Life and death

Last Thursday, I went round with Mr SK Lim on our normal safety inspection. This Monday (20 June) I received a call from one of the staff informing me that Mr Lim has passed away. He was 42.

It came as a shock to everyone. He was still young, had no medical conditions and was a likeable person. Went to his wake the same day. Spoke to his son (in 1st year poly) and his wife. From them, I learnt that he had complained of pains in his chest and back, but had not time to see a doctor. He had an appointment on Sat, but he passed away before Sat could come.

Time for reflection - time and tide waits for no man. We are so busy with work that we don't even have time for ourselves, family or God. We think we are indispensable. But the moment we are gone, the company will get a replacement. They may miss us for a while, but life goes on.

Spare a thought for yourself. Take a vacation with your loved ones. Time gone will not return.

Singapore vs Singapore Inc.

We love our country, Singapore. Foreigners also love our Singapore for many reasons, including cleanliness, security, corruption-free, orderliness, etc. However, since GE2011, there has been a lot of outpouring of unhappiness in the island paradise. Local Singaporeans feel shortchanged and feel that foreigners are benefitting at the expense of Singapore.

Management Model

In my opinion, the government is running Singapore like a business. Its management style is similar to those of Microsoft, 3M, Apple. How? If we look at these companies, even as they launch a new product, they are already working hard at developing a new product. Take Apple for example. Once they launch the highly successful I-phone, they have been quick to launch newer versions. This is adopted to keep ahead of competition. There have been many copycats, but apple has so far been able to keep ahead of competition.

Coming back to Singapore. In the 60s and 70s, our industry was mainly labour intensive, e.g. textile, wood. In 80s, we moved more into electronics industries. The woodworking and textile industries were in their sunset years. In the 90s, we began to face stiff competiton from other countries, such as China, Indonesia, Vietnam, for a share of the electronics pie. What would have happened if the government did not change course? Imagine ourselves still stuck with textile or woodworking industries. Our economy would be in bad shape.

So, what next? The government has been right to move into the service industry - education, medical hub, financial hub (of course I take exception to the IRs). However, there are areas that I think that can be improved on:
- the govt offered subsidised education to foreigners as we needed huge numbers of graduate engineers & other professionals. The 3-year bond was to ensure that these people return to the community. However, with the name brand of NUS and NTU, I am sure that there are sufficient numbers of students from neighbouring countries willing to study in Spore without tuition grants. Then it makes economic sense to make tertiary education as a profit generating industry.
- there is over weightage to engineering per se, given the changing nature of the industries. The polytechnics and unis should offer more courses relevant to the industry. Mid-career professionals in outdated fields should be given a fresh start in new areas with training & opportunities for re-employment.

Social impact
In the corporate world, those who cannot adapt to change, will normally be redundant and forced to leave on their own accord, or through retrenchment exercises. However, in Singapore's case, we need to change fast to continue to stay relevant, but we cannot retrench or ignore the less capable members of our society. If the poor turn to crime out of dire needs, it does not help the rest of the population. It is therefore necessary to have a system in place to ensure that they can pick themselves up and try to live decent lives. Schemes that I find was very helpful was the Job credit scheme and the SPUR program. Of course, there will always be people who take advantage of loopholes, but these helped.
The other challenge will be for the grassroots to reach out to those in need - most probably those in need would not know where to look for assistance, and some may end up in the clutches of loansharks and vices.

Singapore has progressed economically for the majority, but as humans, we may not have progressed. In pursuit of economic success, we have left behind other qualities such as compassion, graciousness. If we can develop these as well, then Singapore may truly become an island paradise.

Working beyond 65 ...

There has been a lot of discussion and debate on working beyond 65. Should we or should we not encoiurage the elderly to work? What drives the elderly to work?

What are the benefits of continual employment?
There are many benefits for the elderly to continue working.
I feel that the most important benefit is that they get to maintain their self-dignity. They don't have to rely on handouts from their children, well-wishers or even the government. When the elderly are financially indepentent, they are normally well treated and respected by their relatives. This is not to say that children will not respect their aged parents if they are not financially productive. But the elderly person will have a higher self-esteem when he/she is not dependent on others. I have met a cleaner who is sent to work by her son in a Lexus. She said that she felt bored staying at home.

The other benefit is that it keep the brain and the body active. Those who are financially free (i.e. they have income without having to work) need not necessarily have to work for a salary. Many of them volunteer in religious institutions, charitable & non-profit organisations, etc.

What drives the elderly people to work?
I don't know when this concept of retirement and pension came about (I have to find out more on this). There is no such thing as a retirement age if you are self employed. Back in olden days when agriculture and trade formed the backbone of economy, people used to work as long as they could work. So today, why are the elderly working beyond their 'retirement' age?
1. They want to remain active physically and mentally
2. They need the money to make ends meet.

Should we legislate employment of the elderly? I think not. By legislating that employers re-employ the elderly, we are depriving up and coming youngsters from employment opportunities. We are seeing this problem in Japan, France. The young are unhappy that the old are clinging on to jobs that could have been released to them. When economy is good, employers will be forced to re-employ the elderly to meet their manpower needs (of course, we should limit foreign imports)