A young lady, recently married, told me that she had difficulty in getting a job. Employers are reluctant to recruit her as she is likely to have one or two babies and this will impose added cost to the employer to pay the salary during the two months of maternity leave. During the interview, this question was raised, and she did not get the job.
Sometime ago, another person complained to me that she was unfairly dismissed due to performance, when the real reason was that a baby was expected. She did not want to disclose the employer or take the matter to the Ministry.
I wonder if this is a common situation? I can understand that some employers, who are struggling to survive in business, does not want to have the added cost. Even the profitable companies want to avoid this cost, if they could, so that they can increase the bottom line profit. Perhaps, there is some hidden instructions to their HR department.
Please share your experience and views on this issue.
Sometime ago, another person complained to me that she was unfairly dismissed due to performance, when the real reason was that a baby was expected. She did not want to disclose the employer or take the matter to the Ministry.
I wonder if this is a common situation? I can understand that some employers, who are struggling to survive in business, does not want to have the added cost. Even the profitable companies want to avoid this cost, if they could, so that they can increase the bottom line profit. Perhaps, there is some hidden instructions to their HR department.
Please share your experience and views on this issue.
15 comments:
There is definitely such a instruction to HR in most Companies including huge MNCs. Where I was from, a manufacturing plant, operators if are found to be pregnant before being employed would be asked to leave. Especially for the lower ranks of employees, this is the sad truth.
Hi,
Mr. Tan, one needs to be practical in the working world. There are lots of hidden rules while upper level approval is also another form of screening to ensure conformance. HR mgr needs to report to HR director etc. HR Mgr may want employ this lady but he knows his next level will not approve it [due to expected absence]. Also given the tight shoestring budget and control over headcount, HR Mgr must bear the responsibility of doing another round of training & engaging temporary staff during this lady leave of absence. In order to ensure his director doesn't lose his trust in HR Mgr, it is only natural the HR Mgr not to employ candidates with potential leave of absence as the extra-work load & disruption is not something his director is happy about. I don't see any different in Civil Servants HR mgr either. Govt may make lots of Motherhood statement to be politically correct but I doubt they really practice what they say e.g. One doesn't wait unitl a GE to realized that Ministers' pay is a problem with the voters since 1994. Worst is that they force through a raise in 2007 with a PAP parliament and pay 8 mths bonus while the majority of the voters are squeeze with high housing cost, transportation, food etc. PM Lee has to work harder to win back support as I don't really believe what PAP says anymore. I lived in Tampines for many years and only sees the MP once during walkabout. I moved to Bishan and don't see my MP before GE. After GE, my MP changed to Josephine and I still have not seen my MP. Bishan is just like Aljunied 5 years ago i.e. close fight. If next election with credible opposition like WP, we can say bye-bye to Ng and Josephine. The opposition will stand a good chance if they start working in Bishan now i.e. follow the example of Aljunied Sylvia i.e. meet residents once a week.
Maternity leave is 4 months. As a hiring manager running a sales team, I definitely would not hire a person who would not be productive for a third of a year. The impact is great as the staff would not be able to hit her targets, I will not be able to hit my team targets and so and so forth. All our compensation would be impacted severely.
No one would hire an employee knowing that he/she would be on long term leave shortly after joining the organisation.
Hi Sales Manager. I thought that the maternity leave is 2 months. Where did you get 4 months? If it is for 2 babies, you do not get them in the same year!
If it is the reality that HR managers do not want to employ females who are expected to get pregnant, then it seem that this so called benefit actually becomes a disadvantage for the female employee. Is there a better way out of this difficult situation?
TKL
The legislation is as follows:-
4 months which 2months is payable by employer and govt will reimburse for 2 months.
So for sales, agree it is difficult, however, for admin and non-direct sales frontline, there is possibility of temps etc.
Or other way, is employers will need to allow telecommuting
Hi Mr Tan,
It is about finding the most suitable candidate, and that includes the attitute, competence, skills, expected salary, and the avaliability of the person.
My company currently has a hiring freeze due to economic conditions. Even resigned staff cannot be replaced. So whoever is in my team have to work harder just to meet the numbers as we are not allowed to replace. We have to go through so much justification just to get excpetional approval to hire one head count.If that person is going to be on leave 4 months then sadly this person will be unlikely to get the job.
With the global economy in such a state, I suspect many companies also face hiring approval difficulties. Who will then hire a person who may not be contributing for 2-4 months?
The various views posted here confirmed my gut feel.
A regulation that was supposed to protect working mothers, i.e. to ensure that they get maternity benefit, has turned out to be a lose-lose-lose case.
It is a lose for the working mother as most employers will avoid employing them, due to the perceived heavy cost of the maternity benefits, and also the disruption to the work pattern.
It is a lose for the employer as, they might be shouldered with a cost that they wish to avoid, and will find ways to get around it.
It is a lose to the nation as we have to set up regulations to catch the hide-and-sick and make life complicated for everyone.
What is the solution?
My view is - make this optional. The employer can provide the maternity benefit to attract female employees, if they wish to, or they can opt NOT to provide the benefit.
If the employer does not provide maternity benefit, they may pay a higher salary to the female employee, which may be better for the female employees. Those who want to have children can save for the cost of the maternity leave, or the government can pay for it as well (as they are now paying for the 3rd and 4th month and for all four months in the case of the 3rd and 4th child.
It is time to face the reality and find the solution, rather than continue with a lose-lose-lose situation.
My proposal applies to people who are recruited after a date of change, and will not affect people recruited earlier.
What are your views?
rex comments as follows,
in actual fact this is not a singapore problem. it is same everywhere in the world where woman's rights is established.
from the employer point of view it is very unproductive to have someone disappear for 2 months. It is not just two months. In the first year of baby's life, there are numerous chores to do and the mother would likely take "off", take leave and so on even after the two months.
From the woman's perspective it is also very worrying. Being away for 2 months allow office politics to be played out fully. She worries a lot whether she will be disadvantaged.
it is very difficult situaton. I don't think it is a national political issue, it is rather more a social issue generic in every society. No one can solve it. Maybe we should go the way of saudi arabia, ban all the woman from work and go back to traditional old ways.
rex
Hi Mr Tan,
My senior sales person would be having her baby in a few months time. She will be on 2 months maternity leave.
She made known her pregnency to us early on, and we are taking proactive approach to plan for her absence.
This is her 3rd child. From her 2 earlier experiences, we know that she will continue to work from home and we will be able to deliver the same results as if she were not pregnent.
I believe that in such a scenario it is alright. 4 months is too much.
Why should one be paid millions and asked public for solutions. What are their scholars in civil service or the perm sec doing? Are they really worth what the tax payers are paying? I doubt so. Some examples of unsolve problems:-
1) complicated taxi fare & taxi hidding before mid night charge
2)low birthrate
3)no jobs for older workers thus raising retirement age is just a political correct exercise.
4) High housing cost
5) High car cost
6) High Ministers' Salary
7) High Food cost
8) High Higher euducation cost
Year in Year out heartlanders faced same problem.
Ear in Ear out for Ministers when we feedback through MPs who raised in Parliament. Only with GE, they suddenly wakes up and promises CHANGES.
We are a small country over saturated with foreigners and MPs in Parliament. Ministers are over paid to run the country. As for the recent revision, the PAP Parliament will just pass it. How many PAP MPs will take the floor and honestly say Political representatives are over paid? Since 1994, these big group of PAP MPs said nothing. Maybe by increasing their allowance to $15,000 a month has helped to keep their mouths shut. Only WP Sylvia (NMP then) has continue voice out this concern.
SALARY - TIME TO ASK THE MINISTERS
--------------------------------
Every politician must state in his election manifesto;
a)What he wants to accomplish in Parliament if elected
b)His expected salary
c)When he will return our CPF money back to Singaporeans if elected.
Now that's transparency.
Now everybody can vote wisely in GE 2016.
Whilst in the UK, I was offered a job in SG. I was 4 months pregnant then and the hiring company did not know this. I felt it was my duty to inform them and there was sheer panic - they asked whether I could work as a temp until I give birth and then come back full time after maternity.
Having gven birth to 3 kids in the UK, I can honestly say the Maternity policy is much better. Employees can opt for maternity leave for up to a year; where 9 months will be allowance (or allowance + basic pay, depending on qualifying service period) and another 3 months as unpaid.
When on maternity leave, mum still accrue all benefits like holidays and most importantly, her job is protected.
Growing up in Singapore, i have seen the transformation of a 3rd world to a 1st world country in terms of economy and infrastructure. But the mentality of Singapore government and management have not improved and maybe even have gone backwards.
Although there is legislation on maternity benefits, Singapore government has not provide enough public education or communication of the importance of such benefits and why it is necessary for management to treat female staff as asset and not expense. Management needs to look into the ROI of staff in terms of 20-30 years instead of 2-3 years of expenses.
As a manager in Australia, I think that Singapore management needs to learn how Australian companies with high wages and better benefits can still achieve higher productivity than Singapore. LKY used to criticize how lazy Aussies are and i think they still do. But this laziness allows them to think outside the box to achieve standards above their international peers. With a minimum wage of AU$15.51/hr (AU$2688 or S$3494 per mth), Australian companies can still be profitable, just show that cost is only part of the equation in running the businesses.
Lastly, I do want to ask Singaporeans: Will you pay more for shirt/shoes if your wages have increased? Workers also have a part to play in the society and paying more to consume will also help fellow Singaporeans improve their benefits.
Thank you for reading my 2 cents worth.
http://mediacaffeine.com/til-sweden-offers-480-days-of-paid-maternity-leave/
something interesting.
Post a Comment