Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Survey: Jobs Credit Scheme

Saturday, February 14, 2009

Survey: Jobs Credit Scheme

Give your views on the Job Credit Scheme in this survey.

49 people responded to the survey within 12 hours. Here are the results. Most of the respondents do not like the scheme. They find the name of "job credit" to be misleading, as it is actually a wage subsidy and not a credit (that needs to be repaid). They prefer other ways to use the $4.5 billion.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan,
I am unsure if Job Credit scheme will really helps to save jobs.
For instance, if a company has no business, does it make sense or cents to keep all its employees though the government is helping to pay the salaries?

Jasmin; February 04, 2009 8:01 PM
Anonymous said...: I totally agree with Jasmin. What is lacking now is the 'ground level' experience. Yes, our leaders say there are jobs out there but Singaporeans are fussy. A $800 job as food court cleaner or whatever all go to foreigners why? To a foreigner $800 is very good, their rental maybe $100 (5 to a room) etc. To a Singaporean, $800 can hardly pay for their HDB loan etc.

With this economic downturn, since majority stay in HDB, there should be a HDB (Housing Deferred Bonus) whereby HDB owners are allowed to opt for special loan repayment be they under Banks or HDB loans.

This will definitely be a great relief and also reduce number of reposession.

Job Credits etc does it help? I really doubt. In the end who benefit? Left to be seen; February 05, 2009 6:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Jobs Credit Scheme will largely benefits MNR & some big organization who are still profitable.Why is the govt giving away the tax payer monies freely to these group?Can't they think of a good scheme to help the citizen?
$4.5b is no small amount.Why should it benefits the profitable companies instead of saving the suffering citizen?Honestly,I really don't understand the logic.

save the $4.5b; February 05, 2009 10:39 AM
Unknown said...: If $4.5 billion is used to save some 50,000 jobs, then each job costs us $90,000. Why not provide a retrenched worker with a cash grant of $10,000 and annual loan of $10,000 during this period. In this way, the $4.5 billion can help more people and those that would be affected.; February 06, 2009 12:12 AM
C H Yak said...: The Finance Minister had said the Government did not consider a temporary GST cut in the 7 per cent GST rate as "it would not have had a desired impact on demand and on the economy".
A GST cut would also leave lower and middle-income groups worse off, especially since GST revenues are used to fund social support programmes.

I could not understand the logic of such an explanation. The current economic crisis is considered "extra-ordinary", and I am sure it would require "exceptional" solutions.

Various problems in Singapore are self-inflicted. Our civil servants always go at length in crafting, packaging and explaining policies which are complicated to implement and which then stay inflexible. For example, the efforts gone at length into in packaging the Jobs Credit Scheme (JCS).

A cut in GST would help every Singaporean, permanent residents and even foreign workers contributing to our economy here. This is more likely to stimulate the economy. During such difficult times, the Government can always look at other more direct ways to fund social programs to help the lower and middle income groups and the needy. For this purpose, touching the "reserves" would be a honourable cause.

It should not become an excuse not to cut GST just because the increase of GST from 5% to 7% was previously explained as for getting the funds to help the needy.

In touching the "reserves" to fund JCS, profitable employers are enjoying subsidy from state funds contributed by all taxpayers. Putting the issue of whether it would save jobs aside, the indirect flow of subsidy would only help those who are still employed, provided firms would hand down the benefits to their employees. First of all, employers who need to retrench would still retrench whether or not there is JCS. Instead of helping profitable employers through JCS, these precious funds could be channelled directly to help the needy, lower income earners and even those retrenched.

With a further temporay cut in GST, I am sure the average worker would benefit much more and the economy would be stimulated. And it is only a "temporary" cut.

Benefits given directly to those in need of help through a simple process is certainly more effective then benefits handed down indirectly through a complicated crafted program no matter how beautifully it is designed and packaged for delivery. It may not be effective.

The JCS helps every employers, but in effect it may not finally help every worker save his job. We would touch the "reserves" to implement it. A cut in GST would benefits every person living in Singapore regardless of his status, but because the Government wants to use a small part of this GST revenue to help the needy and low income earners, the Government sees it not right to lower GST, and also abstain from touching the reserves to help the average needy Singaporean.

This logic seems funny.; February 06, 2009 5:37 PM
Anonymous said...: I think I can provide an insight into why the Govt think we are fussy when the truth is that the govt has been misled by the middle managers in their hierachy. I have witnessed how this is done even in supposedly govt backed co-operatives.
One example is the govt offer of 50% salary matching to help retrenched Singaporeans some years back. This govt backed co-operative hired qualified Singaporeans and pay them half their salary with the govt paying the other half. Once the six months are up they are told to resign or face termination. Reason given is that the org cannot afford to pay them their "high" salaries. To sweeten the deal, offer of part time employment is given. Not wanting to face the stigma of being sacked and with the offer of continuing part time work, these executives handed in their resignation letters. Thus on paper, Singaporeans are branded as choosy while the executive director, who earns more than ten times what these executives are paid, gets to go on radio to talk about choosy Singaporeans and how he and his organisation has tried to help them.
This is pathetic and shows the hiprocrisy of the whole system. I do not think the upper echelon of the govt knows this and genuinely wants to help Singaporeans who are also the voters of the govt. However, their efforts are being undermined by these middle rungs of hiprocratic directors who are benefitting from the system and ruining the whole country.; February 07, 2009 2:34 PM
Concerned said...: Assuming a company presently has 1,000 employees. In view of the down turn in business, it requires only 800 employees to continue the operation. To optimize the business operation, it retrench 200employees and keep the remaining 800 employees. With this, the company will receive a subsidy of 12% of the salary for the remaining 800 employees and thereby enhance its profits. Therefore the Job credit scheme needs to be amended so that employers will not abuse it.; February 14, 2009 11:47 PM