In reply, Mr Giam contended that it was “ridiculous” for any ruling party not to get good relationships with unions.
He claimed that the WP wanted to “untether the NTUC from the PAP and free up loyalists to become independent advocates for employees in Singapore.”
At this point, NTUC deputy secretary-general Desmond Tan ( PAP-Pasir Ris-Punggol ) asked Mr Giam for data points or personal experience showing that union leaders face restrictions speaking up.
Following Monday’s discussion, the older minister of state in the Prime Minister’s Office shared comments from union leaders where they disagreed with Mr. Giam’s description of their experience.
Mr. Giam then inquired about “any instances where the NTUC has taken a public place that has recently been opposed to federal policy.”
Mr. Tan referred to the fresh SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support program, claiming that the government initially disagreed but eventually agreed after NTUC raised the issue for 14 years.
Pritam Singh, the leader of the opposition, aljunied the discussion, and Dr. Koh’s feedback on the WP, including the state that the celebration was opposed to peaceful bilateral relations, were later refuted.
Regarding Dr. Koh’s statement regarding the WP’s establishment, Mr. Singh also noted that it “disregards an important point that more than 60 years have passed and the political climate has drastically and considerably changed.”
He referred to a 1966 NTUC publication in which finally NTUC secretary-general Ho See Beng” took issue with government leaders, especially the perfect minister, for speaking unceasingly of labour’s obligations while almost touching on labour’s rights and major grievances”.
Mr. Singh questioned Dr. Koh if he could provide an “exemplary of an instance in which an NTUC secretary-general or a lieutenant secretary-general has spoken out against a 3G or 4G president to defend the rights of employees.”
” Now, I’m not suggesting that this is the check or the gold common,” I said. But this comes to the center of what people see and believe to be a conflict of interest”, said the WP secretary-general.
” And when NTUC members are saying’ majulah PAP’, I think people are entitled to issue, do you talk for the group first? Or do you start off by speaking for employees?
” The point is never about moving Singapore in a way where employers, employees, employees, state, fight each other to the detriment of our nation and our economic growth, “he said.
Party objectives cannot be more crucial than those of our staff.
A symbiotic relationship does not mean that the NTUC has been neutered or is unable to publicly talk out in the interests of staff, according to Mr. Singh, adding that he had no reason to believe rank-and-file NTUC people do not speak out for employees.
Dr Koh replied:” Just because the Workers ‘ Party lost the relationship with worker unions long ago, does n’t mean that because we can preserve the relationship for 60 years, there’s something wrong with a symbiotic relationship”.
There is no issue of losing a relation in any way, Mr. Singh said.
Dr. Tan closed the discussion by sharing an anecdote from the immediate former head of the Singapore National Employers Federation ( SNEF ).
Contrary to the theory that organisations in Singapore are poor, Dr. Robert Yap had stated to a unusual counterpart that” the unions these are powerful because they get what they want without striking.”
Dr. Tan claimed that the strength of the bilateral structure was that it produced advantageous results through dialogue rather than confrontational openness, and without disturbance.
The government’s official counsel also advised the House to “look at the history” of what tripartism has accomplished for Singapore.
” Collectively, we’ve protected jobs, we have created security, we have ensured wealth for our employees, our companies. I hope we can continue”.