Upload
clemence-tan
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
1/321
Report on Wages
in Singapore, 2011
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
2/321
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
3/321
MISSION
To provide timely and reliable
national statistical information on the labour market
to facilitate informed decision-making within the government and community-at-large
Statistical activities conducted by the Manpower Research and Statistics Department are governed by the
provisions of the Statistics Act (Chapter 317). The Act guarantees the confidentiality of information collected
from individuals and companies. It spells out the legislative authority and responsibility of the Director,
Manpower Research and Statistics Department. The Statistics Act is available in the Singapore Department
of Statistics website atwww.singstat.gov.sg.
http://www.singstat.gov.sg/http://www.singstat.gov.sg/http://www.singstat.gov.sg/http://www.singstat.gov.sg/7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
4/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 i
The Report on Wages in Singapore, 2011 is the twenty-sixth edition published by the
Manpower Research and Statistics Department of the Ministry of Manpower. This Report
presents the main findings of the Survey on Annual Wage Changes, 2011 and the
Occupational Wage Survey, 2011. For a more complete picture of income, we have
included data on the median gross monthly income from work from the Comprehensive
Labour Force Survey, average monthly earnings compiled by the Central Provident Fund
Board and starting salaries of graduates from various institutions of higher learning. The
National Wages Council (NWC) Wage Guidelines For 2012/2013 is also included in this
Report.
The Report consists of five parts, totalling 303 pages. Part I highlights the key survey
findings on total and basic wage changes, bonuses as well as the basic and gross wages
of common occupations. Part II provides explanatory notes on the uses and sources of
the various income, earnings and wage measures as well as the methodology, coverage,
concepts and definitions used in the surveys. Part III presents statistical tables giving
detailed breakdown of occupational wages by gender, age, industry and establishment
size. Also included in this section are the gross monthly income from the Comprehensive
Labour Force Survey, the average (mean) monthly earnings compiled by the Central
Provident Fund Board and the starting salaries of graduates from the various institutions
of higher learning. Part IV lists the occupations and industries for which wage data are
available. Finally, the NWC Wage Guidelines for the current and the preceding year are
included in Part V.
We hope this Report will meet the needs of users for comprehensive and up-to-date
wage data. The contents and presentation of the Report are reviewed regularly. We
welcome readers feedback to help us improve the Report. A Feedback Form page is
enclosed at the end of the publication for readers use.
We wish to thank the employers who had responded to the surveys as well as the Central
Provident Fund Board and the various institutions of higher learning for their contributions
to this publication. We are also grateful to those who have offered valuable comments
and suggestions to improve the Report.
TAN LENG LENG (Mrs)
Director
Manpower Research and Statistics Department
Ministry of Manpower
June 2012
PREFACE
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
5/321
CONTE
NTS
PAGE
PREFACE i
NOTATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS v
LIST OF STATISTICAL TABLES vii
PART I : SURVEY FINDINGS
Annual Wage Changes, 2011 2Occupational Wages, 2011 47
PART II : EXPLANATORY NOTES
Uses And Sources Of Income, Earnings And Wage Data 63
Coverage And Methodology Of Survey 65On Annual Wage Changes
Coverage And Methodology Of 70Occupational Wage Survey
PART III : STATISTICAL TABLESOccupational Wages From Occupational Wage Survey T2
Median Gross Monthly Income From T185Comprehensive Labour Force Survey
Average (Mean) Monthly Earnings From T189 Central Provident Fund Board
Monthly Gross Starting Salary From T193Institutions Of Higher Learning
PART IV : LIST OF OCCUPATIONS AND INDUSTRIES FOR T201
WHICH WAGE DATA ARE PUBLISHED
PART V : NATIONAL WAGES COUNCIL (NWC) GUIDELINES
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
6/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 v
Notations
- : nil or negligible
s : suppressed as the number of actual observations covered are toosmall and to maintain confidentiality of information provided byrespondents
Abbreviations
AWS : Annual Wage Supplement
CPF : Central Provident Fund
CPI : Consumer Price Index
GDP : Gross Domestic Product
KPI : Key Performance Indicator
MOM : Ministry of Manpower
MTI : Ministry of Trade and Industry
MVC : Monthly Variable Component
NWC : National Wages Council
RAF : Rank-and-File
NRAF Non Rank-and-File
ULC : Unit Labour Cost
Cat A : Establishment was profitable and did much better than in the
previous year
Cat B : Establishment was profitable and did as well as in the previous year
Cat C : Establishment was profitable but did not do as well as in the
previous year
Cat D : Establishment incurred a loss
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
7/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 vii
Table Page
OCCUPATIONAL WAGES FROM OCCUPATIONAL WAGESURVEY
Occupational Wages by Sex
1 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations in All Industries (Overall)
T 2
1.1 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations in All Industries (Males)
T 12
1.2 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations in All Industries (Females)
T 20
Occupational Wages by Establishment Size
1.3 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations by Establishment Size in All Industries
T 28
Occupational Wages by Age and Establishment Size
1.4 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations by Age in All Industries T 40
1.4.1 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations by Age in All Industries (Establishments with25 199 employees)
T 56
1.4.2 Median Monthly Basic and Gross Wages of CommonOccupations by Age in All Industries (Establishments withat least 200 employees)
T 68
LIST OF STATISTICAL TABLES
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
8/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011viii
Table Page
Occupational Wages by Industry
2 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in All Industries
T 84
2.1 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Manufacturing
T 94
2.2 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Construction
T 99
2.3 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Wholesale and Retail Trade
T 102
2.4 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Transport and Storage
T 106
2.5 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Accommodation and FoodServices
T 110
2.6 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Information andCommunications
T 112
2.7 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Financial Services
T 114
2.8 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Business Services
T 117
2.9 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Education, Health and SocialServices
T 121
2.10 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly Basic Wagesof Common Occupations in Art, Entertainment, Recreationand Other Services
T 124
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
9/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 ix
Table Page
3 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in All Industries
T 127
3.1 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Manufacturing
T 137
3.2 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Construction
T 142
3.3 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Wholesale and Retail
Trade
T 145
3.4 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Transport and Storage
T 149
3.5 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Accommodation andFood Services
T 153
3.6 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Information andCommunications
T 155
3.7 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Financial Services
T 157
3.8 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Business Services
T 160
3.9 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Education, Health andSocial Services
T 164
3.10 Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles of Monthly GrossWages of Common Occupations in Art, Entertainment,Recreation and Other Services
T 167
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
10/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011x
Table Page
Wages of Major Occupational Groups by Industry
4 Median Monthly Basic Wages of Major OccupationalGroups by Industry
T 172
5 Median Monthly Gross Wages of Major OccupationalGroups by Industry
T 178
MEDIAN GROSS MONTHLY INCOME FROM COMPREHENSIVELABOUR FORCE SURVEY
6 Median Gross Monthly Income from Work of EmployedResidents aged Fifteen Years and Over by Nature ofEmployment and Sex (Total), 2001 2011
T 185
6.1 Median Gross Monthly Income from Work of EmployedResidents aged Fifteen Years and Over by Nature ofEmployment and Sex (Males), 2001 2011
T 186
6.2 Median Gross Monthly Income from Work of EmployedResidents aged Fifteen Years and Over by Nature ofEmployment and Sex (Females), 2001 2011
T 187
AVERAGE (MEAN) MONTHLY EARNINGS FROM CENTRALPROVIDENT FUND BOARD
7 Average (Mean) Monthly Earnings Per Employee byIndustry and Sex , 2006 2011 (Overall)
T 189
7.1 Average (Mean) Monthly Earnings Per Employee byIndustry and Sex , 2006 2011 (Males)
T 190
7.2 Average (Mean) Monthly Earnings Per Employee byIndustry and Sex , 2006 2011 (Females)
T 191
8 Active Central Provident Fund Members by Monthly WageLevel, 2001 2011
T 192
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
11/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 xi
Table Page
MONTHLY GROSS STARTING SALARY FROM INSTITUTIONS OF
HIGHER LEARNING
9 Key Statistics on Employment Outcome of Graduates fromInstitutions of Higher Learning, 2007 2011P
T 193
10 Employment and Monthly Gross Starting Salary ofUniversity Graduates in Full-Time Permanent Employmentby Degree, 2011P
T 194
11 Employment and Monthly Gross Starting Salary ofPolytechnic Graduates in Full-Time PermanentEmployment by Course, 2011P
T 196
12 Employment and Monthly Gross Starting Salary of Instituteof Technical Learning (ITE) Graduates in Full-TimePermanent Employment by Course, 2011P
T 200
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
12/321
ReportonWage
sinSing
apore,20
11
PARTI:
SurveyFi
ndings
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
13/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Annual Wage Changes
The tight labour market continued to lift workers wages , despite the slower economic
growth in 2011. Total wages (including employer CPF contributions) in the private
sector rose by 6.1% in 2011, higher than the growth of 5.7% in 2010. Taking into
account the rise in consumer price index (CPI), the increase in real terms was 0.9% in
2011, lower than the gain of 2.9% in 2010. The corresponding figures when adjusted
using CPI excluding imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation were 1.9%
and 2.4%.
Excluding employer CPF contributions, total wages increased by 5.3%, slightly lower
than the gain of 5.5% in 2010. The increase in total wages in 2011 stemmed from a
basic wage growth of 4.4% and an increase of 6.9% in bonuses (also known as
annual variable component) paid out from 2.17 months of basic wages in 2010 to2.32 months in 2011. Weighed down by inflation, real total wages rose by 0.1% while
real basic wages declined by 0.8%, after increasing by 2.7% and 1.1% respectively in
2010 when inflation was lower.
Over the long term, real wage increases have been broadly in line withlabour productivity growth. From 2000 to 2011, real total wages (including employer
CPF contributions) increased by 1.6% per annum (p.a.) while labour productivity grew
by 1.7% p.a.
Wage Restructuring
As at December 2011, 86% of employees in the private sector was under some form offlexible wage system.
1This eased from 89% a year ago, after rising from 85% in 2009.
The slight decline was observed across both large establishments and small and
medium enterprises (SMEs), possibly reflecting the churn in firms entering and leaving
the economy.
Large establishments with at least 200 employees continued to lead, with nine in ten
(91%) of their workers having at least one key wage recommendation in their wage
system, higher than almost eight in ten (79%) in SMEs.
Having a narrow maximum-minimum salary ratio (involving 63% of workforce) remained
the most common recommendation adopted by the private sector. This was followed by
linking variable bonus to Key Performance Indicators (KPI) (52%) and having the Monthly
Variable Component (MVC) (35%) in the wage structure. In 2011, the coverage of
workforce with MVC and in establishments that had narrowed/were narrowing the wage
ratio were broadly the same as in 2010 (35% and 64% respectively), while the share of
employees with variable bonus linked to KPI declined from 57%.
1Establishments are considered to have some form of flexible wage system when their wage structure incorporates at
least one of the following key wage recommendation:i) implement variable bonus linked to Key Performance Indicators (KPI);ii) introduce the Monthly Variable Component (MVC) in wage structure; andiii) narrow the maximum-minimum salary ratio for the majority of their employees to an average of 1.5 or less.
HIGHLIGHTSON ANNUAL WAGE CHANGES, 2011
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
14/321
2 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
1 Introduction
1.1 This report examines the wage changes and extent to which employers
have adopted the recommendations of the National Wages Council (NWC) in 2011. The
findings are based on data from the Survey on Annual Wage Changes carried out from
December 2011 to March 2012 which effectively covered 4,568 private establishments
each with at least 10 employees. This yielded a survey response rate of90%.
2 Background
2.1 Singapores real gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 4.9% in 2011,
after expanding by 14.8% in 2010 (Chart 1). The consumer price index (CPI) rose by
5.2% in 2011, up significantly from the increase of 2.8% in 2010, but still below the 6.6%
in 2008. Excluding imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation (which do not
involve actual expenditures), the CPI increase was 4.2% in 2011, also up from 3.3% in
2010 but lower than 5.5% in 2008.
2.2 Despite slower GDP growth, employment creation remained strong in
2011. Total employment increased by 122,600 (or 3.9%) in 2011, slightly higher than thegains of 115,900 (or 3.9%) in 2010. Amid the strong employment creation, the
unemployment rate declined to a 14-year low of 2.0% overall, 2.9% for residents and
3.0% for Singapore citizens in 2011.
ANNUAL WAGE CHANGES,2011
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
15/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 3
Chart 1: Key Economic Indicators, 2000 2011
(A) Change in GDP, CPI and Employment
(B) Unemployment Rate (Annual Average)
Sources: Department of Statistics, MTI (GDP, CPI)
Manpower Research and Statistics Department, MOM (Employment, Unemployment)
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
GDP 9.0 -1.2 4.2 4.6 9.2 7.4 8.8 8.9 1.7 -1.0 14.8 4.9
CPI (CPI excl. Imputed rentals
on owner-occupied
accommodation)
1.3 1.0 -0.4 0.5 1.7 0.5 1.0 2.1 6.6 0.6 2.8 5.2
Employment 5.3 0.0 -1.1 -0.6 3.3 5.1 7.6 9.4 8.1 1.3 3.9 3.9
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Per Cent
(1.7) (1.0) (-0.3) (0.7) (2.0) (0.6) (1.1) (2.2) (5.5) (-0.4) (3.3) (4.2)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Overall 2.7 2.7 3.6 4.0 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.1 2.2 3.0 2.2 2.0
Resident 3.7 3.7 4.8 5.2 4.4 4.1 3.6 3.0 3.2 4.3 3.1 2.9
Singapore Citizen 3.9 3.9 5.1 5.4 4.8 4.4 3.7 3.1 3.4 4.5 3.4 3.0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Per Cent
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
16/321
4 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
3 Wage Changes
Overview
Wages rose in 2011, driven by tig ht labour market
3.1 The tight labour market continued to lift workers wages, despite the
slower economic growth in 2011. Total wages (including employer CPF contributions) in
the private sector rose by 6.1% in 2011, higher than the growth of 5.7% in 2010 (Chart
2).
3.2 Excluding employer CPF contributions, total wages increased by 5.3% in
2011, after rising by 5.5% in 2010.2 The increase in total wages in 2011 stemmed from
a basic wage growth of 4.4% and an increase of 6.9% in bonuses (also known as
annual variable component) paid out from 2.17 months of basic wages in 2010 to 2.32
months in 2011.3
Chart 2: Change in Total and Basic Wages, 2000 2011
2 Average monthly earnings from CPF records rose by 6.0% in 2011, after increasing by 5.6% in 2010. This sourcecovers both full-time and part-time employees who contribute to the CPF and can be influenced by the changing mix ofworkers, variations in overtime and wages of new entrants and workers who changed jobs during the year. In contrast,the Survey on Annual Wage Changes, designed to capture change in wage rates paid to workers, covers only full-time
employees on the CPF scheme who are in continuous employment for at least one year. This survey is also the onlysource that provides breakdown of total wage changes into changes in basic wages and bonuses for various categoriesof employees.3
Basic wages and bonuses exclude employer CPF contributions.
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Basic Wages 4.9 2.9 1.8 1.2 2.7 3.1 3.6 4.3 4.4 1.3 3.9 4.4
Total Wages 6.6 1.1 0.0 1.5 3.6 4.3 4.5 5.9 4.2 -0.4 5.5 5.3
Total Wages (incl. employer
CPF contributions)
8.1 5.2 0.0 0.8 1.6 4.3 4.5 6.6 4.9 -0.4 5.7 6.1
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Per Cent
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
17/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 5
Weighed dow n by inf lat ion, real wages rose sl ight ly
3.3 Taking into account the rise in CPI, real total wages rose by 0.1% while
real basic wages declined by 0.8% n 2011, after increasing by 2.7% and 1.1%
respectively in 2010 when inflation was lower. Including employer CPF contributions,
real total wages grew by 0.9% in 2011, lower than the gain of 2.9% in 2010. Whenadjusted using CPI excluding imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation, total
wages (including employer CPF contributions) grew in real terms by 1.9% in 2011, after
increasing by 2.4% in 2010 (Chart 3).
Chart 3: Annual Change in Real Total and Basic Wages, 2000 2011
Notes: (1) Real wage changes were deflated by Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all items. Figures in brackets refer to
real wage changes deflated by CPI less imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation.
(2) Basic wages exclude employer CPF contributions.
Grow th in real wages were broadly in l ine with pro duct iv i ty o ver the long term
3.4 With the slower GDP growth amid continuing strong employment
creation, labour productivity rose by 1.0% in 2011, significantly lower than the increase
of 11% in 2010, reflecting the volatility in year-to-year change in labour productivity
(Chart 4). Over the longer period from 2000 to 2011, labour productivity grew by 1.7%
per annum (p.a.) while real total wages (including employer CPF contributions)
increased by 1.6% p.a.
-5
0
5
10
Real Basic Wages 3.6 1.9 2.2 0.7 1.0 2.6 2.6 2.2 -2.2 0.7 1.1 -0.8
Real Total Wages 5.3 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.9 3.8 3.5 3.8 -2.4 - 1.0 2.7 0.1
Real Total Wages (incl.
employer CPF contributions)
6.8 4.2 0.4 0.3 -0.1 3.8 3.5 4.5 -1.7 - 1.0 2.9 0.9
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Per Cent
(3.2) (1.9) (2.1) (0.5) (0.7) (2.5) (2.5) (2.1) (-1.1) (1.7) (0.6) (0.2)
(4.9) (0.1) (0.3) (0.8) (1.6) (3.7) (3.4) (3.7) (-1.3) (0.0) (2.2) (1.1)
(6.4) (4.2) (0.3) (0.1) (-0.4) (3.7) (3.4) (4.4) (-0.6) (0.0) (2.4) (1.9)
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
18/321
6 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 4: Change in Labour Productivity and Real Total Wages, 2000 2011
Annual
Source: Department of Statistics, MTI (Productivity)
Note: Figures in brackets refer to real wages deflated by CPI less imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation.
Annualised from 2000 to 2011
Labour Productivity : 1.7% p.a.
Real Total Wages (incl. employer CPF contributions) : 1.6% p.a.
(1.7% p.a.)
Note: Figures in brackets refer to real wages deflated by CPI less imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation.
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Labour Productivity 4.8 -4.5 5.7 5.9 7.4 2.9 2.0 0.2 -7.3 -3.6 11.1 1.0
Real Total Wages (incl. employer CPF
contributions)
6.8 4.2 0.4 0.3 -0.1 3.8 3.5 4.5 -1.7 -1.0 2.9 0.9
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Per Cent
(6.4) (4.2 ) (0.3) (0.1) (-0.4) (3.7) (3.4) (4.4) (-0.6) (0.0) (2.4) (1.9)
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
19/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 7
Overal l unit labour cost ro se
3.5 The unit labour cost (ULC) relates total labour cost (comprising wages
and salaries, benefits, employer CPF contributions, foreign workers levy and skill
development levy) to labour productivity.4 With slower growth in real value added and
increases in wages, employer CPF contributions and foreign worker levy, the overall
ULC rose by 3.4% in 2011, after declining by 2.2% in 2010.
Chart 5: Change in Unit Labour Cost, 2000 2011
Source: Department of Statistics, MTI
4Unit Labour Cost (ULC) measures the cost of manpower required to produce a unit of output. It is calculated by dividing
total labour cost over total output.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
OverallULC
2.5 5.1 -3.7 -3.4 -3.8 1.4 1.8 6.2 4.1 0.8 -2.2 3.4
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
Per Cent
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
20/321
8 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
4 Total and Basic Wage Changes
Wage Changes by Type of Employees
Wage gain for RAF continue to lag non-RAF, though th e gap has narrowed
4.1 Wages rose for all three categories of employees in 2011. Junior and
senior management staff experienced higher increases in total wages (6.1% and 5.4%
respectively) than the rank-and-file (RAF) employees (4.7%). Compared to the previous
year, the gain in total wages were slightly higher for RAF employees, but lower for junior
and senior management. Consequently, while the wage gain for RAF continue to lag
the non-RAF, the gap has narrowed (Chart 6).
Chart 6: Total and Basic Wage Change, 2010 and 2011
Note: Non-rank-and-file comprise junior and senior management
Distribution of Establishments by Wage Change
More establ ishments raised w ages in 2011
4.2 Amid the tight labour market, the proportion of private establishments that
raised total wages of their workers increased to 68% in 2011 from 60% in 2010, though
the average quantum of wage increase in these firms at 6.6% was lower than 7.6% in
2010. The proportion that cut wages in 2011 (8.5%) was comparable to 2010 (8.2%),
with quantum of wage cut the same at 4.3%. The remaining 23% kept their wages
unchanged in 2011, down from 32% in 2010 (Chart 7).
3.9%4.4%
3.3%
4.0%4.5%
4.9%4.6%
5.1%
4.3% 4.3%
Basic Wage Change
All Rank-and-File
Non-Rank-and-File
JuniorManagement
SeniorManagement
5.5%5.3%
4.5%4.7%
6.7%
5.9%
6.7%6.1%
6.6%
5.4%
2010 2011
Total Wage Change
All Rank-and-File
JuniorManagement
SeniorManagement
Non-Rank-and-File
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
21/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 9
Chart 7: Distribution of Establishments by Total Wage Change and Extent of
Total Wage Change
Note: Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
Chart 8: Distribution of Establishments by Basic Wage Change and Extent of
Basic Wage Change
Notes: (1) s: Data suppressed due to small number covered.
(2) Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
Extent of Basic Wage Change ofEstablishments Which Cut or Increased Basic
Wages, 2000 - 2011
'00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
Firms Which Cut Total Wages -2.9 -5.4 -7.0 -5.0 -4.6 -4.5 -3.4 -3.1 -5.5 -6.2 -4.3 -4.3Firms Which Increased Total Wages 8.3 5.4 4.8 5.2 5.9 5.9 5.8 7.5 6.6 4.8 7.6 6.6
-12.0
-8.0
-4.0
0.0
4.0
8.0
12.0
Per Cent
Extent of Total Wage Change ofEstablishments Which Cut or Increased Total
Wages, 2000 - 2011
s'00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
Firms Which Cut Basic Wages -5 .8 -6 .6 -6 .0 -5 .2 -5 .6 -6 .2 -5 .2 -3 .5 -4 .9 -4 .8 -5 .6
Firms Which Increased Basic Wages 5.8 4.7 3.8 3.1 3.7 4.0 4.3 5.0 5.3 3.8 4.7 5.0
-12.0
-8.0
-4.0
0.0
4.0
8.0
12.0
Per Cent
Wage Cut No Change Wage Increase
40.5%
68.9%
1.4%
58.1%
0.8%
30.3%
20112010
Distribution of Establishments by Basic WageChange, 2010 and 2011
Wage Cut No Change Wage Increase
31.5%
68.1%
8.2%
60.3%
8.5%
23.4%
20112010
Distribution of Establishments by Total WageChange, 2010 and 2011
s
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
22/321
10 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Distribution of Establishments by Profit Status
Majori ty of establ ishments were prof i table, thou gh prop ort ion dip ped sl ight ly
4.3 The majority of private establishments were profitable, though the
proportion dipped slightly, with the slower economic growth in 2011. 82% of privateestablishments reported that they were profitable, down slightly from 85% in 2010
(Chart 9). The proportion of profitable establishments was higher than the 79% in 2009
and the low of 65% in 2001 when economic conditions were weaker.
Chart 9: Proportion of Profitable Establishments, 2000 2011
4.4 In 2011, the share of private establishments that either outperformed
(Category A) or were as profitable as in 2010 (Category B) fell to 50% from 58% a year
ago. On the other hand, establishments that were profitable but did not do as well as in
the previous year (Category C) rose from 27% to 32%. The share of loss-making firms
(Category D) also increased from 15% in 2010 to 18% in 2011(Chart 10).
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
8090
100
Per Cent
Profitable Firms 73.5 64.9 66.3 70.7 75.4 80.6 81.4 84.9 81.0 79.4 85.1 82.4
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
23/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 11
Chart 10: Distribution of Establishments by Profit Status, 2010 and 2011
Per Cent
Notes: (1) Based on private establishments that disclosed their profitability status in 2010 and 2011.
(2) Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
Wage Change by Profit Status
Wage changes w ere correlated with p rof i tabi l i ty
4.5 The wage changes were correlated with profitability, as many firms have
restructured their wage system to tie wages more closely with business performance.
The more profitable Category A firms gave the largest total wage increase of 6.3%,
followed by Category B firms at 5.6% and Category C at 4.7%. Amid the tight labour
market and higher inflation in 2011, even the loss-making Category D gave a modest
wage increase of 3.4% (Chart 11).
23.2
34.6
27.2
14.9
16.6
33.8
32.0
17.6
0 20 40 60 80 100
Cat A: Firm was profitable and did much bette r than in theprevious year
Cat B: Firm was profitable and d id as well as in theprevious year
Cat C: Firm was profitable but did not do as well as in theprevious year
Cat D: Firm incurred a loss
2010 2011
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
24/321
12 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 11: Total and Basic Wage Change by Profit Status for All Employees,
2010 and 2011
Majori ty of prof i table establ ishments raised wages
4.6 The majority of profitable Category A (84%), Category B (76%) andCategory C (63%) establishments raised wages, while slightly over one in two (53%)
loss-making Category D establishments either froze or cut wages (Chart 12).
Cat A: Firm was profitable and did much better than in the previous year
Cat B: Firm was profitable and did as well as in the previous year
Cat C: Firm was profitable but did not do as well as in the previous year
Cat D: Firm incurred a loss
Cat A Cat B Cat C Cat D
Basic Wage Change
2.0%
3.6%4.0%4.4%
3.1%4.1%
4.8%4.7%
Cat A Cat B Cat C Cat D
Total Wage Change
2.6%
4.0%
5.6%
7.0%
3.4%
4.7%5.6%
6.3%
20112010
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
25/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 13
Chart 12: Distribution of Establishments by Total Wage Change and Profit Status,
2011
Per Cent
Note: Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
Wage Change by Industry
All indu str ies gave wage increases
4.7 All industries gave wage increases to their employees in 2011
(Appendix-Table 1). Financial & insurance services employees had the largest total
wage increase (9.1%), while transportation & storage (7.4%), professional services(5.6%) and real estate services (5.5%) also had above-average increases (Chart 13). In
terms of basic wage increase, the financial & insurance services (7.4%) and
professional services (5.0%) were also in the lead. In contrast, administrative & support
services (total: 3.7%; basic: 3.5%), manufacturing (total: 4.1%; basic: 4.0%),
construction (total: 4.2%; basic: 3.9%) and accommodation & food services (total: 4.5%;
basic: 3.8%) had among the lowest total and basic wage increases.
5.810.3
83.9
4.3
19.4
76.2
9.6
27.5
62.9
17.0
36.0
47.1Cat A
Cat B
Cat C
Cat D
Wage Cut No Change Wage Increase
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
26/321
14 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 13: Total and Basic Wage Change by Industry, 2011
4.4
5.3
Quadrant 1Above-Average Total Wage Increase;Below-Average Basic Wage Increase
Quadrant 2Above-Average Total and Basic
Wage Increase
Quadrant 4Below-Average Total and BasicWage Increase
Quadrant 3Below-Average Total Wage Increase;Above-Average Basic Wage Increase
Total Wage Increase (%)
Basic WageIncrease
(%)
Financial & Insurance Svcs(7.4, 9.1)
Transportation & Storage(3.8 , 7.4 )
Professional Svcs(5.0 , 5.6 )
Real Estate Svcs(4.1, 5.5 )
Community, Social & Personal Svcs(4.2 , 5.0 )
Administrative & Support Svcs(3.5 , 3.7 )
Manufacturing(4.0 , 4.1 )
Information & Communications(4.5 , 4.6 )
Wholesale & Retail Trade(4.1 , 4.6 )
Accommodation & Food Svcs(3.8 , 4.5 )
Construction(3.9 , 4.2)
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
27/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 15
5 Annual Variable Component
Ann ual variable comp onent ros e in 2011
5.1 The private sector paid out an annual variable component (comprising the
annual wage supplement and variable bonus) averaging 2.32 months of basic wage in
2011, up 6.9% from the 2.17 months in 2010. Overall, the annual variable component
formed 16.2% of total wages in 2011, higher than 15.3% in 2010.
Chart 14: Annual Variable Component, 2000 2011
5.2 All three categories of employees received more bonuses in 2011. The
bonus payout was higher for non-RAF (2.63 months or 18.0% of total wages) than RAF
(2.06 months or 14.7% of total wages). Typically, the variable component would be
higher for management staff as a greater share of their pay package is flexible and tied
to performance.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Proportion (All) 15.9 14.5 12.9 12.8 13.5 14.7 15.4 16.4 16.1 14.2 15.3 16.2
Quantum (All) 2.27 2.03 1.77 1.76 1.87 2.06 2.18 2.36 2.31 1.99 2.17 2.32
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
Proportion ofTotal Wage (%)
Months ofBasic Wage
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
28/321
16 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 15: Annual Variable Component as a Proportion of Total Annual Wages,
2010 and 2011
Annual VariableComponent in Months
of Basic Wage
2010 20112.17
(+9.0%)2.32
(+6.9%)
1.92(+6.1%)
2.06(+7.3%)
2.49(+11.7%)
2.63(+5.6%)
2.50(+12.1%)
2.62(+4.8%)
2.47(+10.8%)
2.67(+8.1%)
Notes: (1) Figures in brackets refer to percentage change in annual variable component over the year.(2) Non-rank-and-file employees comprise junior and senior management employees.
5.3 Despite the slower economic growth, the proportion of private
establishments that gave more than one month of annual variable component was
comparable to the preceding year (2011: 44%; 2010: 43%) (Chart 16). The share of
establishments which did not pay any annual variable component or paid less than one
month dropped from 38% in 2010 to 36% in 2011. The establishments which did not
pay bonuses gave their employees an average basic wage increase of 2.5% in 2011. Alarge majority (85%) of them were small establishments with less than 50 employees.
17.1%
17.2%
17.2%
13.8%
15.3%
18.2%
17.9%
18.0%
14.7%
16.2%
SeniorManagement
JuniorManagement
Non-Rank-and-File
Rank-and-File
All
2011 2010
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
29/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 17
Chart 16: Distribution of Establishments by Quantum of Annual Variable
Component Paid, 2010 and 2011
Note: Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
Annual Variable Component by Profit Status
Bonus payout l inked to p rof i tabi l i ty
5.4 The profitable Category A (2.41 months of basic wages), Category B
(2.44 months) and Category C (2.40 months) establishments paid about the same
quantum of bonus while the loss-making firms Category D gave about half of the
quantum at only 1.20 months (Chart 17).
Chart 17: Annual Variable Component by Profit Status, 2010 and 2011
Note: Based on private establishments that disclosed their profitability status in 2010 and 2011.
Months of Basic Wage
26.6
6.0
5.3
19.5
22.3
11.5
8.8
21.0
8.0
6.7
19.9
21.3
13.1
10.0
0 10 20 30 40
None
> 0 to 0.5 months
> 0.5 to < 1 month
1 month
> 1 to 2 months
>2 to 3 months
> 3 months
QuantumP
aid
2 01 0 2 01 1
2.47
2.30
1.84
1.08
2.41
2.44
2.40
1.20
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
Cat A: Firm was p rofitable and did much better than inthe p revious year
Cat B: Fi rm was pro fitable and did as well as in theprevious year
Cat C: Firm was profitable but did n ot do as well as inthe p revious year
Cat D: Firm incurred a loss
201 0 201 1
Per Cent
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
30/321
18 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Annual Variable Component by Industry
Most indu str ies gave higher annual variable component
5.5 All industries except administrative & supported services paid higher
annual variable component than a year ago. Financial & insurance services which
typically has a high annual variable component in its wages, continued to give the
largest payout of 3.35 months in 2011, up by 1.5% from 3.30 months in 2010. In
contrast, administrative & support services continued to pay the lowest annual variable
component averaging 1.05 months, down by 3.7% from 1.09 months in 2010.
Table 1: Annual Variable Component by Industry, 2010 and 2011
Months of Basic Wage
Industry (SSIC 2010) Period Total RAF NRAF
Total2011 2.32 2.06 2.63
2010 2.17 1.92 2.49
Manufacturing2011 2.62 2.44 2.82
2010 2.60 2.47 2.76
Construction2011 1.59 1.36 1.82
2010 1.50 1.33 1.72
Services2011 2.31 2.01 2.65
2010 2.11 1.82 2.48
Wholesale & Retail Trade2011 2.19 1.91 2.54
2010 1.89 1.62 2.30
Transportation & Storage2011 2.88 2.88 2.90
2010 2.39 2.35 2.49
Accommodation & FoodServices
2011 1.20 1.08 1.42
2010 1.11 1.03 1.25
Information & Communications2011 2.39 2.40 2.38
2010 2.31 2.38 2.27
Financial & Insurance Services2011 3.35 3.28 3.37
2010 3.30 3.04 3.39
Real Estate Services2011 2.08 1.47 3.37
2010 1.66 1.17 2.79
Professional Services 2011 2.29 2.07 2.412010 2.17 1.88 2.35
Administrative & SupportServices
2011 1.05 0.92 1.61
2010 1.09 0.98 1.56
Community, Social & PersonalServices
2011 2.46 2.30 2.67
2010 2.37 2.29 2.45
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
31/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 19
6 One-off Special Payment to Rank-And-File Employees
6.1 On workers concerns over higher inflation in 2011, the NWC noted that
while government measures such as the Growth & Share package helps workers cope
with inflation, some companies may wish to further help their workers better cope with
the higher cost of living. In this regard, NWC has suggested that companies couldconsider giving a one-off special lump sum payment to workers.
Majori ty did not giv e one-off special payment to RAF
6.2 As at December 2011, only a minority (4.1%) of private establishments
with RAF employees had given/intended to give a one-off special payment to their RAF
employees while 5.1% was still considering whether to give. Close to one in five (19%)
reported that they had already taken into account the higher inflation in their built-in
wage increment. The remaining 72% did not give and had no plans to give a one-off
special payment (Table 2).
Large establ ishments mo re l ikely to give one-off special payment
6.3 Large establishments employing 200 or more staff were more likely to
give the one-off special payment. 13% of large establishments gave/intended to give
the payment, compared with only 3.6% for the smaller establishments.
6.4 Transportation & storage (9.9%) had the highest share of establishments
that gave/intended to give a one-off special payment, followed by community, personal
& social services (8.2%), administrative & support services (7.8%) and real estate
services (7.3%). On the flip side, information & communications (0.9%), construction
(1.3%) and professional services (1.7%) had amongst the lowest proportion of
establishments that gave one-off special payment to help workers cope with high
inflation (Table 2).
6.5 Financial & insurance services (42%), information & communications
(41%), professional services (28%) and wholesale & retail trade (22%) had above-
average proportion reporting they had already factored in the higher inflation in the
built-in wage increment, despite them having below average share that gave one-offspecial payment. In contrast, construction (11%) and accommodation & food services
(12%) had amongst the lowest proportion of establishments that help workers cope with
high inflation through built-in wage increment.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
32/321
20 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Table 2: Distribution of Establishments by Whether They Had Given A One-Off
Special Payment to RAF Employees, 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Establishment
Yes Considering
Whether toPay in NextWage
Review
Built-in WageIncrement
AlreadyFactored in
HigherInflation
Sub-Total
HadGiven
Not YetDecided
OnDetails
NoPlans to
Give
Overall 4.1 3.5 0.7 5.1 19.0 71.8
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees 3.6 2.9 0.7 5.2 18.2 73.1
200 or More Employees 13.0 12.7 0.3 3.6 33.3 50.2
By Indust ry
Manufacturing 3.2 2.6 0.7 5.7 15.5 75.6
Construction 1.3 0.9 0.4 5.2 11.1 82.4
Services 5.0 4.2 0.8 4.9 21.6 68.5
Wholesale & RetailTrade
4.0 3.0 1.0 4.7 22.4 68.9
Transportation &Storage
9.9 9.9 - 1.9 16.7 71.5
Accommodation &Food Services
3.4 1.1 2.3 7.1 11.6 77.9
Information &Communications
0.9 0.7 0.2 4.2 41.1 53.8
Financial & InsuranceServices
3.5 3.5 - 0.1 42.4 53.9
Real Estate Services 7.3 7.1 0.2 2.4 30.0 60.3
ProfessionalServices
1.7 1.7 - 3.8 27.7 66.7
Administrative &Support Services
7.8 7.2 0.5 5.4 15.7 71.1
Community, Social &Personal Services
8.2 8.2 - 7.3 20.0 64.5
Notes: (1) Based on establishments with RAF employees.
(2) Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
(3) -: nil or negligible.
The most common pract ice was to give equal ly to al l RAF
6.6 The majority of private establishments that made a one-off special
payment gave to all their RAF (2.8% of all establishments with RAF employees). The
most common practice was to give equally to all their RAF (2.2% of all establishments
with RAF employees). Only 0.7% of establishments gave only to RAF earning low
wages (Table 3). 5
5Low-wage workers generally refer to local employees who earn around $1,500 or less per month on a full-time basis.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
33/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 21
Table 3: Establishments That Had Given One-Off Special Payment to RAF
Employees by Type of Payout, 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Establishment Total
Paid to All RAF
PaidOnly To
Low-
WageRAF
Sub-total
With Low- Wage RAF No Low-WageRAF But
WithPayout
To OtherRAF
HigherPayout
for Low-WageRAF
EqualPayout
for Low-WageRAF
LowerPayout
for Low-WageRAF
Overall 3.5 2.8 0.1 2.2 0.2 0.3 0.7
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees 2.9 2.4 0.1 1.8 0.2 0.3 0.5
200 or MoreEmployees
12.7 9.6 1.1 8.2 0.3 0.1 3.1
Notes: (1) Based on establishments with RAF employees.
(2) Figures may not sum up due to rounding.
Majori ty gave in the form o f a lump sum with m edian payout of $250
6.7 Majority of the establishments that made the one-off payment (low-wage
RAF: 82%, other RAF: 79%) gave in the form of a lump sum, with a median payout of
$250. The remaining minority (low-wage RAF:18%, other RAF: 21%) paid out in the
form of a proportion of employees basic salaries, typically averaging (median) 2.0
weeks of basic pay.
Table 4: Distribution of Establishments That Gave The One-Off Special Payment
to RAF Employees by Form of Payment, 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Low- Wage RAF Other RAF
Lump SumPayment
AsProportion
of BasicSalary
LumpSum
Payment
AsProportion
of BasicSalary
Overall 81.6 18.4 78.6 21.4
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees 80.9 19.1 74.7 25.3
200 or More Employees 84.0 16.0 94.9 5.1
Note: Based on establishments that had given a one-off special payment to RAF employees.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
34/321
22 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Table 5: Median and Mean Lump Sum Payout, 2011 (As at December)
Dollars
Low- Wage RAF Other RAF
Median Mean Median Mean
Overall 250 307 250 349
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees 250 290 250 344
200 or More Employees 300 363 300 364
Note: Based on establishments that had given a one-off special payment to RAF employees.
7 Wage Restructuring
7.1 This section of the report updates the progress of establishments inrestructuring their wage system to be more flexible and performance based. Data on
wage restructuring pertain to private sector establishments each employing at least 25
workers.
7.2 Tripartite partners have been working closely to promote the
implementation of flexible wage systems to ensure competitiveness. Specifically, firms
are encouraged to implement the following key wage recommendations:
(1) implement variable bonus linked to Key Performance Indicators (KPI);6
(2) introduce the Monthly Variable Component (MVC) in wage structure;
(3) narrow the maximum-minimum salary ratio for the majority of their employees
to average of 1.5 or less.7
Recognising that establishments may require different forms of wage flexibility to meet
their specific circumstances, employers may choose to implement only the
recommendations that are relevant to them.
6In the survey, establishments are considered to have implemented variable bonus linked to KPI, if they have formulated
and communicated to their employees, the KPI for the payment of the variable bonus.7
Establishments can decide on appropriate ratio for different jobs and industries. In the survey, establishments areconsidered to have implemented this recommendation if they have narrowed the salary ratio to 1.5 or less, decided to/inthe process of narrowing the salary ratio or all along have a maximum-minimum ratio at 1.5 or less.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
35/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 23
8 Progress of Key Wage Recommendations
Large majori ty of emplo yees were und er some form o f f lexible wage system,
though proport ion eased sl ight ly f rom 2010
8.1 As at December 2011, 86% of employees in the private sector was under
some form of flexible wage system.8 This eased from 89% a year ago, after rising from
85% in 2009. The slight decline was observed across large establishments and small
and medium enterprises (SMEs), possibly reflecting the churn in firms entering and
leaving the economy (Chart 18).
8.2 Large establishments with at least 200 employees continued to lead, with
nine in ten (91%) of their workers having at least one key wage recommendation in their
wage system, higher than almost eight in ten (79%) of workers in SMEs.
8.3 One in six (17%) private sector employees were in establishments that
had a fully flexible wage system comprising all three key wage recommendations in
2011. Including employees in establishments with two recommendations (30%), some
46% of the private sector employees had wage systems that incorporated at least two
wage recommendations, slightly lower than the 49% in 2010 (Chart 18).
8.4 Transportation & storage (93%) and accommodation & food services
(91%) had among the highest share of employees with some form of wage flexibility,
while construction (76%) had the least (Appendix-Table 2).
8
Establishments are considered to have some form of flexible wage system when they have at least one key wagerecommendation incorporated into their wage structure.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
36/321
24 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 18: Proportion of Employees by Number of Key Wage Recommendations
Implemented, 2004 2011
Per Cent
1 Wage Recommendations 2 Wage Recommendations All 3 Wage Recommendations
85.7
89.185.183.683.783.381.1
82.6
81.3
75.6
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
46.4
48.845.345.046.046.1
49.2
39.1
47.343.5
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
20.8 19.3 17.0 17.018.4
16.822.0
12.4
21.4
15.0
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
73.4 75.078.8
94.3
76.9 78.681.9
72.9
68.372.1
63.1
90.1 89.988.6 90.790.489.7
85.0
90.2
89.2
Jun
04
Dec-
04
Jun-
05
Dec-
05
Dec-
06
Dec-
07
Dec-
08
Dec-
09
Dec-
10
Dec-
11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
21.224.5 25.0
28.9
30.1
25.326.028.5
26.6 27.7
52.8
59.6
64.1
63.160.0 58.5 59.5 58.2
62.5
61.6
Jun
04
Dec
04
Jun
05
Dec
05
Dec
06
Dec
07
Dec
08
Dec
09
Dec
10
Dec-11
6.26.5
5.86.15.46.05.78.2
4.33.6
24.427.025.125.5
29.131.032.6
32.2
24.119.1
Jun
04
Dec
04
Jun
05
Dec
05
Dec
06
Dec
07
Dec
08
Dec
09
Dec
10
Dec-11
Overall
ByEstablishmentSize
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
37/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 25
Majori ty of establ ishments without key recommendations were sat isf ied with
f lexibi l i ty of their exist ing wage system
8.5 As at December 2011, 14% of employees in the private sector were
working in establishments that had yet to implement any of the key wage
recommendations (Table 6). The majority of them, representing 11% of all private
sector employees, were working in establishments that were satisfied with their wage
flexibility.
Table 6: Proportion of Employees in Establishments That Did Not Implement
Any of the Key Wage Recommendations, 2010 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Note: Figures may not sum up due to rounding
8.6 Overall, nearly all (97%) private sector employees were either working inestablishments with some form of wage flexibility (86%) or were satisfied with their wage
flexibility even though their establishments have yet to implement any key wage
recommendations (11%), same as in 2010 (Chart 19).
Period
Did NotImplement Any
Key WageRecommendation
Satisfied/Not SatisfiedWith Level of Flexibility
in Wage System
SatisfiedNot
Satisfied
Overall2011 14.3 11.2 3.12010 10.9 7.6 3.3
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees2011 21.2 15.4 5.7
2010 18.1 12.1 6.0
200 or More Employees2011 9.3 8.1 1.22010 5.7 4.3 1.4
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
38/321
26 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 19: Proportion of Employees That Were Either Working in Establishments
With Some Form of Wage Flexibility or Were Satisfied With Their Wage
Flexibility Even Though Their Establishments Did Not Implement Any
Key Wage Recommendations, 2004 2011 (As at December)
81.3% 81.1% 83.3% 83.7% 83.6% 85.1%89.1% 85.7%
11.8% 13.2% 11.4% 11.8% 11.3%10.5%
7.6% 11.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Satisfied Even Though Establishments Did Not Implement Any Key Wage Recommendations
With At Least One Key Wage Recommendation
8.7 The remaining establishments that were not satisfied with the flexibility of
their wage system but had yet to implement the taskforce recommendations employed
only 3.1% of the workforce, down from 3.3% a year ago (Table 7). Many of these
establishments that were not satisfied with their wage flexibility reported that they wouldnot be implementing the recommendations of the taskforce (Table 7). They employed
only 1.8% of the workforce and were mainly SMEs (77%).
Table 7: Proportion of Employees in Establishments Without Any Key Wage
Recommendations and Not Satisfied with Level of Wage Flexibility by
Intention to Implement Wage Recommendations, 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
NotSatisfied
With WageFlexibility
Intention to Implement Wage
Recommendations
Yes No Not Aware
Overall 3.1 0.2 1.8 1.1
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees 5.7 0.3 3.3 2.1
200 or More Employees 1.2 0.1 0.7 0.4
Notes: (1) Figures may not sum up due to rounding.(2) -: nil or negligible.
93.2% 94.7% 95.5% 94.9% 95.7%94.3% 96.7% 96.9%
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
39/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 27
9 Implementation of Flexible Wage Components
Narrowing m aximum -minimum salary rat io and l inking variable bon us to KPI were
more comm on than MVC
9.1 Having a narrow maximum-minimum salary ratio (involving 63% of
workforce) remained the most common recommendation adopted by the private sector.
This was followed by linking variable bonus to KPI (52%) and having MVC (35%) in the
wage structure. In 2011, the coverage of workforce with MVC and in establishments
that had narrowed/were narrowing the wage ratio were broadly the same as in 2010
(35% and 64% respectively), while the share of employees with variable bonus linked to
KPI declined from 57%.
9.2 Large establishments continued to lead in adopting the MVC and variable
bonus linked to KPI while SMEs fared better in narrowing the maximum-minimum salary
ratio.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
40/321
28 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 20: Proportion of Employees by Key Wage Recommendations, 2004 2011
Per Cent
Maximum-Minimum Salary Ratio MVC Variable Bonus Linked to KPI
62.5
52.2
59.3
60.8
59.6 60.2 62.4 57.8 59.064.4
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
34.834.734.733.834.7
37.236.039.4
33.532.9
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
51.7
57.253.754.151.952.8
54.2
53.6
47.1
42.0
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
66.0
57.462.4
57.557.656.8
52.147.8
67.2
62.2
59.9
58.162.562.163.7 64.860.8
55.5
62.456.6
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
15.314.014.213.914.216.5
19.315.4
14.2
14.1
48.849.849.749.449.3
51.554.1
50.6
49.8
47.3
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
29.0
26.129.1
33.831.4 31.5
34.2 36.4 35.837.3
68.0
54.1
62.3
68.1
70.567.5
64.668.0
66.9
71.6
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
Note: Figures do not sum up to 100% as establishments can implement more than one key wage recommendation.
Variable Bonus linked to KPI
Large establ ishments mo re l ikely to l ink variable bon us to KPI
9.3 As at December 2011, three in every ten establishments (30%) had
adopted NWCs wage recommendation to formulate and communicate to theiremployees the KPI for the payment of variable bonus, down from 37% in 2010. The
adoption of the NWCs wage recommendation for employers to link variable bonus to
KPI was more prevalent in large establishments (57%).
9.4 By employee count, 52% of private sector employees were in
establishments that had variable bonus linked to KPI. Financial & insurance services
(80%), information & communications (74%) and professional services (70%) had
among the highest share of employees with variable bonus linked to KPI. On the other
hand, construction (21%), administrative & support services (30%) and real estate
services (35%) had significantly below-average proportions (Appendix-Table 3).
Overall
ByEstablishmentSize
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
41/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 29
Chart 21: Proportion of Employees and Establishments That Formulated and
Communicated KPI for Payment of the Variable Bonus, 2004 2011
Per Cent
Employee Establishment
42.047.1
53.6 54.2 52.8 51.9 54.1 53.757.2
51.7
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
25.929.4 33.1 31.8 32.1 33.7
36.2 35.0 36.5
29.6
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
26.129.1
33.831.4 31.5
34.2 36.4 35.837.3
29.0
54.1
62.3
68.170.5
67.564.6
68.0 66.971.6
68.0
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
23.826.9
30.1 28.3 28.530.9
33.2 31.9 33.0
25.9
41.8
50.954.2
56.7 57.0
50.9
58.6 58.362.9
57.0
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
Overall
ByEstablishmentSize
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
42/321
30 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Maximum-Minimum Salary Ratio
Two in three private establ ishments had narrowed/were narrowing their
maximum -minimum wage rat io to 1.5 or less
9.5 Two in three (66%) private establishments had narrowed/were narrowingthe wage ratio for the same job to 1.5 or less in December 2011. This dropped slightly
from 68% in 2010, after increasing from 62% in December 2009. These establishments
employed 63% of the private sector workforce, a tad lower than 64% in 2010, but still
higher than 59% in 2009 (Chart 22).
Chart 22: Proportion of Employees and Establishments That Had Narrowed or
Were Narrowing the Maximum-Minimum Salary Ratio to 1.5 or Less,
2004 2011
Per Cent
Employee Establishment
52.2
59.3 60.8 59.6 60.262.4
57.8 59.064.4 62.5
Jun
04
Dec
04
Jun
05
Dec
05
Dec
06
Dec
07
Dec
08
Dec
09
Dec
10
Dec-11
47.1
56.5 56.553.0
58.061.6
57.762.3
67.6 66.3
Jun
04
Dec
04
Jun
05
Dec
05
Dec
06
Dec
07
Dec
08
Dec
09
Dec
10
Dec-11
47.8
57.6 56.852.1
57.562.4
57.4
62.267.2 66.0
55.560.8
63.7 64.8 62.1 62.558.1
56.662.4 59.9
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
46.7
56.2 56.251.9
57.661.8
57.4
62.4
67.9 66.7
50.1
59.0 58.9 60.661.3 60.2 59.8
61.265.3 63.0
Jun04
Dec04
Jun05
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
9.6 On average, establishments had a maximum-minimum salary ratio of
1.51 for their rank-and-file (RAF) workers, slightly lower than the 1.52 of a year ago
(Table 8). The ratio was higher in large establishments (1.55) than the SMEs (1.47).
Expectedly, the maximum-minimum salary ratio was lower in establishments that were
narrowing or had narrowed the salary range at 1.40 in 2011, same as in the previousyear.
Overall
ByEstablishmentSize
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
43/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 31
Table 8: Average Maximum-Minimum Salary Ratio of the Rank-and-File,
2010 2011 (As at December)
Period
All Establishments
Total
Had narrowed
/ werenarrowing
Overall2011 1.51 1.40
2010 1.52 1.40
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees2011 1.47 1.34
2010 1.48 1.34
200 or More Employees2011 1.55 1.45
2010 1.55 1.45
9.7 Junior management (1.61) continued to have a higher maximum-
minimum ratio than RAF (1.51) (Table 9). Similarly, the maximum-minimum salary ratio
for junior management narrowed from the year before (1.62).
Table 9: Average Maximum-Minimum Salary Ratio of Junior Management,
2010 2011 (As at December)
Period
All Establishments
TotalHad narrowed
/ were
narrowing
Overall2011 1.61 1.51
2010 1.62 1.48
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees2011 1.54 1.41
2010 1.54 1.41
200 or More Employees2011 1.66 1.57
2010 1.67 1.52
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
44/321
32 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Monthly Variable Component
MVC more comm on in commu nity, social & person al services, f inancial services
and transport & storage
9.8 As at December 2011, 16% of establishments had implemented MVC, up
from 14% in 2010. The coverage in terms of employees was higher at 35%, as large
establishments (35%) were more likely to implement MVC than smaller establishments
(13%) (Chart 23).
9.9 Community, social & personal services (58%), financial & insurance
services (54%) and transportation & storage (51%) had among the highest share of
employees with MVC, while information & communications (11%), construction (13%),
administrative & support services and wholesale & retail trade (both 26%) had the least
(Appendix-Table 3).
Chart 23: Proportion of Employees and Establishments With MVC, 1999 2011
Per Cent
Employee Establishment
9.6
37.2 34.7 33.8 34.7 34.7 34.832.9
27.924.7
17.322.4
33.536.0
39.4
Dec-99
Dec-00
Dec-01
Dec-02
Dec-03
Dec04
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
4.1 6.38.1 9.4
16.915.3 15.5 14.8 14.4 15.6
15.5
13.7
10.1 14.2
18.7
Dec-99
Dec-00
Dec-01
Dec-02
Dec-03
Dec04
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
16.514.2 13.9 14.2 14.0 15.3
51.5 49.3 49.4 49.7 49.8 48.8
14.2 15.4
14.110.49.38.5
6.53.9
19.3
50.649.8
47.3
43.2
39.436.4
15.0
27.3
54.1
Dec-99
Dec-00
Dec-01
Dec-02
Dec-03
Dec04
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
11.214.0 12.3 12.7 12.1 11.6 12.910.4
37.933.7 35.9 35.1 34.7 35.2
12.510.97.97.46.44.9
3.4
15.6
37.0 37.235.8
19.426.2
28.2 30.2
41.6
Dec-99
Dec-00
Dec-01
Dec-02
Dec-03
Dec04
Dec05
Dec06
Dec07
Dec08
Dec09
Dec10
Dec-11
Note: It is assumed that when an establishment introduces the MVC in its wage structure, it applies to all employees inthe establishment.
Overall
ByEstablishm
entSize
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
45/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 33
MVC as a Proportion of Monthly Basic Wage
Nearly 30% of w ages in MVC firms were variable
9.10 As at December 2011, establishments with MVC on average set aside
10% of monthly basic wages as MVC for majority of their employees, same as the year
before (Chart 24).
Chart 24: MVC as a Proportion of Monthly Basic Wage in Establishments With
MVC, 2000 2011 (As at December)
9.11 Establishments with MVC typically paid higher-than-average annual
variable component (3.18 months of basic wages in 2011) than non-MVCestablishments (2.01 months). Combining the annual variable component and MVC
(21% and 7.9% of total wages respectively), 29% of total wages were variable in MVC
establishments.9 Including non-MVC establishments, the variable share of total wages
amongst all private establishments was 21%, comprising an annual variable component
of 17% and MVC of 3.5% in 2011.
9The tripartite partners recommended a target of 30% comprising 20% in annual variable component and 10% in MVC.
2.6
3.84.0
5.4
6.8
8.1
9.09.2 9.7 9.6
10.0 10.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Per Cent
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
46/321
34 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Triggers for MVC Cuts/Restoration
9.12 Companies which had put in place clear and appropriate triggers for MVC
cuts and restoration will be able to respond nimbly to business conditions without having
to negotiate with workers or unions at every point of a business downturn. As at
December 2011, about three in five (61%) employees in MVC establishments had
indicators/guidelines in their wage structure for the cut and restoration of MVC, up
slightly from 59% in 2010.
Table 10: Distribution of Employees With MVC by With/Without
Indicators/Guidelines for the Cut & Restoration of the MVC, 2010 2011
(As at December)
Per Cent
Period Yes No
Overall2011 61.2 38.8
2010 58.8 41.2
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees2011 62.2 37.8
2010 61.7 38.3
200 or More Employees2011 61.0 39.0
2010 58.2 41.8
Note: Figures may not sum up to 100% due to rounding.
Abo ut three in f ive establ ishm ents had no intent ion of implementing MVC
9.13 As at December 2011, 16% of establishments had implemented MVC
while 0.7% had decided to or were in the process of implementation (Table 11). Another
10% were still assessing the system. About three in five (58%) establishments had no
intention of implementing while another 15% were unaware of the MVC. Nearly all
(91%) of the establishments which did not wish to implement or were not aware of the
MVC were SMEs.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
47/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 35
Table 11: Distribution of Establishments and Employees in Establishments by
Intention to Implement MVC, 2011 (As at December)
Establishment
Per Cent
TotalWithMVC
Decided/ in theProcess of
Implementation
Still UnderConsideration
PreviouslyWith MVCBut Was
LaterRemoved
No Wishto
Implement
NotAware
ofMVC
Overall 100.0 15.6 0.7 9.9 0.9 57.8 15.1
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199Employees
100.0 12.9 0.7 9.9 0.9 59.0 16.6
200 or MoreEmployees
100.0 35.2 0.8 10.4 0.8 48.9 3.9
Employee
Per Cent
TotalWithMVC
Decided/ in TheProcess of
Implementation
Still UnderConsideration
PreviouslyWith MVCBut Was
LaterRemoved
No Wishto
Implement
NotAware
ofMVC
Overall 100.0 34.8 0.6 8.2 1.0 48.2 7.2
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199Employees
100.0 15.3 0.8 10.3 1.2 58.2 14.2
200 or MoreEmployees
100.0 48.8 0.5 6.8 0.9 41.0 2.1
Note: Figures may not sum up due to rounding.
10 Information Sharing
Majori ty of emp loyees were wor king in establ ishments that shared information
10.1 Overall, slightly over three in four (76%) employees were working inestablishments that shared information in 2011, same as in the previous year. The
corresponding percentage was higher in the larger establishments (87%) than the SMEs
(61%) (Chart 25).
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
48/321
36 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Chart 25: Proportion of Establishments and Employees That Share Information
With Employees, 1999 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Information sh aring mor e prevalent among firm s with a flexible wage system
10.2 Information sharing continued to be more prevalent among
establishments with a flexible wage system. 64% of establishments with at least one
wage recommendation shared information with their employees compared with 49% of
establishments without any wage recommendations (Table 12).
Employee Establishment
Overall
ByEstablishmentSize
70.1 71.374.7 74.4
78.276.1 77.8
78.575.9 76.9 75.2 75.8 76.3
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
53.3 54.2
59.3 58.8
63.9
58.562.8 63.2 62.5 63.5 60.8 60.2 61.3
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
54.2 54.660.0 59.8
64.760.5
62.9 64.3 62.7 64.4 61.3 61.3 61.4
85.2 86.989.5 88.2 90.1 89.3 88.4 88.3
85.3 86.8 85.5 86.4 87.1
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
50.8 51.7
57.2 56.661.7
55.760.1 60.7 60.2 61.3 58.2 57.8 58.8
76.5 77.983.3
79.083.4 82.2 81.9 81.0
77.179.7 79.4 77.8 79.2
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
49/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 37
Table 12: Proportion of Establishments and Employees in Establishments That
Shared Information With Employees by Type of Wage System,
2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
All Establishments With at Least One WageRecommendation
No WageRecommendation
EstablishmentCount
EmployeeCount
EstablishmentCount
EmployeeCount
EstablishmentCount
EmployeeCount
Overall 61.3 76.3 64.3 79.3 49.4 58.8
By Establ ishm ent Size
25-199 Employees 58.8 61.4 61.7 64.5 48.3 49.8
200 or MoreEmployees
79.2 87.1 81.5 88.5 63.7 73.6
10.3 Overall, one-third of private establishments (33%) shared information at
least annually, up slightly from 31% in 2010 (Chart 26). In terms of employees covered,
46% of employees were working in establishments that shared information at least
annually, same as in the previous year. The information sharing was more frequent in
large establishments than the SMEs (Table 13).
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
50/321
38 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Table 13: Distribution of Establishments and Employees by Frequency of
Information Sharing, 2011 (As at December)
Establishment
Per Cent
AllEstablishments
By Establishment Size
25-199Employees
200 or MoreEmployees
Total 61.3 58.8 79.2
Regularly 32.8 30.5 49.8
Annually 14.1 13.4 19.4
Half-yearly 6.2 5.9 8.0
Quarterly 8.3 7.1 17.3
Monthly 4.2 4.0 5.2
As and when necessary 28.4 28.2 29.1
Others 0.1 0.1 0.3
Employee
Per Cent
AllEstablishments
By Establishment Size
25-199Employees
200 or MoreEmployees
Total 76.3 61.4 87.1
Regularly 46.4 32.4 56.4
Annually 14.7 13.8 15.4
Half-yearly 8.7 6.3 10.4
Quarterly 18.9 8.2 26.7
Monthly 4.1 4.2 4.0
As and when necessary 29.8 28.8 30.5
Others 0.2 0.1 0.2
Note: Figures may not sum up due to rounding.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
51/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 39
Chart 26: Proportion of Establishments and Employees That Shared Information
at Least Annually, 1999 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
ByE
stablishmentSize
Overall
24.6 25.827.9 28.4
30.5 32.533.3
35.9 37.032.7 31.2 31.9 32.4
47.5 46.5 48.543.5
48.053.4 53.9 52.8 55.0
55.8 55.7 56.7 56.4
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
25-199 Employees 200 Employees
22.5 23.127.0 26.5
29.7 29.7 31.433.6 35.3 30.7 29.0 28.8 30.5
40.3 39.844.0 42.8
45.849.8 48.7 47.9 46.1 47.3 47.7 46.1
49.8
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
36.4 36.5 38.1 36.239.8
43.8 45.4 45.947.5 45.7 45.3 46.2 46.4
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
24.3 24.728.4 28.0
31.3 31.833.5 35.4
36.832.7 31.2 30.9 32.8
'99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11
Employee Establishment
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
52/321
40 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
11 Concluding Remarks
11.1 The tight labour market continued to lift workers wages, despite the
slower economic growth in 2011. Taking inflation into account, real wages increased
slightly in 2011, after growing more significantly during the economic rebound in 2010.
Over the long term, real wage increases have been broadly in line with labour
productivity growth.
11.2 A large majority of employees in the private sector were under some form
of flexible wage system in 2011, though the proportion has eased slightly from the year
before. More employees were working in establishments which have narrowed/were
narrowing the maximum-minimum salary ratio and have linked variable bonus to KPI
than those with MVC.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
53/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 41
Appendix
Table 1: Total and Basic Wage Change by Industry, 2010 and 2011
Per Cent
Industry (SSIC 2010) PeriodTotal Wage Change Basic Wage Change
Total RAF NRAF Total RAF NRAF
Total2011 5.3 4.7 5.9 4.4 4.0 4.9
2010 5.5 4.5 6.7 3.9 3.3 4.5
Manufacturing2011 4.1 4.0 4.4 4.0 3.8 4.3
2010 4.9 4.3 5.6 3.6 3.3 3.9
Construction2011 4.2 3.6 4.9 3.9 3.4 4.4
2010 4.4 4.0 4.9 3.5 3.2 3.9
Services2011 5.6 5.0 6.3 4.5 4.0 5.1
2010 5.8 4.6 7.2 4.0 3.4 4.8
Wholesale & Retail
Trade
2011 4.6 4.3 5.0 4.1 4.0 4.4
2010 5.4 4.7 6.4 3.6 3.3 4.1
Transportation &Storage
2011 7.4 7.1 8.1 3.8 3.8 3.9
2010 2.5 2.2 3.5 2.9 2.7 3.3
Accommodation &Food Services
2011 4.5 4.5 4.4 3.8 4.0 3.4
2010 3.3 3.2 3.3 2.9 2.9 2.9
Information &Communications
2011 4.6 4.3 4.8 4.5 4.2 4.7
2010 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.0 4.0 4.0
Financial &Insurance Services
2011 9.1 8.1 9.4 7.4 6.0 7.7
2010 10.0 6.6 11.1 6.0 4.1 6.7
Real Estate
Services
2011 5.5 4.9 6.8 4.1 3.8 4.6
2010 4.8 4.0 6.4 3.3 3.2 3.6
ProfessionalServices
2011 5.6 5.2 5.9 5.0 5.0 5.1
2010 8.1 6.2 9.2 5.7 4.4 6.5
Administrative &Support Services
2011 3.7 3.5 4.4 3.5 3.4 3.9
2010 4.3 4.3 4.5 2.8 2.7 3.1
Community, Social& PersonalServices
2011 5.0 4.3 6.0 4.2 4.0 4.4
2010 7.0 6.9 7.1 4.3 4.3 4.3
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
54/321
42 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Table 2: Proportion of Employees With Some Form of Wage Flexibility by
Industry, 2010 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Industry(SSIC 2010)
Period
Some Form ofWage
Number of Key Wage
Recommendations ImplementedFlexibility
(A) + (B) + (C) Three (A) Two (B) One (C)
All Industries2011 85.7 16.8 29.6 39.3
2010 89.1 18.4 30.5 40.3
Manufacturing2011 87.2 19.5 30.8 36.9
2010 89.3 18.5 32.1 38.7
Construction2011 75.5 6.7 11.3 57.5
2010 81.2 4.0 19.5 57.7
Services2011 87.6 18.0 33.6 36.0
2010 90.9 21.6 32.4 36.9
Wholesale & Retail Trade2011 88.4 10.8 37.0 40.6
2010 92.6 15.1 34.2 43.3
Transportation & Storage2011 92.8 26.6 38.3 27.9
2010 94.4 36.7 33.0 24.7
Accommodation & Food Services2011 90.6 29.5 19.7 41.5
2010 90.8 31.2 25.9 33.7
Information & Communications2011 88.9 2.4 40.0 46.5
2010 88.7 4.3 44.4 39.9
Financial & Insurance Services2011 86.7 29.0 38.9 18.8
2010 96.1 34.7 31.4 30.0
Real Estate Services 2011 82.5 16.2 27.4 38.92010 79.2 11.2 27.2 40.7
Professional Services2011 87.6 21.4 28.1 38.1
2010 83.6 19.3 31.8 32.5
Administrative & Support Services2011 83.8 14.4 16.1 53.3
2010 89.2 16.6 21.1 51.5
Community, Social & PersonalServices
2011 84.2 11.0 44.8 28.4
2010 92.1 16.9 38.8 36.3
Note: Figures may not sum up due to rounding.
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
55/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 43
Table 3: Proportion of Employees in Establishments by Key Wage
Recommendations and Industry, 2004 2011 (As at December)
Per Cent
Industry(SSIC 2010)
Period
WithMaximum-Minimum
SalaryRatio
With MVC
WithVariableBonus
Linked toKPI
All Industries
2011 62.5 34.8 51.7
2010 64.4 34.7 57.2
2009 59.0 34.7 53.7
2008 57.8 33.8 54.1
2007 62.4 34.7 51.9
2006 60.2 37.2 52.8
2005 59.6 36.0 54.2
2004 59.3 33.5 47.1
Manufacturing
2011 65.0 36.3 55.6
2010 60.9 36.1 61.42009 59.7 37.4 58.6
2008 55.7 33.4 55.1
2007 59.1 33.9 55.5
2006 57.4 35.0 56.2
2005 59.3 36.0 58.7
2004 56.2 37.3 52.6
Construction
2011 66.5 12.6 21.1
2010 69.1 13.3 26.4
2009 62.9 11.6 21.6
2008 61.0 11.8 25.5
2007 58.8 11.0 19.3
2006 54.4 8.8 20.62005 47.7 8.2 21.8
2004 60.2 12.4 24.1
Services
2011 60.4 39.3 57.4
2010 64.7 39.1 62.7
2009 57.5 39.0 59.6
2008 58.3 39.2 60.7
2007 65.1 40.7 58.4
2006 62.7 43.7 57.3
2005 61.9 41.3 58.1
2004 60.9 35.9 49.0
Wholesale & Retail Trade
2011 64.8 26.0 56.2
2010 71.7 24.2 61.1
2009 64.1 26.0 61.0
2008 62.4 27.9 65.8
2007 60.0 24.5 63.4
2006 57.5 27.9 58.2
2005 56.1 24.9 57.0
2004 58.7 22.3 50.4
Transportation & Storage
2011 67.6 51.0 65.8
2010 78.9 51.9 69.9
2009 69.8 47.6 66.7
2008 70.3 47.6 59.4
2007 75.1 48.9 56.8
2006 79.1 51.9 58.9
2005 77.0 46.9 60.32004 76.5 50.7 47.0
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
56/321
44 REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Industry(SSIC 2010)
Period
WithMaximum-Minimum
SalaryRatio
With MVC
WithVariableBonus
Linked toKPI
Accommodation & Food Services
2011 83.9 40.1 45.3
201080.3 40.9 57.92009 72.4 39.4 53.1
2008 72.9 46.8 57.1
2007 83.9 44.1 51.1
2006 82.3 50.3 53.6
2005 84.8 48.5 54.3
2004 78.7 35.3 37.4
Information & Communications
2011 48.5 11.1 74.0
2010 49.4 15.2 77.1
2009 51.6 14.1 75.9
2008 50.6 16.7 76.2
2007 54.3 22.7 77.9
2006 33.4 23.7 78.7
2005 31.3 17.8 74.7
2004 42.8 13.3 60.1
Financial & Insurance Services
2011 50.2 53.9 79.6
2010 49.8 57.9 89.2
2009 41.6 59.7 81.6
2008 48.6 62.6 78.3
2007 57.3 66.3 71.7
2006 61.5 63.6 77.5
2005 58.9 68.8 76.0
2004 52.5 57.8 70.7
Real Estate Services
2011 66.9 40.1 35.3
2010 63.1 32.5 33.3
2009 54.0 29.7 37.12008 45.8 25.6 48.6
2007 58.0 22.2 33.7
2006 74.2 31.0 39.8
2005 63.7 24.3 37.0
2004 71.8 21.8 28.6
Professional Services
2011 55.9 33.1 69.5
2010 54.3 33.3 66.4
2009 55.1 27.0 62.3
2008 46.4 29.0 58.2
2007 57.3 35.4 61.7
2006 48.9 35.8 55.2
2005 46.3 36.9 49.72004 46.6 30.3 54.1
Administrative & Support Services
2011 73.2 25.9 29.7
2010 83.0 20.5 40.1
2009 70.3 25.9 37.2
2008 74.8 18.9 30.8
2007 79.6 20.3 28.6
2006 69.9 17.3 24.9
2005 59.0 18.4 24.0
2004 63.2 6.9 11.8
Community, Social & Personal
Services
2011 38.5 57.8 54.5
2010 45.4 59.7 59.7
2009 35.1 62.6 54.52008 38.8 63.9 60.6
2007 57.2 69.3 63.1
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
57/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 45
Industry(SSIC 2010)
Period
WithMaximum-Minimum
SalaryRatio
With MVC
WithVariableBonus
Linked toKPI
2006 52.0 74.3 56.9
200566.0 69.2 67.62004 50.3 63.5 54.8
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
58/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011
Attesting to the value of knowledge and skills, the median monthly gross wage
was the highest for managers at $6,630 in June 2011. This was followed by
professionals at $4,632 and associate professionals & technicians who drew a
median pay of $3,070. Clerical support workers ($2,097) and service & sales
workers ($2,000) were paid less. Among blue-collar occupations, craftsmen &
related trades workers ($2,377) and plant & machine operators ($2,015) were paid
more than cleaners, labourers & related workers ($1,020).
Wages tend to rise with age as workers gain experience. In June 2011, the pace
of wage increase with age was more pronounced among managers and
professionals. The link between age and wages was less obvious for lower-skilled
workers whose wages generally rose more gradually and peaked earlier. In fact,
wages of plant & machine operators and cleaners, labourers & related workers
were largely flat for younger workers before declining for those in their mid forties
onwards. Advancing age typically works against workers in physically demanding
manual occupations.
Higher value-added industries generally pay better. Specifically, financial services
and professional services were among the top three highest-paying industries
across many occupational groups in June 2011. In contrast, accommodation &
food services and construction were among the lower-paying industries.
Like in other countries, females in Singapore typically earn less than males. The
gender wage gap was narrower in white-collar occupations, with women in the
prime-working age of 35 to 39 earning close to or the same as men in clerical
support, professional, associate professional & technician and service & salesoccupations. Gender wage differential also varied with age, with the younger
cohorts having substantially lower wage differential than those older. With age,
females were more likely to take career breaks to care for their family which
reduced their work experience and hence pay, relative to men.
HIGHLIGHTSON OCCUPATIONAL WAGES, 2011
7/29/2019 Wages Report 2011
59/321
REPORT ON WAGES IN SINGAPORE, 2011 47
1 Introduction
1.1 This is a report on wages of common occupations in Singapore. It
examines wages of different occupations as well as similar occupations across different
industries and the impact of age and gender on occupational wages. As the occupational
wage data are based on aggregates of similar jobs, they can only serve as a guide for
expected wages of individuals, given that no workers and jobs are totally alike 1 and
wages are determined by prevailing market conditions.
1.2 The wage data are obtained from the Occupational Wage Survey, 2011 on
a representative sample of private sector establishments each with at least 25employees. The survey was conducted by the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board on
behalf of the Ministry of Manpower. The wages captured refer to basic and gross monthly
wages (excluding bonuses and profit sharing) of full-time private sector employees who
contributed to CPF in the month of June 2011. With a response rate of 91%, the survey
covered an effective sample of 3,869 private sector establishments employing some
262,000 CPF contributors on a full-time basis. The survey concepts and methodology
are in Part II.
2 Monthly Basic and Gross Wages
2.1 With a median gross monthly wage of $6,630, managers was the highest
paid occupational group in June 2011, lifted by high-earning managing directors/chief
executive officers ($16,684) and company directors ($11,495). At the other end were
lower-paying managers, including restaurant managers ($2,813) and retail/shop sales
managers ($3,240).
2.2 Professionals came in second at $4,632, weighed down by the entry of
fresh graduates and the downward bias created by professionals who were promoted to
managerial positions and hence no longer classified as professionals. The occupationswithin this group ranged from the higher-paid university lecturers ($10,918) and lawyers
(excluding advocates & solicitors) ($8,400) to psychologists ($3,150) and social work &
counselling professionals ($3,1