Raising Wages In Johor Not Enough To Stop People Working In Singapore

---

 

From P Ramasamy
I might superficially agree with Johor DAP chief Liew Chin Tong that higher wages in his state might attract talent to the state.
Specifically, paying two-thirds of the Singapore salary might allow workers to rethink the option to work in Singapore instead of Johor.
Of course, Liew qualifies his argument by saying that the rise in wages is something long-term predicated on the notion of high-end investments to Johore.
As the new state opposition leader, his idea of upgrading the salary of workers in Johor is something that the newly-elected state government should think about.
Having said this, I am not sure that the mere upgrading of wages to two-thirds the level of salaries in Singapore is as straightforward as he might think.
High-end investments and talent are important in the upward wage movement among workers. Unfortunately, the payment of wages to the level near that of Singapore is more easily said than done.
Low wages are often equated with low productivity of workers, the infamous argument employers often invoke to deny wage increases.
But a more important argument in favour of high wages is whether or not workers are talented, have the required skills and others.
It is on the basic skill requirement that high wages might not be defended, but surely not depressed low wages.
Even if we accept the argument of wage differentials on the basis of talent and productivity, the present wage system in Johor or the country as a whole cannot be defended.
I am not sure when talking about wages, whether Liew was referring to the workforce in Johor as a whole or just the manufacturing and service sectors.
Even if an argument can be pursued to raise wage levels in the manufacturing and service sectors near that of Singapore, then what about the agricultural sector. Here, I am referring to the plantation sector where the production of palm oil is the major preoccupation.
Wages in the plantation sector are extremely low compared with the other two sectors.
It is preposterous to think of raising wages among plantation workers near to that of wages in Singapore. The curse of forced labour will forbid it.
There are no plantations in Singapore, since its economy is a modern industrial one.
How can we miss the phenomenon of forced labour that is crippling to the rise of wages in Johor or in Malaysia as a whole.
By the way, forced labour is not just confined to the plantations, but is also quite pervasive in manufacturing establishments that rely on cheap and malleable labour.
I am not sure why Liew in his enthusiasm about wage increase, ignored the phenomenon of forced labour in Johor.
Malaysia is an attraction to foreign multinational companies because of the subdued nature of labour.
The minimal strength of trade unions and the pro-employer policies by the Malaysian government act as powerful incentives for investments in manufacturing and services.
Given this, how are we to increase wages when there exist forces that are inimical to the long term interests of labour.
Worker repression in Singapore
It is not that Singapore is heaven for the working class. In fact, despite high wages in comparison to Malaysia, the repression of workers is much more severe there.
Wages might be high in Singapore in comparison to Malaysia, but such a fact might not make sense to the notion of working class freedom in Singapore.
It is not that workers have more freedom in Malaysia or Johor, but the situation is relatively better to that of Singapore.
The corporatist model of trade unionism in Singapore militates against labour gains.
Malaysia has a poor variant of this model in the form of a tripartite arrangement that allows for labour manoeuvrability.
Of course, wages are high in Singapore not in absolute terms, but in relative terms.
The difference between Johor and Singapore is more reflective of the nature of development than anything else.
In this sense, comparing the labour situation in Johor with Singapore might not really address the matter of low wages in Johor.
In fact, I would have expected Liew to take a more objective look at the labour situation in the state by factoring not just the manufacturing and services sectors, but also the plantation sector.
In that sense, comparing the labour scenario in Johor with that of Singapore might not make any sense at all.
If the comparison was made to prevent workers from Johor from moving to Singapore, then even the levelling of wages might not make any sense.
Thousands of workers travel daily to work in Singapore. They prefer to work in Singapore with a higher salary compared with working in Johor.
With the savings from their hard-earned money, they have bought houses and invested in properties because of the lower cost of living and depressed property market.
In a sense, they have enjoyed the benefits of two worlds.
I am sure if they had been paid two-thirds the salary in Johor, they would most likely still prefer to work in Singapore.
Liew misses the point that it is not salary alone but there are other variables that need to be taken into account as to why workers have a preference for Singapore if they can help it.
The daily journey to Singapore is a nightmare, but it is still worth it considering the pittance they get in Johor plus the demeaning aspects of racial and religious politics. - FMT
P Ramasamy is Penang deputy chief minister II.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.

---