Talk to bosses on alternative work arrangements, ministry advises
- The Straits Times (21 July 2011) : Talk to bosses on alternative work arrangements, ministry advises
- The Straits Times (16 July 2011) : Why seniors end up as security guards
Talk to bosses on alternative work arrangements, ministry advises
- The Straits Times, 21 July 2011
We refer to the letter by Mrs Joanna Han “Why seniors end up as security guards” (ST, 16 July 2011).
2. There are existing statutory protections in place to ensure that all workers, including security officers, do not work excessively long hours. Under the Employment Act, the daily legal limit for work is 12 hours. Employers have the flexibility to design shift patterns that suit their operational and employees’ needs within this legal limit. MOM also conducts regular checks to ensure that employers comply with this requirement and other statutory provisions, including providing weekly rest day, leave and overtime payment.
3. MOM and our industry partners, including the Security Industry Regulatory Department of the Singapore Police Force, the Union of Security Employees and the industry associations continually seek ways to improve work processes in the security industry by leveraging on technology to make the job more age friendly. We also promote the adoption of good workplace practices, like different shift work patterns (including 8-hour shifts, part-time schemes and shorter work weeks) to suit the needs of security officers. Several security agencies have already introduced shorter shift arrangements.
4. We thank Mrs Han for her feedback. We encourage employees who are seeking alternative work arrangements to speak to their employers. Employers who need assistance in implementing flexible work arrangements can approach MOM for assistance. If employees feel that they have been discriminated at the workplace, they can contact the Tripartite Alliance on Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP) at 6838 0969 for advice and assistance.
Why seniors end up as security guards
- The Straits Times, 16 July 2011
For the past three years, my 69-year-old mother has tried three times to secure a simple job, slicing fish, with NTUC FairPrice. Each time, the interviewer, upon finding out her age, turned her down.
During one interview, she was asked whether she was strong enough to carry goods, or quick enough at work. This puzzled her because strength and speed are not vital to a job like cutting or slicing fish. After the third try, my mother gave up. She signed up for classes to be a security guard - she was the oldest in her class - and is currently working 12-hour shifts nightly.
I shop at FairPrice daily and have encountered cashiers and fish packers who are foreigners and cannot execute a simple exchange of goods or tell me where the shrimps are without help from their local colleagues. So, I cannot help but wonder why applicants like my mother are turned down.
After my mother's experience, I am not surprised to see so many seniors working as security guards everywhere - in boutiques such as Zara in Liat Towers, VivoCity and Ngee Ann City. These are citizens who built the nation but must now stay on their feet for 12 hours daily for pay that is less than $1,500 a month. Don't they deserve less physically demanding work, especially when such jobs are available?
I hope the Ministry of Manpower will review the long hours in jobs held by people like security guards, especially if they are seniors. A more humane arrangement for them is an eight-hour shift.