BTO flat buyers face longer wait amid labour and supply strains

[investor101]

Some workers also suggested ideas for improvements in the workplace. Some ideas helped to save the company tens of thousands of dollars a year. But the worker only got paid $100 one-time for the idea.

So, workers get the impression that any increase in productivity will not benefit them in the long run. So why bother to increase productivity? After a while, you discover that the the company will run out of steam for innovation and progress, since the rewards are not shared with the workers over the long term.

It is for this reason that some workers stay as workers forever and fail to improve and move up. The ability to see problems and help company to save cost or improve profitability is an asset in itself and the individual should try to develop it as much as possible - this is value adding to his own ability. Employers will be able to see this and reward accordingly in time to come.

What reward scheme would you come up with say for an idea that saves costs by $10,000 a year if you are the employer?

If a worker can give me an idea that saves costs by $10,000 each year, I don't mind raising his pay permanently and let him share in the fruits of the cost-savings measure.

Ability to see help company is an asset in itself? Sounds a tad too socialist or religious to me. Most people perform better when there is an incentive to do so, including offer places in heaven or attainment of nirvana.

[CityFarmer]

Some workers also suggested ideas for improvements in the workplace. Some ideas helped to save the company tens of thousands of dollars a year. But the worker only got paid $100 one-time for the idea.

So, workers get the impression that any increase in productivity will not benefit them in the long run. So why bother to increase productivity? After a while, you discover that the the company will run out of steam for innovation and progress, since the rewards are not shared with the workers over the long term.

It is for this reason that some workers stay as workers forever and fail to improve and move up. The ability to see problems and help company to save cost or improve profitability is an asset in itself and the individual should try to develop it as much as possible - this is value adding to his own ability. Employers will be able to see this and reward accordingly in time to come.

What reward scheme would you come up with say for an idea that saves costs by $10,000 a year if you are the employer?

If a worker can give me an idea that saves costs by $10,000 each year, I don't mind raising his pay permanently and let him share in the fruits of the cost-savings measure.

Ability to see help company is an asset in itself? Sounds a tad too socialist or religious to me. Most people perform better when there is an incentive to do so, including offer places in heaven or attainment of nirvana.

"Ability to help company is an asset" sound like a religious? I see it more real than S$ salary received.

I agree people perform better when there is an incentive, but the incentive is not ONLY restricted to money. More other incentives are proven more effective.

[egghead]

If a worker can give me an idea that saves costs by $10,000 each year, I don't mind raising his pay permanently and let him share in the fruits of the cost-savings measure.

Good for you. I would have considered if a worker is a one-trick pony before giving a more permanent reward. If that worker is able to consistently generate ideas, it shows that he has the ability and talent. I will be stupid to let him go to my competitor. Come to think of it, it is no different from investment - you need consistent performance to show that your success in one particular trade or year is no fluke.

Ability to see help company is an asset in itself? Sounds a tad too socialist or religious to me. Most people perform better when there is an incentive to do so, including offer places in heaven or attainment of nirvana.

You are entitled to your own view on this and I won't go any further than here.

[yeokiwi]

Any boss of construction company here to share his/her views?

[investor101]

Some workers also suggested ideas for improvements in the workplace. Some ideas helped to save the company tens of thousands of dollars a year. But the worker only got paid $100 one-time for the idea.

So, workers get the impression that any increase in productivity will not benefit them in the long run. So why bother to increase productivity? After a while, you discover that the the company will run out of steam for innovation and progress, since the rewards are not shared with the workers over the long term.

It is for this reason that some workers stay as workers forever and fail to improve and move up. The ability to see problems and help company to save cost or improve profitability is an asset in itself and the individual should try to develop it as much as possible - this is value adding to his own ability. Employers will be able to see this and reward accordingly in time to come.

What reward scheme would you come up with say for an idea that saves costs by $10,000 a year if you are the employer?

If a worker can give me an idea that saves costs by $10,000 each year, I don't mind raising his pay permanently and let him share in the fruits of the cost-savings measure.

Ability to see help company is an asset in itself? Sounds a tad too socialist or religious to me. Most people perform better when there is an incentive to do so, including offer places in heaven or attainment of nirvana.

"Ability to help company is an asset" sound like a religious? I see it more real than S$ salary received.

I agree people perform better when there is an incentive, but the incentive is not ONLY restricted to money. More other incentives are proven more effective.

Wish more bosses and executives felt the same way when determining their own pay. I noticed that in the recent two decades, the pay gap between senior executives vs normal PMET or blue collar worker is fast growing bigger and bigger. Bankers also demand larger bonuses and money-related rewards, rather than non-monetary rewards.

Non-monetary rewards, especially medals and awards or pat on the backs, are often given to most workers. Very few executives actually want those. Check out their growing salaries and bonuses.

One other incentive I know of is better work-life balance.

[natnavi]

The article below provides one of the answers as to why construction workers in Singapore are looked down.

Such perception of others is unhealthy, and it will only breed disrespect for others. We should start raising their wages and not artificially suppress their wages by bringing in FWs that are not needed. We do not have to rely on FWs but we can always improve productivity though equipment upgrades. If we do not start changing, the future for Singaporean's morality looks bleak.

It is always important to remember that every individual in the society is important to help the society run. It is like how the @$$hole may look insignificant compared to the other parts of the body, but close it up, and the rest of the body will start to break down.

------------------------------------------------------------

Executive-focused society in Singapore 'is bizarre'

Joy Fang
My Paper
Monday, Mar 25, 2013

SINGAPORE - Singapore is too fixated on producing professional, managerial, executive and technician (PMET) jobs for Singaporeans, and this mindset creates a problem, said economics professor Linda Lim yesterday at a population-policy forum.

Prof Lim, who is a University of Michigan business-school professor, said that if so much emphasis is placed on such high-skilled jobs, the prestige of lower-skilled occupations, such as bus drivers and carpenters, would be low.

So, citizens would typically not take up these jobs, as is the case, with foreigners filling in instead.

"It is bizarre to have a society where we have only PMETs and everyone wants to be a PMET. If you have that kind of society, of course you would need foreigners," she said.

Pointing out a sentence in the Government's January Population White Paper, which said that Singaporeans "aspire to be in higher-skilled and more rewarding work", Prof Lim said that this is already a value judgment by the authorities.

It suggests that being a bus driver is low-skilled, unrewarding and a job for foreigners, she said.

"Why is it only us who cannot do our own low-skilled work?'

She further questioned why it was that only Singaporeans considered these jobs low-skilled and not deserving of good pay or respect.

The forum was organised by the University of Michigan Alumni in Singapore. Held at The American Club, it was attended by 120 academics, business owners and alumni members.

Prof Lim noted that Singapore currently sets a maximum-growth target and works towards that, pumping in foreigners when the country comes up short on labour. But she questioned why there was a need to set "unrealistic" growth targets and try to attain them.

On Singapore's fertility issues, demography expert and former chief statistician Paul Cheung, who also spoke, said it is vital to tackle it by starting with the perceptions of Singaporeans first.

He said: "People in Singapore may be too caught up with their own careers and the trappings of urban living. I think they have forgotten about certain basic elements, such as human relationships and family values. We need to go back to the basics."