AT FIRST glance, the security tripartite cluster's proposals appear to belatedly uplift the welfare of security officers ("Higher wages for security guards from September 2016"; Oct 30), but a closer look will reveal flaws.
First, while the minimum monthly basic wage of security guards will rise by 37.5 per cent in 2016, the hiring fee has been increasing since the progressive wage model was first mentioned a year ago. This is unfair to both the security guards and service buyers.
Second, there is no real wage increment if security agencies move the common reimbursements for transport, laundry and meals into the basic wage.
Third, while there is concern about long working hours, the security tripartite cluster provides no concrete ideas to resolve this.
Allowing overtime exemptions to continue is tantamount to bending the Employment Act. Such exemptions are allowed only as a temporary measure, and the tripartite cluster should advise the Ministry of Manpower to stop allowing them.
Fourth, there is no proposal on how real productivity can be achieved through the adoption of technological innovations or redesigning workflows in the industry.
The tripartite cluster recommended a career progression plan that breaks down a single guard's job into five parts that require more than one person. This hair-splitting creates unproductive subdivisions of work, aggravating the manpower shortage.
Fifth, the current system of grading security agencies has created imbalances. A "Grade A" agency charges about $1,000 more than a "Grade C" one. Regardless of the grading, all agencies must pay the market rate to attract the right number of security guards.
Lastly, the tripartite cluster team includes only representatives of Grade A agencies. Some representation from agencies with different grades would ensure a balanced mix of perspectives, which would yield more useful recommendations.
Ling Poon Wah (Ms)
*Article first appeared on ST Forums (17 Nov 2014)