In his National Day Rally speech, the Prime Minister revealed plans to create an environment conducive for couples to have and raise children. These measures were targeted at addressing the practical problems that child-rearing couples may face. These are also to “signal where we must change our mindsets and norms…” Among the measures being considered are ideas to improve and encourage work-life balance. The PM said paternity leave will be introduced, and renewed efforts in place to promote flexible work arrangements and improve work culture and employer attitudes.
Will work-life balance measures hurt business performance?
*The invited contributors featured in this forum are giving their first reactions to the PM’s speech.
We welcome your comments and opinion as well.
————————
Elaine Ee, freelance writer and editor, and is an editor of publichouse.sg. She is expecting her fourth child.
I don’t know of any evidence that shows that properly thought out and implemented work-life balance measures in the workplace hurt business performance. On the contrary, capable, trained staff quitting their jobs because it becomes impossible to juggle work and family, hurt a company. Work-life balance measures would make it easier for companies to retain such staff, reduce attrition and keep talent in their organization, and for these staff to continue to perform in their jobs without compromising their professional quality and contribution to the firm.
Some small and medium enterprises have voiced concern about paternity leave, and naturally so. But technology makes it possible to design many roles to incorporate flexibility and working remotely; after all executives who travel are expected to do their jobs on the road, showing that it is possible to do certain jobs WELL even if one is not in the work place or tied to regular working hours. This obviously applies to men and women, and can be put in place when an employee needs to spend a prolonged period away from the work place, whether a father on paternity leave or a mother looking for a longer term flexible solution.
So I feel the obstacle to work-life balance is more a mindset one than a logistical one.
Where the government can help is to spare companies the cost of maternity and paternity leave. Right now the government bears the cost of the third and fourth months of maternity leave and not the first two months, but the third and fourth months are utilized less by mothers, while the first two months are almost always taken, leaving firms no better off. Perhaps the government could look into footing the bill for the whole four months, for all paternity leave—and helping with the cost of hiring temporary replacement staff.
The field of human resource also needs major re-educating in Singapore, especially in large, local organisations. Currently, many human resource departments cannot think outside of full time work. It’s full time or nothing, or poor part-time positions. They need to have their minds opened to designing remuneration packages and job structures that accommodate effective flexible or part-time working arrangements—for jobs across all levels. If they do, I think they will find a whole untapped pool of willing and able workers available to them.
———————
Paulin Straughan, Associate Professor and former Nominated Member of Parliament.
There were 2 significant aspects of the Prime Minister’s National Day Rally Speech that addressed family-related concerns. The first was PM’s support for work-life balance, and the second, his announcement on the Government’s support for the call for paternity leave. I believe both these are attempts to address the same issue – a correction to the swing away from investment in family to over-investment in paid work.
The primary concern for Singapore is twofold: the sustained ultra-low fertility rate (TFR) as well as the steady increase in proportion of singles. While it is important for us to continue to support married couples in their childrearing endeavors, that alone will not arrest the decline in TFR. In tandem, we have to look seriously at the barriers that make it difficult for young Singaporeans to find a life partner.
In this regard, I believe the primary factor that takes us away from family work is paid work. Singaporeans work long hours, and the vast majority depend solely on earned income to sustain their lifestyle. So performance at work is very important as this directly impacts earned income – and the annual performance bonus. The current performance appraisal system sends two key messages: there is keen competition for limited rewards (in terms of promotions, salary increments and bonuses), and the competition is on an annual cycle.
Paternity leave will serve to send a strong signal that childrearing is a shared responsibility for parents. In itself, however, it continues to focus the cost of family building on individuals. As long as there is high opportunity costs to individuals who choose to invest in family, the singlehood rates will continue to inch up and the TFR fall. And certainly, no government in the world can afford to pay individuals to have babies.
So the answer lies in curbing the opportunity cost for stepping out of the workplace. For this reason, I argue that the most important statement made by the Prime Minister in his National Day Rally Speech is when he stood firmly behind the call for a better work-life balance.
The strive towards work-life balance cannot be conceptualized as an individual’s decision. It is a reflection of a larger, organizational operation.
Work-life balance can only be achieved if we derive a more objective and transparent means of accessing output so that we can quantify what is a satisfactory performance. Concurrently, we must also place clear limitations on how much we should spend at work. And set the norms to favour work-life balance by NOT rewarding overwork. If we are able to raise productivity and cut back on hours worked, it will be a win-win situation for the nation.
———————
Kelvyanne Teoh is a Principal Therapist with Morning Star Community Services. She has a Masters in Counselling and works closely with families. She also develops/conducts training programmes in addition to supervising and mentoring a team of counsellors and trainers.
Employers can no longer afford to focus primarily on profits without considering the wellbeing of its employees. Doing that would be like killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Time and energy have emerged as two crucial resources needed to manage the many modern-day demands of work and family life. Rising costs of living and the push to keep our competitive edge at work can lead to people feeling as if they have “no choice” but to put their work as the most important priority in their lives. Yet at the same time, their children need their time in their growing-up years. Such dilemmas are draining and can result in guilt-laden people feeling like failures. Must it be when I “win” at work, I “lose out” with the family and vice versa? Sooner or later the energy drain translates into poor work performance and fraught relationships at home.
Certainly work-life initiatives such as flexi-work schemes can go a long way in easing the dilemmas so that the personal and professional wellbeing of a valuable talent pool is intact. The freedom to organise a person’s time eliminates feelings of being trapped and promotes positive energy needed for creativity; passion and productivity. People do not have to deny one aspect of their lives for another equally vital aspect to thrive.
It makes for good business sense that we as a society commit to protecting our peoples’ well being and be serious to combat the notion that achieving is so important that a person’s wellbeing is a necessary casualty. Research has already proven that it costs more to recruit new hires than to retain good staff. For work-life balance measures to be successful, a paradigm shift is needed as a society for us to value all aspects of a person’s life.
———————
Also: Participate in the forum on singles potentially being allowed to purchase HDB flats here: Allowing singles to buy HDB flats.