Updates on Unemployment and Retrenchment Numbers and Adoption of Schemes such as SGUnited Traineeships

Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower how many Singaporeans have (i) been retrenched this year (ii) been placed on unpaid leave due to the COVID-19 situation and (iii) had their pay reduced by more than 50% since the start of the circuit breaker period.

Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is being done to ensure that companies do not misuse the SGUnited Traineeships Programme and SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme to fulfil their manpower requirements; and (b) whether companies that have recently retrenched their workers are allowed to hire under the these traineeship programmes.

Thank you, Sir. As for the first set of questions for this next set, I will also address questions that are for the next Sitting or for Written Answers that are related. The reason is that, this approach allows us to deal with them more holistically. So, I seek Members' understanding.

To Ms Ng's question, MOM publishes the Labour Market Report on a quarterly basis and the Report on Labour Force in Singapore on an annual basis. The Advance Release for the second quarter of 2020 estimated that there were 90,500 unemployed residents in June 2020, compared to 73,900 in December 2019. So, it is 90,500 in June 2020, as compared to 73,900 in December 2019. That is a difference of 16,600 over six months.

Of those unemployed, one in three were aged 50 and over, and this proportion has been and continues to be stable.

In comparison, about one in four persons in our resident workforce is aged 50 and over. This is consistent with the longer time they have taken to return to the workforce if they exit. Based on latest available data on the duration of unemployment, the median period for residents aged 50 and over was 12 weeks. This duration has been broadly stable for a number of years. But we should expect it to rise in times of economic downturn, as it is likely to for all age groups, although the extent really remains to be seen.

To Ms He Ting Ru’s question, preliminary figures from the survey data indicate that 5,280 Singapore Citizens were retrenched in the first half of 2020. In our labour statistics compilation, being placed on unpaid leave is captured as “temporary layoffs”. In the first half of 2020, an estimated 11,050 Singapore Citizens were affected by temporary layoffs, compared to 33,000 non-citizens.

Since the start of the circuit breaker on 6 April 2020, employers with more than 10 employees are required to notify MOM within one week of implementing cost-saving measures, such as shorter work hours or no-pay leave, that result in more than 25% reduction in gross monthly salary for local employees or 25% reduction in basic monthly salary for foreign employees.

Based on the notifications received between the start of the circuit breaker period and 20 August 2020, salary reductions of more than 50% are a small minority. We are not able to provide the breakdown between Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents as the distinction was not made in the notification by employers.

The Government continues to monitor the job market closely and adjust its measures to support workers and help businesses maintain or expand their local employment. The National Jobs Council is coordinating efforts to provide 100,000 jobs and skills opportunities for jobseekers under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package.

Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about the take-up of these programmes. MOM has started providing weekly updates on the jobs and skills situation to highlight the opportunities available for jobseekers and how they can access them. By now, more than 95,000 opportunities have been made available. These include: (a) 65,000 job opportunities, (b) close to 20,000 company-hosted traineeships, attachments or training places, and (c) over 10,000 opportunities under the SGUnited Skills Programme.

We have helped to place over 25,000 individuals into jobs, traineeships and training places. Of these, 24,000 across various age groups were placed into new jobs. About half are in the public sector, with another quarter in the Modern Services and Lifestyle sectors. The salary range of jobs can vary, depending on the sector and the specific job roles that an individual takes up.

Over 1,000 fresh graduate trainees have taken up traineeships under the SGUnited Traineeships programme. The majority of the traineeship positions filled are in growth sectors, such as Information Communications Technology and Media, Professional Services, and Financial Services. As the process of shortlisting and selecting suitable trainees by host organisations takes time, we can expect to see more placements into traineeships and company attachments subsequently. Lastly, close to 700 trainees have enrolled in 40 courses under the SGUnited Skills Programme.

We have expanded outreach to increase awareness of these opportunities. To reach out to fresh graduates on opportunities under the SGUnited Traineeships programme, WSG works closely with MOE, the Institutes of Higher Learning, NTUC and the People’s Association. To reach out to mid-career individuals on attachments under the SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme, WSG organises SGUnited Jobs and Skills Fairs to allow them to apply for opportunities onsite. Twenty-four SGUnited Jobs & Skills Centres have also been set up across all HDB towns. We also reach out to both groups through digital media channels.

From January to July 2020, 36,400 jobseekers received basic career advisory or job search assistance through WSG and NTUC-e2i’s career matching services. This is 30% more than the same period in 2019, despite Circuit Breaker measures.

The traineeships and attachments do not automatically convert into a permanent job. However, we are hopeful that companies will find a good number of trainees to be a good fit and make them part of their permanent staff. This will depend largely on the fit of each trainee to the job, and the business situation and hiring needs of the host organisation when the traineeships or attachments are completed. Workforce Singapore’s experience with the Attach-and-Train programmes so far has been that host organisations that are impressed with trainees will place them in full-time positions in the companies to make the most of the time and money that they have invested in the attachment. The new Jobs Growth Incentive scheme will give greater support to businesses to expand and grow their local headcounts over the next six months. This will also help spur the hiring of trainees.

I should add that in designing the Jobs Growth Incentive, we made sure to double the support for more mature jobseekers. New local hires aged 40 and above attract twice as much wage subsidies.

For cases where the traineeship does not result in a permanent job, the experience will equip the trainee with industry-relevant knowledge and skills, and help to burnish their credentials and value proposition to other employers. The Government will also continue to support them in their job search journey, through career matching services offered by WSG and NTUC’s Employability and Employment Institute, and other partner organisations.

Ms He Ting Ru asked about the safeguards against misuse. The Singapore Business Federation or SBF, our programme partner for these programmes, scrutinises each application to ensure that host companies structure their traineeships and attachments appropriately with clear development plans, so that participants can have a meaningful experience. SBF also scrutinises the applications to make sure that the companies are not using these programmes to hire workers for permanent jobs at low cost.

Host organisations are required to declare in their applications if they had undertaken retrenchment exercises or adopted various cost-cutting measures. If there are grounds to believe that companies are replacing existing employees with trainees in similar roles, such applications will be rejected. Some host organisations have asked if they can pay more than the stipulated allowances for very attractive candidates. Instead of traineeships or attachments, they are advised to offer paid employment to these very attractive candidates, which will also enjoy significant support under the Jobs Growth Incentive.

In addition to the rigorous screening process that I have described above, SBF also assists companies to review and improve their proposals, especially for applications that are incomplete or lacking in detail. These measures are necessary so that the traineeship or attachment experience is a positive and meaningful one. This is why it has taken four to six weeks, on average, to approve the applications, to ensure that the trainees’ interests are safeguarded. SBF has stepped up resources in response to the strong interest in these programmes to process these applications as quickly as possible.

I thank the Minister for the reply. I have some supplementary questions. The first relates to retrenchment. Would the Ministry consider publishing monthly, more granular updates available, especially during crisis periods like what we are going through at the moment? This is for us to be able to monitor and see whether the many, many schemes that have been introduced are working and how effective they are, whether there are areas that need extra support.

The second is whether we will consider also publishing – because I notice the Minister answered the question about the number of Singaporeans who were retrenched, but that figure sometimes seems to also include residents – so, whether we can have a bit more granularity as well between Singaporeans and PRs? Ultimately, Singaporeans do not have the back-up option of returning to their home countries. So, I think there is some value in knowing the data about whether Singaporeans are more affected.

Thirdly, have there been any public sector retrenchments so far this year?

I have some more questions on traineeships. I thank the Minister as well on traineeships. It is good that SBF has agreed to partner with MOM. However, I am just wondering whether we can have a bit more structure in this sort of on-going assessment reports of employers who have taken part in the schemes. For example, whether there will be monitoring visits being undertaken, whether we can publish regular achievement rates and information on how successful these companies are in converting traineeships into permanent job placements. And, finally, whether the trainees themselves will be given a chance to provide feedback on the schemes and also on the specific employers. These, all together, will help everyone make sure that these schemes are not abused and are maximally effective.

Mr Speaker, I thank Ms He for her questions. The host companies for the traineeships have to submit monthly updates to SBF as to what is happening to the traineeship. This submission has to be signed off by the trainee himself or herself. SBF has also made available their staff to handle incidents where the trainee feels that the programme is not well structured or they are not learning as much as they would like. SBF commits its resources to intervening in these cases. So, this aspect of the work that Ms He thinks is important, we agree. And it is being done.

As to whether they convert into placements subsequently, we are also interested to know and we will keep track of it as best as we can. Because even if a person does not stay in employment with the host company, it does not necessarily mean that the traineeship was not useful. Quite often, individuals, having completed the training, move on to other better options for employment. So, I think we will keep track of it, but we must know that we have to interpret that data quite carefully.

As to whether the public sector has retrenched, the public sector has actually leaned forward to bring hiring in advance of our needs. Quite a large number of the positions that are made available to jobseekers are because the public sector, having looked at their developmental plans and deciding that instead of hiring six months or nine months later, bring these forward so that the jobseekers can have a wider range of options and they can also have meaningful employment during this much more difficult time.

To the question on the data, the data I described was exactly what you wanted – citizens. So, I am not sure whether that got carried across clearly enough. It was not a combination of citizens and PRs. The Member asked for citizens; we have provided the Member with the citizen data. In fact, I also contrasted it to what was happening for the non-citizens, if the Member can go back and take a look at that.

Can we report employment statistics on a more regular basis? That has been the plan. That has also been the reason why Minister Chan Chun Sing and I, almost on a weekly basis now, have been visiting companies, different sectors to showcase the job, the opportunities available. During those occasions, we always publish a job situation report, different dimensions of it.

We are looking at one of the statistics that we can provide at a more regular interval – today, it is available on a quarterly basis. We are looking at whether unemployment data can be reliably provided on, perhaps, a monthly basis. So, it is not a question of whether we can provide the statistics more regularly. It has to do with whether it is reliable and you can count on it for decision-making. And if it is not reliable because the data-set is not going to be large enough, then by providing even more granular data at even closer intervals does not necessarily help in decision-making.

I would like to thank the Minister for clarifying a lot of the questions previously. I am very heartened to know that the MOM exercises compassion in the way they approach the various challenges in hiring practices that micro-enterprises and SMEs encounter to support them to adopt the correct and desired hiring practices.

My supplementary question is related to the overarching issue of unfair hiring or workplace practices. I understand that so far proactive surveillance has surfaced more of these companies than complaints by job seekers or employees. In my encounter with my residents, I do see that there is a lot of hesitance and uncertainty by employees or jobseekers when they encounter unfair hiring or workplace practices. They are not sure or not confident of raising these issues to the correct authorities.

My question is, will the Minister consider increasing efforts in jobseeker or employee education efforts to reassure people and empower them that if they are aggrieved in any of their experiences while seeking jobs or within their workplace environment, they can safely blow the whistle. And what is the recourse that they have? Because I think they have concerns and on repercussions on the employability in the future.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. I can appreciate that in some instances if the persons, for example, are still employed by the company, they are very careful and want to make sure that they do not get identified as the whistle blower. We are very mindful of that and we will make all effort to protect their identity. We have to approach the companies in a smart way, so as not to reveal their identity.

To expanding the outreach to encourage, individuals to step forward, I agree with her, entirely, especially for workers who are likely to be more vulnerable and less able to appreciate how best they can advance their interests. We have a programme called WorkRight. Our officers proactively reach out to these workers who we believe are in slightly more vulnerable positions – less likely to know their rights, less likely to know what the employers are supposed to do for them and meet statutory obligations. We educate them, not just on the ground, but also through the use of the vernacular media. We will have to continue to step up these efforts and ensure that people feel the sense that they can raise these issues safely.