WDA is a statutory board of the MOM

The Singapore Workforce Development Agency (Abbreviation: WDA; Chinese: 新加坡劳动力发展局) is a statutory board under the Ministry of Manpower of the Singapore Government.

What is productivity?
What are the statistics for the real 20th percentile and the median wage growth (excluding employer CPF contribution) for all Singaporean workers (full-time and part-time) for the last 5 and 10 years?
How is rise in living standard for Singaporeans defined?

"Over the past decade, Singapore’s economy grew by an average of 5% per annum. Singapore’s productivity growth over the same period averaged about 1% per annum, a rate on par with that of other developed countries. The broad majority of Singaporeans also enjoyed real wage growth and a rise in living standards." - Really?
http://www.mom.gov.sg/skills-training-and-development/productivity/Pages/what-is-productivity.aspx

Who were the people involved in the study?
Did it involve all industries?
What is the sample size?
Can the actual number of people and statistics' results be shown to the public?

An independent Longitudinal Study initiated by the Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA) in 2012 found that individuals who achieved (SOAs) received higher wages compared to those without SOAs.
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/singapore-employees-complete-wda-training-012700018.html

How is the $13 million being spent?
How many companies (of what size) have received the funding in which industries and how has low-wage Singaporeans benefited, as well as how many Singaporean workers? How many received a pay rise and by how much after completing the training?

To nudge more firms to help workers upgrade their skills to earn higher pay, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and the Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA) yesterday launched a $13 million training fund for those in the oil, petrochemical, energy and chemical sectors.
http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20121108-382178.html

How many Singaporeans did sign up for the programme?
Can there be elaboration on the number of Singaporeans who are showing support towards this?

Retirees and housewives are spurning a government scheme to woo them to work as security guards.
Launched a year ago, the programme that targets the two groups to ease manpower shortage in the security sector has not taken off, revealed the Singapore Police Force and Workforce Development Agency (WDA).
Why? Is it because primarily that the pay per hour as computed from the media reports last August when the scheme was launched - was only about $4?
http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20130716-437563.html

Money is being spent to groom Singaporeans or foreigners?
Did WDA ensure jobs are going to Singaporeans?
How many of the 32,500 employment change (jobs created) in the last quarter went to Singaporeans, PRs and foreigners? (Note: the number of unemployed locals increased by 25,300 to 83,000 (non-seasonally adjusted) last quarter and the non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Singaporeans increased to 4 per cent)
So, does this mean that most of the jobs created did not go to Singaporeans?

Singapore has experienced a huge influx of people, particularly in the past 10 years or so. Our population has surged from four million in 2000 to 5.3 million last year. As our citizen growth rate has remained relatively low, the proportion of PRs and foreigners has increased.
Why is it that despite the consistent rhetoric in the last two years or so that the influx of foreign workers and immigration will be curtailed - the population growth rate of foreigners and PRs increased from 2011 to 2012, according to the Department of Statistics?
http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/foreigner-influx-matter-too-many-too-fast-20130301


BY: Han Hui Hui and Leong Sze Hian

If Singapore Government’s Statutory Boards can sue Singapore citizens for defamation, you will be sued for defamation as asking question will cast doubt on the credibility and integrity of the WDA as well as the manner in which the WDA conducts its affairs and/or business, giving rise to an imputation that the WDA is dishonest and/or unethical.

No comments:

Post a Comment