Income's Orange Revolution

Minister Lim Swee Say (LSS) has come out to defend the position of my former employer, NTUC Income, in the wake of revelations as to why my former boss and presidential hopeful, Tan Kin Lian (TKL), left NTUC Income. He has shared he wanted NTUC Income to be run more professionally, not that it implies that TKL ran it unprofessionally.

LSS has a very different style from that of his predecessors, Lim Boon Heng and Ong Teng Cheong. In his tenure, he has been shameless in his pursuit of preparing NTUC and its cooperatives for a future, where it sheds it straight-jacketed, stingy image. That image may have appealed to a generation of past; it will not to a generation that is more questioning and image conscious.

To achieve this vision, LSS has had to get rid of NTUC's old guard, albeit in a respectful and sensitive manner. Unfortunately, as is the case with such changes, no matter how well one manages it, feathers get ruffled. What LSS did with NTUC Income is a microcosm of his unwavering pursuit to reposition NTUC.

I had decided the year before TKL's retirement that 2007 would be my last year as a full-time employee in NTUC Income. I was taking a sabbatical to complete my qualification process as an advocate and solicitor of Singapore. I informed NTUC Income of this.

I was in my last months of full-time service in NTUC Income when TKL was succeeded by Tan Suee Chieh (TSC). I worked part-time for NTUC Income until December that year. It was my intention to return to NTUC Income after my sabbatical ended two years later. However, the policies of the law firm I joined in order to complete the applicable regulatory obligations required me to resign from NTUC Income. Nevertheless, during that limited period, I was in a position to experience first-hand the transition of leadership.

In all fairness, TSC did not have an easy time. He had to dismember the entrenched association of NTUC Income to TKL. This required turning upside down a lot of the practices of NTUC Income. He had to divest a lot of non-core assets. He also had to pull the plug on several unprofitable product lines, among other things. He went on a massive spending spree to improve the office environment, including his own office, and to bring in top-tier consultants to revamp the image of NTUC Income.

It also meant, in carrying out this task, he would have to bring in new people he could trust. To attract talent, salaries were increased across the board with employees taking home bigger bonuses. Several employees were re-designated or shipped out.

However, one thing that annoyed me at a fundamental level was when I found out much later that head-hunters had been appointed to find a replacement for or to bypass NTUC Income's independent and competent general counsel. TKL tried to do something similar before in devolving the responsibilities of the general counsel; TSC was just following TKL's example. To the credit of the unity of the Singapore bar, no lawyer worth his or her salt accepted the job. Any general counsel, who asks tough questions and is a true guardian of an organisation's interests, should be prepared for such surprises from time to time.

TSC continues to run NTUC Income like a very tight ship, as did TKL. Given the interests and importance of NTUC Income to the Singapore landscape - for example, in holding key stakes in Singapore assets like the Singapore Press Holdings - there can be no other way.

I initially had reservations about LSS's plans for NTUC Income.

While many things have changed, including the CEO becoming perceivedly less accessible, I still sense NTUC Income remains committed to its social charter of delivering better value to its policyholders. With innovations like its annual kite festival and city running event, it also remains true to its cooperative roots of giving back to society.

If the saffron revolution has defined the freedom fighters of Burma and Tibet, the orange revolution has been the hallmark of the leadership of Tan Suee Chieh. He must be credited for beating the odds and changing the course of NTUC Income to appeal to a more active, image-driven Singapore citizenry, as much as his predecessor may disagree with the way things have panned out.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this? Feel free to react below or leave a comment.

NTUC President should have held tongue

NOTE SENT TO NTUC PRESIDENT JOHN DE PAYVA

I write to you as your union member.

You disclosed recently that you invited one of the presidential candidates to speak to fellow union members. The NTUC has always supported values of fair treatment and equal opportunities. It is therefore unfortunate that it has not invited others in similar situations to do the same.

I must also protest your expression of personal views on your preferred presidential candidate. It has never been in the tradition of trade union leadership in Singapore to have one's personal political views expressed in the face of a high likelihood of the NTUC making known its preference.

It is for this reason union leaders must be publicly supportive of the People's Action Party, even though personally they may hold a different view. Anyone who has dared express such a divergent personal view publicly has been swiftly removed from his position as a union leader.

In expressing your personal views, you may have prejudiced the process by which the NTUC
goes about deciding its preferred presidential candidate. In the interest of good governance, you may wish to now detach yourself from such a process.

You have also disturbed that fragile balance that exists between the public and private views of a union leader. You may have set the wrong precedent for union leaders to follow. It is not surprising that other union members have started to follow your example, and are expressing their own personal views on this issue.

Your exemplary act thus frees me to register my disagreement with your choice of presidential candidate. If your criteria is that you "want a person who has got that kind of stature and that kind of exposure, who understands the fundamental role of the President", there are many others within the NTUC, including yourself, who can meet your criteria.

With respect, a unionist does not need to support a person, who cut his links with the NTUC more than a decade ago.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this?
Feel free to react below or leave a comment.

Power Behind Presidential Throne

Traditionally, the elected presidency of Singapore has been the preserve of the National Trades Union Congress. The candidate likely to muster the confidence of NTUC is supported by the People's Action Party leadership.

Former President Ong Teng Cheong (expired) and the current President S R Nathan were both active unionists, who depended critically on the NTUC to be eventually elected as heads of state. The NTUC's endorsement was also necessary during their presidency since many charitable initiatives of the President is dependent to various levels on the support, financial or otherwise, of the NTUC.

The NTUC support also gives the President greater visibility. For example, the NTUC commissioned to much fanfare a presidential neck-tie for the late Ong Teng Cheong.

Tan Cheng Bock in announcing his candidacy for the office of President may have pitted himself not against the PAP but the whole machinery of the NTUC.

Inderjit Singh was therefore right in saying that PAP members would feel awkward supporting Tan Cheng Bock's bid. Their loyalty to NTUC will demand that they distance themselves from Tan Cheng Bock, assuming his bid is not eventually endorsed by NTUC.

Any PAP MP who fails to do so is likely to find himself sidelined by NTUC. There are serious repercussions for such an MP. He may, among other things, lose access to subsidised grocery vouchers that MPs distribute to their poor constituents. Union members that volunteer in the constituency of such an MP may also withdraw their involvement.

The rallying force of the NTUC is still a force to be reckoned with. A good example of this is the recent general election. The PAP was hard-pressed to attract crowds at its election rallies.

The NTUC held one rally for the labour movement during that period, where the PAP leadership turned out in full force in their unmissable party whites. The rally held in the air-conditioned comfort of the Singapore Indoor Stadium attracted a capacity crowd of over 8000 unionists - quite possibly the most supportive audience the PAP faced during the general election!

The government has tried to dilute to strength of the unions in Singapore by creating parallel grassroots organisations and reaching out to other pools of volunteers. But these efforts pale in comparison to the work of the NTUC.

Moreover, there is now a strong call that such grassroots organisations move towards being less partisan, given their reliance on government funds.

In this light, it is therefore likely that in the next 5 years, the NTUC will become a stronger force.

Unlike such grassroots bodies, the NTUC faces no pressure to be non-partisan. In fact, its strength historically lies in its partisan nature. The message to its membership is an uncompromising one - an NTUC member must also be a PAP supporter. Any member who disagrees is likely to find himself at the exit of One Marina Boulevard.

Candidates desiring to be President will need to court the support of the NTUC or of political lobbies that have the equivalent power of NTUC to attract the support of the masses. Otherwise, it will take no less than a miracle for such individuals to be Singapore's next elected President.

Happiness
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this?
Do leave a comment as it will make a difference.

NTUC Income AGM: Let All Members Attend - Part 2

See Part 1 here.

REPLY RECEIVED FROM BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NTUC INCOME INSURANCE COOPERATIVE LIMITED ON 28 MAY 2008

Thank you for your e-mail dated 27 May 2008 addressed to our Chairman. Your feedback has been noted.

We appreciate the interest shown by our members to attend our 38th Annual General Meeting (AGM) on 30 May 2008. Bearing this in mind, we have in fact changed the AGM venue from the Auditorium at NTUC Income Centre to the Auditorium at Level 7, NTUC Centre, One Marina Boulevard, Singapore 018989. The new venue has a capacity of 550 which is more than twice that of the Auditorium at NTUC Income Centre. The venue was changed to accommodate the increased attendance this year.

NTUC Income has more than 500,000 ordinary members. You have suggested that Income should enable all its members to attend the AGM. Looking at the numbers, you must agree that it would be quite impossible to accommodate everyone at any one location. By changing the venue to a larger auditorium we have accommodated the interest shown by our members to attend this year's AGM up to reasonable limits.

As we have reached the capacity of the new venue, we are unable to accommodate more attendees. We have explained this to members who have contacted us and most have accepted our explanation.

We wish to thank you once again for your feedback. Please be assured that NTUC Income is mindful of the rights of its members and will ensure that members' interests are respected and accommodated up to reasonable limits.

We note that you have registered to attend the AGM and look forward to your presence at the meeting.

Jeffrey Lee
Chief Financial Officer
NTUC Income

RESPONSE TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NTUC INCOME INSURANCE COOPERATIVE LIMITED ON 30 MAY 2008

Thank you for assuring "that NTUC Income is mindful of the rights of its members and will ensure that members' interests are respected and accommodated up to reasonable limits".

Unfortunately, I cannot agree with your position. With all due respect to your good office, it appears driven more by pragmatic ideals rather than the position reflected in the Cooperative Societies Act.

Section 50 of the Cooperative Societies Act provides that "the supreme authority of a society shall be vested in the general meeting of its members, at which every member has a right to attend and to vote" (emphasis added).

Lack of capacity or "reasonable limits" does not seem to be a strong enough reason to limit this supreme authority and a member's right to attend.

There are many societies and companies in the world over which have as many members as NTUC Income, if not more.

One good example in Singapore is Singtel, which has over 300,000 shareholders and whose Corporate Governance Committee is headed by a top legal thinker, the Honourable Professor Tommy Koh. Despite its large shareholder base, Singtel, to the best of my knowledge, does not have a similar practice of turning away its ordinary shareholders from its AGM.

It is not unheard of organisations with membership numbers as large as NTUC Income to hold such events in even venues like stadiums. This is because a member's right to attend the AGM is sacrosanct. Such members cannot be turned away from attending the meeting simply due to lack of capacity.

Clearly, those members, who have expressed an interest to attend your AGM, should not have been turned away in the first place. I note, however, that most of have accepted your explanation and may have, unfortunately, waived their right to attend the AGM.

My concern is for those who continue not to accept your explanation. Surely, they continue to hold the right to attend the AGM and cannot be turned away.

However, if you can assure me that your position is based on the advice of your General Counsel to the Board of Directors and that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies is in agreement with the advice of your General Counsel, I am happy to defer to the view of your General Counsel.

Wishing you a fruitful AGM.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this?

NTUC Income AGM: Let All Members Attend

LETTER SENT TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NTUC INCOME INSURANCE COOPERATIVE LIMITED ON 27 MAY 2008

A number of your members have expressed a desire to attend NTUC Income's Annual General Meeting on 30 May 2008 at 6pm at the Auditorium, 7th Floor, NTUC Income Centre, 75 Bras Basah Road, Singapore 189557. I understand from them that they are being turned away due to lack of capacity.

Such a development is unfortunate for several reasons.

Members are the cornerstone of any successful cooperative society. NTUC Income is a key cooperative of not just the National Trades Union Congress but also of Singapore.

Indeed, it plays an influential role in the Singapore landscape. For example, NTUC Income has a decisive stake in the management shares of the national press.

Under your leadership and that of your predecessor, NTUC Income has been a leading light in championing transparency and accountability in the financial sector and the insurance industry.

I am sure you will appreciate that such meetings are an important opportunity for your members, especially your members in the minority, to hold the cooperative society and its management accountable.

Members also get to exercise their rights, as provided in the By-Laws of NTUC Income, at such meetings.

The gravity of this is only enhanced in light of recent decisions by your team, which have received much publicity in the media and will affect a majority of your ordinary members.

I am sending this feedback, as the members, who have been declined the opportunity to attend your AGM, would prefer to remain anonymous. I hope it can be looked into.

NTUC Income has crucially represented in its latest annual report that "it is committed to maintaining the highest standards of corporate governance".

As such, please enable all your members to attend NTUC Income's Annual General Meeting, in particular those who have expressed a desire to do so. Let your members exercise their rights.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this?

SIEU Reply: Three Ideas For SIEU

This is an excerpt of a reply from Singapore Insurance Employees' Union to my letter where I shared three ideas with them:

REPLY RECEIVED ON 1 MARCH 2007 FROM SIEU

On behalf of SIEU, I am very pleased to receive your feedback.

Your 3 useful suggestions will be given to the Education & Publication Committee.
I like to share with you that the union is keen to improve its publication. The union also wish to provide more and better communication and educational avenues to its members. However, we are always challenged in terms of resources and logistics as SIEU has only about 3043 Ordinary and 3614 General members.

In this connection, we are most delighted to have members like you who are concerned about the union and its activities...

As our member, we welcome your participation in the union. Your contribution in
any way you prefer would make a difference to our organisation.

We thank you for your support and feedback.

Willie Tan
General Secretary
SIEU

*****

The part of the reply that I have removed is an invitation from SIEU requesting me to join their Education & Publication Committee. I have agreed "to be both a sounding board and ad-hoc resource for the union for up to 12 hrs per year, without any official recognition of the contributions".

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Three Ideas For SIEU

LETTER SENT TO SINGAPORE INSURANCE EMPLOYEES' UNION ON 28 FEBRUARY 2007

I recently received the Mentor, a publication of the Singapore Teachers' Union (STU), from my sibling.

I found it to be full of information. I was pleasantly surprised to learn about the rich history of the union and that it represents some thirteen thousand teachers. I found a work plan of the union for the year ahead. And they are organising at least four dialogue sessions in one month alone to cater to busy members so as to share information and get feedback about the future of the union.

I also visited the STU website. It is regularly updated and a useful resource for members telling them about upcoming events and continuing education opportunities.

In contrast, the Singapore Insurance Employees' Union (SIEU) has about 6,000 members and is about ten years younger than the STU. Its website also appears to have had its last comprehensive update in 2005, when it was launched.

The STU is perceived to be more energetic and youthful than the SIEU.

I think the SIEU can learn from the STU in three ways:
a. Update its website with new developments and as a platform to inform members about future events and continuing education opportunities.
b. Improve its own union publication to the calibre of the Mentor.
c. Make public its own work plan for 2007, and be more consultative and vigorous in its efforts to reaching out to members about this plan.

If it does these, I am confident that the SIEU can be as vibrant as the STU.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

What shape should this piggy bank take?

ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN TODAY (SINGAPORE) ON 15 JANUARY 2007

So it's confirmed: Singaporeans will soon get extra funds from the Government to freely pursue higher education.

Indicating that the Government has embraced the suggestion by a panel of education experts to set up post-secondary accounts for every individual, Education Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said, on Saturday, that more details would be announced in March.

The aim is to help Singaporeans get that "edge" that "comes from not just having studied something in the past, obtaining your certificates and degrees, but from continual learning", said Mr Tharman.

What shape this education account takes remains to be seen — but there are already hints, going by some precedents.

In 2005, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) launched a pioneering initiative with some of its cooperatives. SkillsSave lets employees open individual-based learning accounts with NTUC Thrift and Loan Co-operative Limited.

Both employer and employee contribute a regular amount to this account and, until 2009, the Singapore Labour Foundation will match the contributions for union members. The result is that a sum of just under $1,000 goes into an account yearly.

SkillsSave has three key characteristics. Firstly, the account is portable — meaning if an employee resigns and joins another organisation, he can take the account to his new job.

Secondly, the funds can be accumulated throughout one's working life and have a savings element. The account can only be closed in limited situations, such as when the person dies or retires.

Thirdly, personal responsibility for one's learning is encouraged; employer approval is not required for the use of the money in the account.

The individual decides what he wants to learn from an array of offerings provided by training providers, which include the likes of the Singapore Academy of Law. Importantly, the learning "need not be of any direct relevance" to one's current role.

Also, at least one of the cooperatives on this scheme allows a person to take learning leave of up five days — on top of the annual leave entitlement.

Would the Government's plans for post-secondary accounts be as ambitious? It's unlikely.

An important consideration would be the costs incurred for employers, and organisations may be expected to resist any attempts to raise the already dear cost of doing business in Singapore. Nevertheless, with SkillsSave, the NTUC and its cooperatives have set the lead for the Government.

Indications are that the plan for post-secondary accounts will take the 14-year-old Edusave Scheme — which sees funds deposited in deserving schoolchildren's accounts for enrichment programmes — a step forward.

Currently, the Government transfers any remaining sum in the child's Edusave account to the Central Provident Fund (CPF) account when he or she reaches 21 years of age. It is likely the post-secondary accounts will thus come under the CPF Board's purview and be linked to one's CPF account.

As such, the advantage that the Government's post-secondary accounts will have, over the SkillsSave scheme, is the protection from creditors accorded to CPF-related schemes.

It could also mean that any balance in a child's Edusave account would be moved to the post-secondary account when the child turns 21.

Perhaps, as part of its plans, the Government will also revisit the CPF Education Scheme. It currently enables one to pay for "approved full-time subsidised undergraduate courses leading to a degree" or "approved full-time diploma courses".

It would be timely to expand the CPF Education Scheme to enable an individual to pay for full-time postgraduate courses at the Nanyang Technological University, the National University of Singapore or the Singapore Management University, using his or her own CPF funds.

The plans for post-secondary accounts is a milestone worth celebrating.

It highlights that the Government is finally putting its financial weight fully behind a principle it, and the labour movement, have long espoused: The importance of life-long learning, and the importance of setting aside funds to invest in one's post-secondary education.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Explore Solutions Beyond Restoring CPF Cut

Outgoing chief of the National Trades Union Congress, Lim Boon Heng, has been lobbying for higher Central Provident Fund contributions from employers for middle-income Singaporeans.

He has argued, "We hope that the Prime Minister and the other Cabinet Ministers should be hearing this favourably. We hope also that the employers would consider this seriously and support this, because workers have made sacrifices in the past few years and since, generally speaking, they're doing well, then they should reciprocate the actions of the workers of the past by doing the small restorations to the CPF."

Employers are being encouraged to increase their level of CPF contributions from 13% to 16%.

Lim Boon Heng has suggested, "We should do this gradually, so we shouldn't ask the employers to straight away raise it to 16 per cent but maybe somewhere in between. The timeline would depend on whether we get consensus and support from the employers and whether we also get support from the government."

Some years ago, these level of contributions, which use to be higher than the present 13%, were reduced to help Singapore be more competitive and to enable it to attract investments needed to create jobs.

These threats continue to be relevant, even in these good times.

And, suppose, if the Singapore economy were to return to its dark days, will one have to resort to the CPF cut again?

Interestingly, the outgoing Chief Executive Officer of NTUC Income, Tan Kin Lian, has argued, "There is some discussion in the newspaper on the need for the employer to increase the contribution rate to the Central Provident Fund. The final outcome is not significant in financial planning. It is clear that the CPF is no longer the sole source of funds for retirement."

Perhaps, there are other ways of rewarding employees in these better moments.

For example, when the employers' CPF contributions were cut years back, my own employer decided to reward employees by giving them one month of paid leave every three years.

Another solution could be for employers to do a one-off top-up of CPF contributions when the employers are doing well, much like how the annual wage supplement operates.

The labour movement can explore solutions other than the restoration of the CPF cut.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

Hassle-Free Payment For Union Membership

LETTER SENT TO NATIONAL TRADES UNION CONGRESS ON 20 SEPTEMBER 2006

Union members are now being made to pay their dues by GIRO under a "seamless membership" banner. It affects people like me who do not use GIRO but prefer, for our own unique reasons, to transact by cash, cheque or credit card.

The only other choice given to us is to terminate our union membership. And loyal union members will find it difficult to make this other choice.

As the labour movement prepares to appeal to all as part of it 2011 vision, it must seriously consider becoming hassle-free and provide other payment modes for union dues. For example, payment by the NTUC-OCBC credit card.

Otherwise, it may well be that some of these persons or less loyal union members may find it more hassle-free to make the choice to terminate their membership or not be a union member.

I hope NTUC and its unions will look into this suggestion.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav

REPLY FROM NATIONAL TRADES UNION CONGRESS ON 25 SEPTEMBER 2006

Thank you for the suggestion. We are indeed looking into the payment of membership fees via NTUC-OCBC card.

Readers Question: Tan Kin Lian Stepping Down

After the newspaper reports in Business Times, The Straits Times and Berita Harian, some readers have wrote in to ask me about this. Here are some of the frequently-asked questions.

Is it true that Tan Kin Lian is stepping down as Chief Executive Officer of NTUC Income?

Yes, he will step down on 1 April 2007 "to pursue other interests". He has confirmed this on his blog.

By that time, Tan would have given 30 years of public service to NTUC Income.

What is your reaction?

The announcement was received by some colleagues as a shock. But to many I know, it was an affirmation of issues that have been discussed in the office in the past week.

I joined NTUC Income on 15 August 2003. I have worked in NTUC Income as its Legal Counsel for about 3 years and 1 month now. I was expected to last less than a year.

In these 3 years, I have learnt many things. But one key lesson is that, in any situation, we must be positive and make the most of the opportunities it brings.

I think a new leader will bring new ideas and new ways of doing things in NTUC Income.

What else do you hope to see in the new leader?

First, the same courage that Tan had to make his views known, even if the issue involved regulators or others with influence.

When I joined NTUC Income, my mentor told me, "Tan Kin Lian is one person who will stand up for what he thinks is right. And he is the one person who will let you do the same. So the opportunity to work with him is an honour."

Second, the same desire and willingness that Tan had to help deprived constituencies in society.

I remember, when I first joined NTUC Income, a manager had put forward a proposal to Tan. The manager painted a very rosy picture and provided enticing figures to support that image.

Tan replied, "Our goal as a cooperative is not make too much money. We only need to make a reasonable amount of money. Our goal should also be to help people and to create jobs so that they can help others."

Third, I hope the new leader will preserve some of the laudable things that Tan has done. For example, our level of promptness in responding to queries and the accessibility of the Chief Executive Officer to our policyholders.

How do you think the newspapers covered the report?

I think the reports could have painted a better picture of what he has achieved and the legacy he is leaving. But then, there was no confirmation that he is actually leaving. Now that this is known, perhaps, the newspapers will do so.

It is not easy to take a cooperative "from an asset base of $40 million in 1977" to "total assets exceeding $17 billion and annual premiums exceeding $2 billion". NTUC Income is also "rated "AA" by Standard & Poor's, [which] is the highest rated insurance company from Asia".

Tan Kin Lian brought you into NTUC Income. Is your position secure?

I do not report directly to him, although I have done some work for him from time to time. The status of my position is determined by the head of legal, who supervises me.

In any case, I think, in this day and age, it will be fool-hardy for anyone to think he has a secure position.

It is more important to know if one is adding value and if such value creation is appreciated.

In this respect, at the start of every year, I agree on a set of performance indicators with my supervisor. And by the end of the year, I am measured against these benchmarks. So far, I am meeting most of these standards.

Happiness,
Dharmendra Yadav