Policies on public transport, foreign workers, wages may need relooking
By Leslie Koh, The Straits Times, 1 Dec 2012
IT WAS probably a significant moment for observers when the Government finally decided to call this week's industrial action by the SMRT bus drivers a strike.
And for many, it was probably just as important that the authorities decided to take serious action concerning those behind it.
But as pundits continue to debate over whether the Government could have responded more quickly, and how much responsibility SMRT should bear, I would like to argue that there is an even bigger issue worth looking at in the wake of Singapore's first strike in more than 25 years.
Indeed, in one fell swoop, as it were, the SMRT drivers managed to cover a combination of several hot-button issues: public transport, foreign workers and wages.
The debate that followed the incident showed that there was a lot more to the strike than a group of disgruntled workers protesting over their wages and living conditions. Bigger questions have emerged over the vulnerability of public transport, the state of labour relations and human resource management in Singapore.
In other words - what's wrong with this picture?
How could an essential service be so easily disrupted? Are we relying too much on foreign workers? Could they be treated better? Are their wages too low?
First, public transport.
The strike is but the latest in a series of problems to hit the sector. In the past year or so, there have been massive breakdowns on the MRT, bus shortages requiring the state-funded purchase of buses, and inadequate taxi services, prompting service standards to be tightened. And now, a labour strike over wages.
Just what is happening in Singapore's public transport system?
It is hard to pinpoint one main cause, as the troubles cover several aspects, from engineering to customer service standards and human resource management.
It suggests there is an underlying problem that goes beyond poor management, natural wear and tear as well as human error.
In fact, some of the slip-ups could be said to be typical of what one might expect from a cost-cutting, profit-maximising business.
Unlike customers of a commercial enterprise, however, public transport commuters cannot take their business somewhere else.
When trains, buses and taxis fall short, the whole nation - and not just the bottom line - suffers.
Perhaps it is time to revisit that old issue again: Whether public transport should be run as a profit-oriented business, or as a state-run operation that remains free from shareholder pressures.
The Government has repeatedly stressed that privatisation has raised efficiency and productivity in the sector.
But with all the recent problems cropping up, maybe it is time to put this sacred cow under inspection again. This is especially so as a good public transport system is absolutely critical if Singapore wants to grow its population, reduce reliance on cars and build more homes across the island. Cost efficiencies may have to take a back seat.
And if a complete U-turn is not possible, can the public transport structure, or the way operators are managed and regulated, be overhauled?
Second, foreign workers.
Some of the drivers' unhappiness was understandable. To be sure, more can be done to improve the wages and treatment of bus drivers - and foreign workers in general - as well as relations between them and their bosses.
But the strike has also raised one major concern: Can this happen again? Can an essential service like public transport or utilities be so easily disrupted by a group of foreign workers?
Of course, there is nothing to stop a group of Singaporean workers from doing the same thing.
But one would like to believe that Singaporeans would have more qualms about downing tools when it would affect their own families and friends. That is why there are no foreigners manning the front lines in the military, the police and civil defence.
Yet Singapore relies heavily on foreign workers in many sectors that are no less essential - nurses in hospitals, workers in refuse collection and maids, for instance.
These foreigners are picking up the slack at places Singaporeans do not want to go. But perhaps the case can now be made for a lot more to be done to ensure a higher percentage of Singaporeans in these jobs. At stake is not just jobs for locals, but also national security.
Making this happen, of course, is another story.
Hospitals and transport operators say they hire foreigners because they cannot find Singaporeans to take the jobs. But Singaporeans argue that the pay is simply too low.
And this is where the third issue comes into play.
This week's strike shows that low wages are a problem not only for Singaporean workers. Along with calls for the wages of the lowest-paid citizens to be raised, it looks like the same pressure could come from foreign workers too.
Already, the rising cost of living in Malaysia, China, India and other nations where Singapore gets its workers from is pushing up their salary demands.
And the risks of not raising wages for foreign workers here could hit home just as hard as they do for Singaporeans. Not all disgruntled workers may resort to strikes, but they might do exactly what some netizens told them to do this week: Go home.
In the short run, that would deprive Singapore of the workers it desperately needs now.
More than that, it also suggests that the country's reliance on cheap foreign labour to boost its economy may not be sustainable in the long run.
Ironically, Singapore will have to increase wages both to draw Singaporeans back into certain sectors to reduce its reliance on foreign labour, and to draw foreigners to fill the remaining gaps.
All three issues - public transport, foreign workers and wages - will not be easily or quickly fixed. But if they really are what is wrong with the picture, they have to be addressed in due course.
The drivers' strike may have ended after two days, but its impact promises to last a lot longer.
No comments:
Post a Comment