Parliamentary Speech on Employment Act
Mr Speaker, Sir, for some years, the Workers’ Party had highlighted that the definition of employee in the Employment Act was too restrictive. The current definition before this amendment excluded from the Act those who were holding jobs in confidential, executive or managerial positions, even if their salaries were not high and they needed protection under the Act.
We therefore welcome the broadening of the definition of employee to include those in confidential positions. We note that the Bill also includes those in executive or management role with a salary of up to $2,500 for the purpose of Part III on payment of salary. This will allow such employees to claim salary arrears or seek recourse for unfair dismissal through the Ministry of Manpower rather than to sue in court which is costly and most of them cannot afford.
However, Sir, I would like the Minister to clarify the scope of clause 13 on working hours for shift workers. Clause 13 proposes to insert a new subsection 40(2A) to provide that an employee may be required to work longer than 44 hours per week, average of three consecutive weeks, to work on rest days and even to work more than 12 hours a day. The situation where this may be allowed will include work essential to the life of the community, defence or security. Sir, I can understand the need for this if a sudden crisis takes place, like where there are mass casualties. Working such prolonged hours on a one-off basis is understandable.
However, the section is wide enough to capture a situation of non-emergency where security manpower is deployed for, say, 15 hours on a daily basis. Is this section needed due to manpower shortage? From a human factor’s point of view, is this good for public security? Since employees are now allowed under the new amendment to continuously work for such long hours without adequate rest, in moving this amendment, did the Minister consider the long-term effect on the health of such employees? I also wonder whether this amendment contradicts the concept of work-life balance which the Government has been promoting.
Video Link: 18 Nov 2008 – Employment Amendment Bill (Low Thia Khiang)
