by MP for Aljunied GRC, Sylvia Lim
Low wage workers do not earn enough to meet Singapore’s cost of living. The government recognizes this by introducing the Workfare Income Supplement and encouraging re-training through schemes like Workfare Training Support. I too am a strong believer in training, but for low wage workers, the outcome they seek is better employment conditions or prospects. I recognize that this is a challenging deliverable.
The Workforce Development Agency has disbursed close to $1.02 billion in grants from 2007 to 2010. To what extent has the money poured into training produced the desired results of uplifting low wages?
WDA currently carries out an annual survey on the effectiveness of its Workforce Skills Qualifications training. The survey provides a rough snapshot of the return on investment in training. According to the 2010 survey, 65% of companies reported positive outcomes in productivity after training, but only 25% of trainees experienced pay increments after training, while 44% experienced an expanded or new job scope. It appears that training is benefiting companies and making workers work harder more than it is uplifting wages.
At the Budget or National Day Rally speeches, it seems customary to highlight success stories of how some individuals have moved into higher value work after training. Are they the norm, or are they, in fact, exceptions? What proportion of low wage workers went for training but saw no improvement in their wages? What sort of tracking or return-on-investment analysis is being done?