WP Youth Wing SG100 Conference – 3 October 2015

WP Youth Wing SG100 Conference – 3 October 2015

WP Youth Wing SG100 Conference – 3 October 2015

In light of the recently-concluded GE2015, the WP Youth Wing has decided to rework the focus and format of our SG100 Conference. The Conference will now serve as a brainstorming and discussion platform for us to better understand the aspirations of Singaporean youths and how we can realise these aspirations.

The two brainstorming sessions will be chaired and facilitated by WP youth members and volunteers who were involved in GE2015. The Conference is a closed door event, and is only open to youths 18 to 40 years of age who are either existing party members and volunteers, or who have the intention of becoming WP volunteers.

Note: Please be advised that we will not be conducting a post-mortem of the recently-concluded GE2015 during the Conference.


  • Date: 3 October 2015, Saturday
  • Time: 1pm to 5pm
  • Venue: The Agora, Midview City, Sin Ming Lane

Due to limited seats, registration is compulsory. Please fill in the form here to sign up. Those who are not registered will be turned away at the door. Registration is only complete if you receive an email confirmation from us.


  • Opening remarks by Daniel Goh
  • Brainstorming Session 1: What are the aspirations of Singaporean youths for SG100? Chairs: He Ting Ru and Ron Tan
  • Tea Break
  • Brainstorming Session 2: How can Singaporean youths contribute towards SG100? Chairs: Bernard Chen and Cheryl Loh
  • Closing summation by Md Fairoz and Redzwan

For any enquiries about the conference, please contact Md Fairoz at fairoz.shariff@wp.sg

7 thoughts on “WP Youth Wing SG100 Conference – 3 October 2015

  1. Roland Chia Siang Chin

    I’m Roland Chia and will turn 41 this year. I think I’m overage to be youth wing but myself and my Wife would like to be WP volunteer. Cheers.

  2. Irene Choo

    I hope to attend the conference though I am likely too old to be included in the “Youth” team”
    In case I am unable to make it (due to my family commitments), please allow me to share my concerns on the lack of protection for our PMEs, which can reduce empowerment, and jeopardizes our young’s dream of upward social mobility.
    The following is a copy of my latest letter to TR Emeritus (not published yet) calling for a change in our Employment Act (EA) to include all PMEs and implement laws against unfair employment practices. I hope Workers Party had help to push for a change in this direction.
    Title: Overqualified, Underemployed – exacerbated by lawlessness

    I am a concerned mother who is deeply worried about the future of my children.

    The threat of unscrupulous and discriminatory employment practices that favours foreigners over locals can be felt across the nation, from low wage earners to top-salaried professionals. While the government has stepped up efforts to help the displaced workers, the initiatives may be too passive and too little to fully address the root of the problems.

    It is widely reported that Singapore PMEs had been squeezed out of employment due to an influx of cheaper but not necessary more qualified foreigners. Professionals holding top key positions in MNCs are also facing similar threats of whimsical dismissals, except, they are more likely to be replaced by more expensive expatriates, who are not necessarily more superior, in terms of qualifications, competency and experience.

    This is a worrisome trend, and can do more harm than good to our economic and social development.

    During my research to gain clearer insights of protection against unreasonable dismissals, I was shock to learn that PMEs earning more than $4,500 a month are not covered under the general provisions of the Employment Act, including redress against unfair dismissal, paid sick leave etc. Is this reasonable?

    Perhaps, you and your readers help verify some of my findings, which I had posted in “UP for PME” Facebook page (NTUC) earlier (denoted in italic font)
    1. Is it true PMEs earning above $4500/month are excluded from the basic floor rights under the Employment Act (Part IV), which covers rest days, hours of work, overtime, annual leave, retrenchment and retirement benefits, annual wage supplement and variable payments?”?
    2. Is it true Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) compliance is not mandatory?
    3. Is it true less than 6% of total 77,000 registered companies have pledged to comply to FCF guidelines, though FCF was introduced 2 years ago?
    4. Is it true the cost of compliance is higher than the cost of non-compliance?
    5. Is it true “moral suasion” approach can be immoral & hence, rarely used in isolation to resolve economic problems in the real world?

    If true, can please help explain how to ensure prejudice against Singapore job applicants can be removed; and Singapore core in the workplace can be successfully established when
    1. Most PMEs basic rights to fair employment is not recognised and protected by law
    2. Discriminatory employment practices against SG applicants is legal and not prohibited by law
    3. Employers have no legal obligation NOT to subscribe to unscrupulous employment practices; no clear punishment for delinquency; and no proper channel of redress for victims of abuse.

    It seems impertinent to assume private operators will have the innate sense of morality to contribute to the building of our “National Excellence” without “direct suasion”; It would be naive to assume the ubiquitous practice of favouritism, nepotism and cronyism in the workplace can be deterred without clear regulations and punishment; and lastly, PMEs are not “the doyens of the workforce” and neither do they command so much bargaining power that they do not need any protections against unscrupulous employment practices.

    Hence, it is critical for the incumbent to review and amend our outdated law for the modern economy. Not only should EA be extended to all PMEs, we also need to implement a set of clear authoritative standards, to install discipline & ensure accountability to prevent and combat exploitation.

    But policy makers may deem the call for greater protection for our workers and defense against discriminatory employment practices as Protectionism; a GREAT SATAN, that jeopardises free market mechanism, and curbs economic growth. But is their fear valid?

    Perhaps, our policy makers have over-rated the value of foreign talents and over-estimated their contribution, while under-estimating the threats of unfair competition from abroad. Perhaps, they should re-examine the implications of the following observations:

    • Foreign PMEs may be cheaper but not necessary more superior.
    • Unqualified Foreign PMEs are unfairly remunerated with better salary.
    • Foreign PMEs do not help create more job opportunities, instead, they lower morale and reduce productivity.

    When our high skilled workers are driven into low skilled jobs such as taxi drivers, security guards, freelancers, contract workers & etc, it causes much grievances and financial hardship on families. On the national level, our own valuable human resources is forced to go into “idle”; leading to lower efficiency; and causes our economy to operate below its optimal level. Hence, we are worst off in the long run, for failure to provide adequate protection for our workers to fend off unfair competition that jeopardises efficient distribution of resources and undermines productivity.

    If you believe in empowering our future, please stand up for more protection for our PMEs. Please say NO to unscrupulous, discriminatory employment practices against our PMEs. Let us help restore confidence in our core values based on meritocracy, justice and equality.

    May the door to success is opened for our young, once again.

    Thank you.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *