Gukubird Neutral Newbie February 8, 2012 Share February 8, 2012 SINGAPORE: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said employers' contribution rates to the Central Provident Fund for older workers have to go up, but added that any increases will have to be gradual. Mr Lee revealed this at a pre-Budget dialogue with unionists last week. Currently, CPF contribution rates are cut when workers reach 50 years old, and cut further when they turn 65. The labour movement, NTUC, has been calling for this to be reviewed. This too, comes at a time when Singaporeans are being encouraged to work beyond their retirement. Mr Lee said the government is discussing the matter with unions and employers. But cost is a consideration. He noted for instance, that a larger proportion of older workers kept their jobs during the recession, because their CPF was lower, and so they were cheaper to retain. The government's concern here, is that once older workers lose their jobs, it's much harder for them to get back to work. Source :Increase CPF contribution to older workers I am not too sure about this proposal, with the readily available cheaper and better FT, will this scheme encourage company to retain older workers? ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman888 Moderator February 8, 2012 Share February 8, 2012 it is definitely a cost to the company and it is a valid point that once the older employee lost their job, it is not easy to get it back since ft is readily available. unless the additional cpf contribute come from the govt to top up their cpf accounts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ladykillerz 4th Gear February 8, 2012 Share February 8, 2012 it is definitely a cost to the company and it is a valid point that once the older employee lost their job, it is not easy to get it back since ft is readily available. unless the additional cpf contribute come from the govt to top up their cpf accounts. i am just guessing, the main fund is diluting. the best solution is to squeeze more from any sources, even the old ones. initially, CPF is a form of fund whereby, one is retired, he/she can use the money for retirement. this country is somehow unique, which decide the country citizen on the retirement age. got to agree with Jman888, no point considering to squeeze from the employers or the employees. if the govt is sooooo concerned about this issue, why not the additional contribute comes from the govt? think deep about it, you should guess the actual motive behind the scene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ngck 3rd Gear February 8, 2012 Share February 8, 2012 i think it because the youngsters who buy HDB now will have to top up quite alot of cash when they reach their 40s and 50s. they are telling you HDB prices will not come down, cannot pay, they will "help" you by raising CPF rates. after squeeze peasants dry, they turn to squeeze the employers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Without_a_car Clutched February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 i think it because the youngsters who buy HDB now will have to top up quite alot of cash when they reach their 40s and 50s. they are telling you HDB prices will not come down, cannot pay, they will "help" you by raising CPF rates. after squeeze peasants dry, they turn to squeeze the employers. by raising the HDB income ceiling to $10,000 for normal flats, and $12,000 for EC, with the CPF contribution cap set at $5,000. If they don't raise the contribution, after 55, a lot people who took their mortgage at 30 at the maximum loan limit will have problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watwheels Supersonic February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 They cannot dun do anything cos of the significant increase in inflation, older workers have to work harder & longer hours. As anyone grows older they will also need more medical care. Actually in the first place should not cut their CPF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayleigh 6th Gear February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 (edited) i am just guessing, the main fund is diluting. the best solution is to squeeze more from any sources, even the old ones. initially, CPF is a form of fund whereby, one is retired, he/she can use the money for retirement. this country is somehow unique, which decide the country citizen on the retirement age. got to agree with Jman888, no point considering to squeeze from the employers or the employees. if the govt is sooooo concerned about this issue, why not the additional contribute comes from the govt? think deep about it, you should guess the actual motive behind the scene. I dun think so. Based on statistic of Singapore, majority of elderly are earning 2k or less per month. The marginal increase in the CPF contributions and taken collectively is not significant. If the intent is sincerely for the old age, let's not double guess the good intent and stir it . Edited February 9, 2012 by Rayleigh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayleigh 6th Gear February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 They cannot dun do anything cos of the significant increase in inflation, older workers have to work harder & longer hours. As anyone grows older they will also need more medical care. Actually in the first place should not cut their CPF. Can't agree more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windwaver Turbocharged February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 They cannot dun do anything cos of the significant increase in inflation, older workers have to work harder & longer hours. As anyone grows older they will also need more medical care. Actually in the first place should not cut their CPF. I agree with this but as usual there're ways around this problem to employers . The big problem is most bosses are unwilling to share profits with workers. How many bosses are genuinely rewarding people when the economy is doing well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustank Hypersonic February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 I agree with this but as usual there're ways around this problem to employers . The big problem is most bosses are unwilling to share profits with workers. How many bosses are genuinely rewarding people when the economy is doing well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cars08 1st Gear February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 I agree with this but as usual there're ways around this problem to employers . The big problem is most bosses are unwilling to share profits with workers. How many bosses are genuinely rewarding people when the economy is doing well? When u become a boss..u will focus more on enriching urself...n if u cant get ppl to work for u..kpkb to garment get more foreign workers...profit maximisation.... who gives a damn to those working below as long as they dun screw up...give them a few pennies when nearing festive season probably...sharing profits...a...most towkays will tell u fat hope...as back in their mind is either a bigger hse or a bigger car... give out profit means less to spend and expand... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kangadrool Supersonic February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 Bosses always reward themselves gao gao first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustank Hypersonic February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 When u become a boss..u will focus more on enriching urself...n if u cant get ppl to work for u..kpkb to garment get more foreign workers...profit maximisation.... who gives a damn to those working below as long as they dun screw up...give them a few pennies when nearing festive season probably...sharing profits...a...most towkays will tell u fat hope...as back in their mind is either a bigger hse or a bigger car... give out profit means less to spend and expand... Badder? sianz leh, badder long time never come in liao Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerwoods Turbocharged February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 i am just guessing, the main fund is diluting. the best solution is to squeeze more from any sources, even the old ones. initially, CPF is a form of fund whereby, one is retired, he/she can use the money for retirement. this country is somehow unique, which decide the country citizen on the retirement age. got to agree with Jman888, no point considering to squeeze from the employers or the employees. if the govt is sooooo concerned about this issue, why not the additional contribute comes from the govt? think deep about it, you should guess the actual motive behind the scene. They have invested every cent into the world stock markets and from recent poor market performance they have lost heavily since 2008. They where got money to contribute to you ? Ya probably in the form of increasing the Interest Rate in your CPF loh.. Squeeze from Employer is correct. In the 1st place, why discriminate Older workers from younger ones ? If Employer is feeling the pinch = reduce Corporate Tax to the level of Hong Kong to what 17% ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Without_a_car Clutched February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 They cannot dun do anything cos of the significant increase in inflation, older workers have to work harder & longer hours. As anyone grows older they will also need more medical care. Actually in the first place should not cut their CPF. back then the mortgage was 20 years, they were thinking by 55 the worker would have paid off their mortgage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cars08 1st Gear February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 Badder? sianz leh, badder long time never come in liao Dun associate me w badder lah... nt clone....confirm chop & stamp... u referring to this one rite... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustank Hypersonic February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 Dun associate me w badder lah... nt clone....confirm chop & stamp... u referring to this one rite... aiyah i am saying the red words are badder's favourite Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singaporean1965 Neutral Newbie February 9, 2012 Share February 9, 2012 "We are madoffed".... Quoted from the book "The man who stole $65 billion" ↡ Advertisement Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
Safety or money first?
Safety or money first?
No basis for employers to cut pay if flexi-work does not affect productivity: Gan Siow Huang
No basis for employers to cut pay if flexi-work does not affect productivity: Gan Siow Huang
Singapore family sets up vending machine outside home, offering free drinks for workers
Singapore family sets up vending machine outside home, offering free drinks for workers
Want to reverse aging? Do this now!
Want to reverse aging? Do this now!
Managers Exploit Loyal Workers Over Less Committed Colleagues
Managers Exploit Loyal Workers Over Less Committed Colleagues
From Singapore to Thailand, Asia dangles visas to lure high-fliers
From Singapore to Thailand, Asia dangles visas to lure high-fliers
Suzuki Jimny and Every mate to create cute "Jimry" baby van
Suzuki Jimny and Every mate to create cute "Jimry" baby van
Survival of the fittest, we shouldn't waste anymore pocket money
Survival of the fittest, we shouldn't waste anymore pocket money