Most Read
Most Commented
Read more like this
mk-logo
From Our Readers
‘Unemployment insurance scheme keeps retrenched workers off the job’

The proposal to set up an Unemployment Insurance Scheme (UIS) by the Human Resources Ministry to manage retrenched workers in this country is completely out of touch with today’s economic and employment realities. Here's why.

First, the UIS makes leisure more attractive than employment.

This, however, is not to say that the retrenched workers will deliberately prolong their search for new job but with a pool of several thousands of retrenched workers, surely the scheme will draw people into a dependency relationship with the government, will have potential abuses or fraud.

For example, a person who knows he is eligible for it is more likely to leave his current job more readily and once unemployed, he will not actively search for new job and preferring to live on the insurance money a while longer.

Suppose you win RM20 million in a four-digit draw today. What happens to your willingness to working at current job? You start taking work for granted and feel like quitting, right? Because you think the money is more than enough to cover your basic expenses. The same result applies when you are receiving the UIS.

Second, the scheme is said to promote and opportunities for re-skilling and upskilling.

Contrary to this belief, it encourages preservation of old skills and discourages new learning and new skills.

How do we re-skill and upskill the retrenched workers while they can afford to be choosy in searching for new jobs?

If they insist on getting high wages, and if they are not offered by high wages, they will stay unemployed as long as possible.

When this happens, as times goes by, they not only lose hope but also suffer erosion of their work skills and attitude.

Working on any level usually broadens skill and ability and adds valuable experience that improves productivity.

Unfortunately these retrenched workers who are relatively weak economic actors and are willing to work for lower wages cannot get employed since their ability is stripped away by the government, namely, through the minimum wage.

How to employ them when the scheme puts an extra financial burden on employers who already suffering from a business downturn which keeps their labour costs up and their demand for labour down?

Whether it will provide an incentive to workers to work less or disincentivise employers from hiring more workers, the result will be the same, higher unemployment.

Uninsurable risk?

Lastly, if the UIS is so great, why not let insurance companies provide it?

To assess risks inherent in every conceivable set of conditions for every specific pool of workers effectively is not the job of any minister. It’s impossible.

The minister could argue that private insurers would assume that unemployment is an uninsurable risk and would have created some sort of moral hazard.

It’s like giving insurance for the risk of not feeling good in the morning and not getting out of bed to work.

If I were insured against the risk and getting paid whenever I don’t feel good, I would spend far more time in bed.

If insurance companies created such a perverse incentive structure, which I believe they won't, the result is bankruptcy.

And he would be absolutely right. But so does the government.

The bottom line here is that the UIS being advocated by the government and unions to subsidise the retrenched workers will keep them off the jobs.

ADS