i beg to differ that there are such 1/3 difference... maybe it
is so in the public official employment... but in the private
sectors.. most private companies do not and will not give that
additional 1/3 more to male employees on the grounds of cost
control, competition and watever nonsense excuses... the truth is
because... they do not consider our men's contribution to the NS as
any from of contribution to the company.... rather they consider it
a national judicial legal obligations set by the ruling govt... of
which they are not apart of....thus they are not liable to pay the
men anything extra then the women simply base of sex.
secondly.... with the rising number of Foreign talents ( hereby
denoted as FT) competing for local jobs... many men discovered that
too often... our local men's and women's salary are being pushed
down if not competed downward by such uncontrolled influx of cheap
FT sometimes with highly dubious educational qualification and at
times unbelievable lack of capability. in fact... many private
firms prefer so called foreign FT over local men and women simply
because they are cheaper... so wherefore the concern of 1/3
advantage for local men?? if the women jacks their salary up by
1/3... wont they simply be pricing themselves out of the market in
certain areas?? i mean...... take a real hard look... the womens
are not competing the local mens for jobs.... there are over
700,000 FTs or FW in singapore!!
the worst is when one of those MF FTs become the head of the
company... i have heard that they actually reccommend to the local
boses NOT TO HIRE local men... because we have reservist
obligations and that alone would result in disruption to company
'smooth running' and at times would require the company to employ
partimers to fill the gaps... as such... productivity would be
'affected'... and these foreign FT actually request that they
should have a 'EMPLOY local MEN LAST' policy and that the firm
should try to employ as many FTs as possible as they keep cost down
because they are cheap and that they have no reservist obligations
PLUS... they cant change boss easily thereby reducing woker
turnover.
Lastly... at a bad economic times like these... i beg to ask...
wherefore came the logic to boost the ladies pay (by as much as
1.3) when everyone else has been clamouring for pay cuts and pay
freeze to keep their jobs in view of the local high unemployment...
those moronic womens are trying to get their own local women's to
be fired by their boss and get replace by cheaper female
FTs????
OR was it a govt ploy to get local womens to be kicked out of their
jobs and let the local men takeover their jobs since the boss would
no longer have the additional cream if the local women are to get
the same pay as men.
anyone sees a male chauvanistic attempt by certain officials by
riding on the stupidity of some stupid local women leader's
short-sightedness??