro-manage, but we do want to make everybody more efficient. But, as I cautioned, let us not exaggerate the potential of that impact.

Mdm Ho Geok Choo (West Coast): Mr Speaker, Sir, this has reference to my question regarding the mindset of potential employers, especially with regard to retrenched employees who are above 45 years of age. I notice from the handout that quite a big number of job vacancies exist in the public sector, and these jobs are actually in the general administration area. I am just wondering whether the public sector sets the example of encouraging potential employers to look at the above-45 more favourably by starting to actually open up these jobs to those 45 years of age who have been retrenched from the private sector.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, the question implicitly implies that we have not been open, and I do not think that is true. We judge it on its merit. Government will create programmes that are general and enabling. Under this particular People for Jobs Traineeship Programme, we have said that for the first six months, Government will provide $2,000 or 50% of your salary, whichever is lower, and that is a very strong signal that Government, including the civil service, would like to enhance the employability of those above 40.

Dr Chong Weng Chiew (Tanjong Pagar): For those who are successful in being placed in jobs, does the Ministry monitor whether they are able to hold their jobs and, if not, for how long? The reason why I ask is, I think, this figure would give us a good indication on the quality of job-matching being offered.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Yes, we do. Sir, that is a very good question. We have particular schemes, in fact, for example, the Place, Train and Incentivise where, especially in the hotel line, because that is one sector where there are jobs which we think that Singaporeans should fill in, but we have got anecdotes where they go for training, take up the training course and then go on the job, but after two days, they leave. So we have added another component that if you stay on, I think, for three to six months, we will give you another $500 incentive for you to stay on. So we are tweaking the system to see how we can make it sustainable. And you are right, we need to find out not only in terms of job placements for a day because that does not make sense, but long-term sustainability.

Another part of our effort is to work with industry, in fact, to re-engineer certain of the jobs so that they are more attractive to the extent as possible. But, you know, in wafer fabs, there is a limit. It is a 12-hour shift. You need to don suits. Mrs Yu-Foo said that initially there was a wrong impression that you donned suits to protect yourselves, that there was something wrong in the environment. So we have to go on this campaign to say, "No, no, we are actually trying to protect the product from you." Then, they understood. But these are little things that you find out on the ground and you adjust to it.

Mr Charles Chong: Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Minister of State confirm that the Ministry of Manpower is providing sufficient funds to these self-help groups and the various CDCs to help them in their employment assistance programmes, and MOM is satisfied

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, I am never satisfied with the returns gained, if that means that I want improvement. I always want improvement. So that is the answer to the second question. But in terms of resources, we provide about $210,000 a year, including officers and training, and we are also now changing the system - that is just for employment for the officers to beef it up. We have to realise that structural unemployment, what we are seeing, is a relatively new phenomenon. Prior to that, we never had that and job counselling capabilities were not quite there. If Members think that trying to get somebody a job is identifying a job, identifying a retrenched worker and putting it together, I would encourage them to visit the DCN. Mayors will know that a tremendous amount of hand-holding, building up confidence, telling the person that, "It's okay, you can take this.", is required, matching the capabilities, which means that you have to spend a lot of effort sometimes in each. So, these would have to be built. We will continue to pour in resources so that we can at least get better results.

Mr Loh Meng See (Jalan Besar): Sir, I read with alarm the very large number of unemployed amongst the diploma (6,400) and degree (12,900) holders. Can we help the polytechnics and universities, so that we do not add to new graduates among this field of unemployed? Can we have some idea of who these people are?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, Mr Loh Meng See has crossed into education now. But I will answer that question.

The employability of our polytechnic diploma holders and graduates, in terms of three months or six months after they graduate, is still around about 70-80% in this time. What was the reason that we have this? And you are right. Previous recessions affected more line operators and production operators. But this current recession affects diploma holders and graduates. They have not been spared. It is the pace of globalisation, in other words, sectors which are affected all across, and even foreign workers, for example, we had a 30% reduction in our employment pass. The reason is that there is uncertainty in the global economic climate, there is less visibility and people are not hiring. But I am less worried for this group, because once the economy picks up, they are the ones that will be absorbed quite quickly.

Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong (Non-Constituency Member): Does the Minister of State agree that one of the reasons younger persons generally experience higher unemployment is because of competition from the employment pass holders?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Steve Chia's question, Sir, implies a zero sum game, and that is not here at all. We have very strong economic data to suggest that our employment pass workers increase our overall pie. If we did not have them, well, you might have more representation of our local workers in our economic sector, but of a much smaller pie. So we cannot run away from the fact that, even though we have foreign workers within the midst of our industries, they do indeed create more jobs on the whole because they make us more competitive. And we will continue to stick to that strategy. We should not allow short-term situations to skew or to mar our responses to what is a viable and very reasonable and important long-term strategic drive.