3/14/2013
Foreigners issued with Employment Agency Licence
‘De Luna was actually issued a licence to operate her own employment agency, RSD, in Jul 2010. While still engaged as director of RSD, she set up another agency with her husband, William, without obtaining a licence for it. William was then in Singapore on a social visit pass.’ Quoted from TRE.
The process of bringing in foreign workers to work here involves local knowledge of both countries. At the PMET level there are the Search and Recruitment Agencies and Consultancies. These businesses are similar in nature to student agencies bringing in foreign students to study here. At the executive search level, the recruitment of foreigners to work here is or was not a major business as the number used to be small and at very senior levels or for specialized jobs. The line is now blur with recruitment agencies bringing in huge numbers of low and medium level executives that are nothing different from recruiting workers.
Again this is an area that approving foreigners to operate recruiting/employment agencies will put the local agencies at a huge disadvantage. Our agencies will not have the local knowledge that the foreigners located here will have in their home countries. And these foreigners being here will have local knowledge as well.
The question, why don’t Singaporean agencies operate offices in the foreign countries where the workers are? There is a comparative cost disadvantage here for Singapore agencies. Would it be cheaper for the agencies of both countries to operate within their territories and cooperate in the recruitment process as it was originally done and the cost savings filter down to the workers? Both sides will do their own business and earn their keeps respectively?
There are many agency licences eg recruitment/employment for maids, foreign workers, junior executives, housing agents, student agents etc etc that do not need to be given to foreigners to compete with our locals right here. There is no real value or skills added except putting more competition and even unfair advantages to the foreigners. There is no loss if foreigners are not issued with such licences and our local agencies could thrive or more locals could take up such small businesses.
Limiting such licences cannot be protectionism. Opening them to foreigners to come here will only make life of local small businesses tougher. What or where is the advantage to have foreigners coming here to set up such small businesses that locals are more than adequate to provide. No need foreign talents really.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
"There is no real value or skills added except putting more competition and even unfair advantages to the foreigners."
Agreed 1000% where is the value? How stupid is the PAP govt?Uses our stick to knock our own head.
Example PRs from malaysian,pinoy,ang mo,prc,india housing agent? Crazy
redbean talking nonsense again.
The great thing about Singapore is ANYONE can set up a legal business for any purpose. The only "test" is whether or not that business can make money or not.
One of my drinking kaki is from Bombay/ Mumbai. He's been in Singapore for years running an agency which organizes work visas, medical checks etc. for Indian workers. Yes, he make alot of money. Power to him.
The beautiful thing about capitalism is no one "needs" anyone specifically. There is lots of choice, no one is indispensable. So the question doesn't hinge on whether you need FT's or not, but the fact that ANYONE -- FT or local -- CAN start an enterprise and allow the market to eventually choose who succeeds and who doesn't.
Meritocracy and capitalism go hand in hand.
A lot of these employment agencies are there to fish information of locals seeking jobs. When these locals landed a job, they will try to track them and offer those companies that hired them a cheaper foreign person. This kind of society promotes mistrust and betrayal.
This is why it is called a hotel. And it is also the reason why the Singaporeans are marching to Hong Lim.
Good for foreigners but shit to citizens. Meritocracy or treason?
@anon 428:
>> This kind of society promotes mistrust and betrayal.
I see your emotions have got the better of you.
No, actually, if taken in the "right spirit", is supposed to cultivate innovation, persistence, self-reliance, and personal responsibility.
Obviously you've missed the point ;-)
@redbean:
>> but shit to citizens
Only to the citizens who are themselves "attractive" to shit. :-)
Other right-mindfulness citizens, who've adopted the right view and the right intention have applied the right thinking, the right effort by taking the right action to reduce their "suffering". And so it came to pass, their suffering was reduced.
Namaste, motherfuckers ;-) (in this instance, the right speech!)
Jollibee is simply brilliant. After facing pressure and bad public for not hiring Singaporeans and a public boycott, it has came out with a statement that its hires are 79% Singaporeans and PRs.
Wah lan, they learn the trick quite fast, lumping PRs and Singaporeans as one group. Would they like to break down this group to reveal how many are Singaporeans and how many are PRs? Or when pushed, they would also answer, it is not in our interests to disclose the details?
I think when you are in business, you have to do whatever is necessary to remain in business -- which firstly means you have to stay profitable and grow your revenues.
No business is required to pander to the emotions of "the many" who have nothing better to do than to poke their noses into stuff that is none of their business.
Good businesses adapt and are able to take advantage of whatever direction the wind is blowing. This is called "pragmatism".
A few of my favourite eateries have had to close because of MoM's reversal of policy when they curbed the amount of foreign labour. The bottom line is, for businesses to thrive, they need access to OPEN labour markets, with no minimum wages, no non-discrimination laws, and a free hand in steering their course through a very competitive jungle full of disloyal, fickle customers who will just stop spending and move to a competitor.
No enterprise is require to reveal any details of its operations to the public. The only reporting they need to do is that which is required by the laws of the land.
Post a Comment