Mr Lim, the secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) had mentioned whether there are alternatives for DBS and The Union to explore reducing costs and save jobs - from a flexible wage system to flexible work arrangements.
However, DBS has defended its decision, saying that cuts affected 3.5 per cent of junior ranks, compared to 16 per cent of senior management.
DBS had also said that a hiring freeze had been in place before the bank decided to retrench 900 staff.
The bank also said it had considered cutting wages, but decided against it due to different labour laws in countries where the bank has branches in.
DBS mentioned there is duplication or redundancy of departments and so they have to layoff staffs.
So does it means that DBS only started to realized these after so long? And that they decided to lay off these people in bad time, during the festive and school holiday period?
Reporters and the media should dare to ask questions like: “Could the lay-offs have been avoided? What other measures did the group look at before deciding to take the present drastic action?, Or were they more concerned in increasing the bottomline and maintaining profit margins than in protecting jobs?, And who are the ones that are going to be laid off at DBS? Are they going to be the so-called non-performers, the underperformers, or those that led DBS into its unfortunate encounter with the Lehman Brothers Mini-Bonds and the DBS High Notes 2 and 5?
Yes, some cutbacks in staff by companies cannot be avoided. But why is streamlining done only during a downturn? Why can’t companies here run a tight ship even in good times, so that the chances of resorting to lay-offs and retrenchment are slimmer?
Too many companies have gone on a hiring binge in good times.
No comments:
Post a Comment