Introduction
Mr Speaker, it's been over a decade of the Labour Movement listening to and representing Singapore's freelancers and the self-employed. The NTUC and our affiliate associations – the National Taxi Association, National Private Hire Vehicle Association and National Delivery Champions Association – have worked for years on advocating and planning for this debate today. I would like to give a shoutout to my Brothers and Sisters in the Gallery. These are the good people – association leaders, unionists, platform owners, and operators – who have worked hard to make this debate happen today.
This landmark bill, if passed into law, recognises that self-employed gig platform workers are in employee-like work arrangements with platformbv operators and will allow platform workers (such as our taxi/PHV drivers and delivery riders) to be formally represented by union-like Associations under Singapore's Labour Laws, and to be accorded, rightfully, fair and even workplace injury insurance, as well as retirement and housing adequacy alongside all Singaporean employees.
The Labour Movement is no stranger to the ground concerns of our freelance workers, and thanks to Singapore’s unique style of Tripartism, has been representing our workers’ rights to Government and platform/taxi companies. Successful negotiations through the Tripartite partnership have helped our drivers and riders through challenging times and have created improved worker outcomes in terms of work prospects and working conditions.
In 2010, the National Taxi Association advocated for taxi companies to match Medisave Contributions for our drivers under the "Drive and Save" (DAS) Scheme, and the National Private Hire Vehicles Association replicated this successfully for our PHV drivers in 2017 with Grab. We also innovated voluntary mediation for disputes with operators and we want to thank our progressive operators for this support. Throughout COVID-19, we protected livelihoods by working with taxi companies to reduce rentals and hold taxi pump prices when fuel prices spiked. Partnering closely with food court operators, platform companies and the Government, the NTUC negotiated on proper rest areas for drivers and riders providing essential services during COVID-19 restrictions.
Earlier this year, the NTUC mooted and co-led a multi-agency workgroup comprising of Government and private sector condominium MCSTs and Mall Operators to look into work and safety conditions for our delivery riders. These working models and Tripartite relationships have been carefully cultivated by our Associations to improve the welfare of our workers in the absence of legislation. If you need proof of this working model, it is visible here – at the gallery with our platform operators seated next to our platform workers.
However, Mr Speaker, there are miles to go before we sleep. And as more Singaporeans choose to be part of the gig economy, and as more global players enter this fast-evolving platform industry in Singapore, it is important that our workers' interests and livelihoods stay protected. We listened, and we know that platform workers are stressed about the long-term sustainability of their livelihoods, especially with non-transparent incentives and order mechanisms, app glitches, and fluctuating demand/supply. They are worried about unsafe working conditions and the financial burden placed on their families should accidents, or even death, occur. They are aggrieved over the lone voices they have when it comes to their challenges being heard by platform partners and other stakeholders in the course of their daily work.
Vulnerabilities and Challenges Faced by Platform Workers
Unlike the truly self-employed, today’s platform workers are in employee-like work arrangements as they are subject to their platform operators' management controls and have to adhere to the platforms' rules of engagement. Many a times, our platform workers are left in vulnerable situations, especially when their platform partners change their incentive structures and order booking rhythms.
Brother Calvin (not his real name) was once a delivery rider using a Power-Assisted Bicycle (PAB). By targeting peak-hour shifts, he was able to earn a comfortable, steady $2,500 a month, and this allowed him the ability to support himself and to take on some long-term financial commitments. But things changed. Despite booking those same peak-hour shifts, fewer orders started coming in. Once, he went for days without even being able to book for the same shifts he once used to be able to get. Seeing that bicycle deliveries had shift slots opened when there are none opened for PABs for the same shifts, he resorted to changing his delivery method from PAB to bicycle. The week-by-week change threw off his cadence in life, and I believe that livelihoods should not be as precarious and fleeting as an unconsulted, unconsented change in a partner platform’s priorities.
Calvin is fortunate that he was nimble enough to leave the industry, but there are scores of others in this industry, who have fully vested their livelihoods and trust in platform apps, finding themselves in a double bind. They are unclear why the rules of engagement on their partner platform have changed, while trying to make ends meet for their families in a job that had promised partnership and a viable means to a livelihood.
Indeed, representation also covers circumstances which may appear trivial to the rest of us but bear great impact to our drivers and riders. I call it the “Cupcake Effect”. In my interactions with our Delivery Riders, many have brought up to me about the hump at most of our public carpark gantries. While most of us cannot even recall that hump, and I appreciate how the HDB has put these humps in to slow down cars before the gantry, the hump is a bane to many delivery riders as it causes the cream decoration on cupcakes to be overturned, and drinks to be spilled. Our riders have told us that they often do not know where to bring these grievances to, hence Tripartism and formal representation would be critical twin pillars in allowing our platform workers’ voices to be heard.
Protection through Workplace Injury Insurance Coverage
Mr Speaker, we all have read about tragic stories involving delivery riders losing limbs and lives in unfortunate accidents, and some of us, may have even personally met with their family members in the wake of these unfortunate circumstances. The fact of the matter is that workplace injuries are common in the delivery space, and more often than not, our platform workers leave behind grieving family members, finding themselves in even more precarious financial difficulties. While we argue that many platform companies do provide basic insurance cover for their drivers and riders, as pointed out, these insurance are often inadequate and are uneven in coverage, many a times, tied towards performance metrics and tiered privilege systems. I ask, should something as basic as insurance be gamified?
Take the tragic example from June 2022, when a 54-year-old food delivery rider lost his life in an accident at the Punggol Waterway Point Mall. I attended his wake, and what struck me most was the vulnerability of his family. He was the main breadwinner in the family, leaving behind an elderly mother. The National Delivery Champions Association set up a counselling booth with the assistance of the Mall to support the riders who witnessed the accident. It was a reminder of how real the dangers is at work for our platform workers. But what happens to the families left behind? Is there enough support for them? Unfortunately, the answer is often no.
Hence, Mr Speaker, I put it to you that work injury insurance is not a game, 工伤赔偿不可能当成游戏, and hence I support the mandating of a WICA-like coverage for our platform workers, akin to that enjoyed by our Singaporean employees. Work injury insurance should not be tied to whether a worker meets performance targets or has a specific mode of transport. Insurance must cover all workers at all times, regardless of their activity level or their ranking within a system.
Strengthening Financial Stability, Retirement and Housing Adequacy through CPF
In the same vein, the same must be said of our platform workers’ CPF and housing adequacy. PHV drivers Brothers Joseph and Gabriel tell me that they find it difficult to maintain a steady stream of income due to the non-transparency of work order rhythms and the fluid nature of a platform’s incentive systems. They are both family-men, coping with the rise of business costs out of their control – rentals and petrol mainly, and the volatility of their platform earnings. The pressures are compounded by the demands of their families and long-term commitments. Our platform workers’ stresses are not unique and are commonly shared by all Singaporeans. The difference is that for most working Singaporeans, they have certainty in planning and growing a nest egg through CPF contributions. Growing older means higher healthcare costs; growing a family means taking on housing loans.
Gabriel shares that the rental cost of a Toyota Noah that used to cost $80 a day pre-COVID now costs $110 (and this is a 37.5% increase), but definitely, fares have not increased proportionally to that. Today, he has to drive another one to three extra hours just to maintain his pre-COVID income, but with a good sense of financial literacy and prudence, Gabriel is able to maintain his lifestyle to manage his family’s daily expenses. However, others might not be as savvy as Gabriel, and some are now falling into arrears.
Indeed, anecdotally, just as I was receiving feedback from our member drivers on unsustainable low trip and order rates, I have also seen a corresponding higher numbers of platform workers in arrears for their HDB loans at my MPS in the past six months.
These worries and aspirations are not only those belonging to our traditional breadwinners. Our Sisters have often voiced out their need for long-term financial adequacy for their families and themselves. Sister (not their real names) Farrah, a mum of six; Sister Maria, a single mum with an adult son; Sister Courtney, a single mum with a child with disabilities, have all called for better housing and retirement adequacy. Sister Farrah would like to purchase a flat of her own; Sister Maria would like to contribute to her son’s future marital home; and Sister Courtney would like to provide better therapy services for her special needs child.
Mr Speaker, it is clear that should we recognise our platform workers as employee-like, it is fair that our platform workers are covered by CPF. Our platform operators, as with all the rest of Singapore-based employers, will need to provide their share of CPF as part of their cost of business. This will be critical in ensuring that our platform workers are paid fairly for a sustainable livelihood and be finally on par with the rest of the workforce for the work they have done. My taxi and PHV Association leaders have a wise saying, and it is: 羊毛出在羊身上 (the sheep’s wool must come from its body). How would the Ministry ensure that our platform operators pay for their fair share of their platform workers’ CPF, keeping in mind that platform operators need to be sustainable?
Mr Speaker, in Mandarin please.
十多年来，工运一直在认真倾听和支持新加坡自由工作者和自顾人士的声音。职总以及我们的德士、私召车司机和配送员协会，多年来一直致力于推动和用心规划这项法案。通过劳资政合作伙伴的共同努力，我们今天终于能够站在国会，辩论这项具有里程碑意义的法案。
如果该法案顺利通过, 这将是全球首创，正式承认平台人员能够享受类似雇员的待遇。这样一来，平台人员就可以通过平台协会获得相应的正式权益。更重要的是，这将保证他们获得更全面的工伤保险，也加强了他们对退休准备和住房稳定性的支持。因为一旦平台人员能够享有类似雇员的待遇，那么他们就可以享有这些相应的基本福利和权益。
我们必须采取更多措施来支持新加坡这日益壮大的工作群体。全国职工总会也对平台人员充满深深的关怀，我们将一如既往地维护他们的权益, 因为我们珍惜每一名平台工友。
Protecting the Lives and Livelihoods of Platform Workers
Mr Speaker, in English.
More must be done to support this growing group of Singaporean workers, and as I rise in support of the bill, which the NTUC and the Labour Movement have worked hard to push, I reiterate, as I have on several occasions, the concerns I have with the rollout.
Given that we agree that platform workers are treated as employee-like, how do we ensure that platforms contribute fairly to CPF and insurance without passing the costs onto workers and end consumers through reduced pay or higher fees? Would the MOM be requiring platform companies to provide clear breakdown of fares to both workers and end consumers, stating clearly their share of CPF contributions?
Waiting in between bookings and jobs is a regular part of a platform worker’s daily job routine. As long as a platform worker has his or her app on and has exhibited that they are ready to take on a booking, arguably, this waiting time should also be covered under the work injury insurance.
Given that anecdotally from our drivers’ and riders’ feedback that real earnings have gone down, and drivers need to drive longer hours, can we also extend the Platform Workers CPF Transition Support scheme for all drivers, even those who earn more than $2,500 today? The coverage can be capped up to $2,500 of their earnings.
Conclusion
Mr Speaker, the time has come for our platform workers forge their own collective agreement so that their voices are heard, their working conditions improved, and their grievances addressed in a timely and fair manner. As employee-like workers, platform workers' retirement/housing adequacy worries must be addressed, by having platform operators pay for their fair share of CPF. As workers working in precarious work conditions, platform workers must be covered adequately by accident and loss of income insurance.
NTUC cares deeply for our platform workers and we will continue, as we have done over the years, to champion their interests, because every platform worker matters.
My clarifications notwithstanding, I strongly support the motion. Thank you.
