Have PEP in-principle approval - now I have a question

[mugsey68]

Received my PEP in-principle approval letter this week.

I now need my employer to cancel my existing EP, so that I can get the PEP issued.

Question - can my exitsing employer refuse?

[Nath21]

No from what I understand but they can make life hell for you and sack you knowing what the employment law over here is like.

I got one too and was going to hold off initiating it because firstly I only just started, its not renewable so it only lasts five years so I think I was going to time the use of it. It offers you a bit e leverage but the leverage is double edged if your employer dosen't like you having that leverage.

I don't see why they need to inform your employer in this whole process its really a design weakness in this PEP process because its trying to give the employee more choice whilst keeping in bed with the employer.

[sundaymorningstaple]

I don't see why they need to inform your employer in this whole process its really a design weakness in this PEP process because its trying to give the employee more choice whilst keeping in bed with the employer.

They have to inform you employer because when you get the PEP it cancels the EP. The employer sponsors the EP. Why is that a design weakness? Because you want to be able to jump ship whenever you feel like it without due process? Don't you think that the business AND the Government of Singapore have a right to protect their interests? After all, they are contributing to the economy of the Nation. All the employee does is try to contribute to his own economy and the expense of the employer. This is especially so, if the employer has to train the individual. Additionally, while some employers "seem" to shaft the employee, remember, the employee wasn't forced to sign the original contract under threat of death. The employee signed on voluntarily. I'm not saying that all employers are up front (the bad apples are there and are being caught every day) but again, those running scams, usually do so with the express acknowledgment of the employee (who wants a job 'at any cost' including his own morals). So the employee is just a guilty as the employer.

[Nath21]

Your arguement on the government protecting its interest doesnt make sense. I can see that perspective from the employer but not government. If the government chooses to give me the right to switch jobs and effectively sponsor me instead of the company then the government has recongnised my worth as an individual to contribute to this economy and they want to give me chance to switch jobs and not be tied to one employer. By notifying the employer its undermines the individual. Why does the company have to know? There is no reason whatsever other than to cancel the previous EP. They could alternatively just cancel the companies EP without telling the company, offer the individual the PEP and nothing would change until either the individual or the company decided to part their relationship. Therefore its a design weakness because some people the government is trying to encourage to take the PEP wont because they know their employer will act inappropriately. I can understand its due process as you say but I stick by its a design weakness in the process.

Also its not like employers dont already have enough powers here. I can be sacked without notice or reason which is pretty much unheard of in other countries but legal over here.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Obviously you know little about the HR/MOM functions of the government and the interaction between the two. If so, you would understand that if the employer is no longer responsible for the welfare and repatriation of said employee, then the employer has a right to know that his liabilities have been discharged by the cancellation of the Working visa as the employer had to sponsor it in the first place. With sponsorship comes certain liabilities to the employer.

How hard is that to comprehend?

Also its not like employers dont already have enough powers here. I can be sacked without notice or reason which is pretty much unheard of in other countries but legal over here.

Go reread you contract. It also tells you that you also have the same rights. That IS law here. The employer can contract any terms they want but when it come to termination of a contract, they are required by law to give the employee the same options. So where is it unfair? And why, if it was unfair, did you sign it in the first place? Hoist by your own petard?

[Nath21]

Your right I dont know much about the relationship between government and companies here but I do know when I hear a bunch of bananas. What welfare and repatriation is the employer responsible for? None!

If I entertain this so called welfare actually existed then hasnt the government offered to take over these from the company by offering me a PEP?

Working rights is a separate argument but linked and im happy to take you on on this as well.
My contract requires 3 months notice my employer dosent require to give me any, and can fire me without cause. Sorry If I dont agree that fair. I signed because I know I have skills to pay the bills and it wont come to that but is that really fair for all workers? Im not whinging on my behalf but at the actual system that allows that.

You didnt answer the key arguement to this is why offer the PEP at all when the process set up undermines the actual take up of the offer?

The rights of the employer dont actually change with the PEP compared to the EP. The employer still has to contact the MOM on termination so therefore unless you can justify what other responsibilities the employer has which you mentioned before I think its a process flaw which wont see everyone who wants to take up the offer actually do so.

[sundaymorningstaple]

You are still missing the point I see. Do you know the purpose of the PEP in the first place? You seem to think that is solely the governments purpose to keep those people here. That is part of it granted. The government also invites those P1 pass holders as these are the ones that under the current economic conditions, tend to really be affected by retrenchments. This is a real problem especially where there are families and schooling to consider. This gives the government the opportunity to keep somebody here that they might otherwise lose. As far as stabbing the employee in the back by notifying the employer I'm still not sure where you get this idea from. Unless you are a slacker and should be let go anyway that is. If you are carrying your weight in the company, I don't know of any company that would let anybody go deliberately because somebody got a PEP.

Matter of fact, the only time I've ever heard about problems it when an employee applies for PR behind the employers back (which can be done know as the employers sponsorship is no longer needed). This can entail additional expense for the employer in having to pay employers portion of CPF.

Anyway, it's all irrelevant as you already have your mind set that it's not fair and all the logic in the world is not going to change your mind so one can only hope you are not the same at your place of work because if you are, I can understand your apprehension......

I'm outta here. I'll not waste any more of my valuable time. Good luck.

[Strong Eagle]

What welfare and repatriation is the employer responsible for? None!

Wrong. When I take you on as an EP, I agree, as a company, to guarantee that I will bear the expense of throwing you out of the country if the Singapore government determines that you should be thrown out of the country. I am also liable for any taxes that you have not paid when you leave.

Need to read up a bit, Nath21.

[Nath21]

When im provided with evidence of the welfare and responsibilities (see below) they dont appear to sufficent to warrant notifying the employer of a change of indivudal status from PEP to EP. As an individual its the government that lets me work here not the company. The company effectively got the right to hire me from the government.

Usually when the employer notifies the MOM of termination of emplyment the individual will receive a letter asking them to leave by a certain time. If push comes to shove the individual will be forced to pay for the plane ticket home. In the most severe cases where the individual has no money (the company would just withhold final pay so really there is no cost to bear by the company.

with regard to taxes your referring to income tax which is witheld from you final pay well that happens normally.

Anyway the system is what it is I aint going to change it. Its easy to set these things up by looking at the world with rose coloured glasses. There will be small amount of people offered the PEP that wont take it up for fear of action from the employer. It would be a good world where no employer took the offer of PEP as a threat but you only have to read these boards to know that aint true.

By the way this in no way effects my own situation as I have a good employer but to me its theoretical arguement.

PS: I dont mean to upset you SMS I just have an opinion and your evidence didnt persuade me otherwise and believe me my opinion can be persuaded. Thanks for your thoughts anyway.

[sundaymorningstaple]

PS: I dont mean to upset you SMS I just have an opinion and your evidence didnt persuade me otherwise and believe me my opinion can be persuaded. Thanks for your thoughts anyway.

Don't worry Nath21, I'm not upset at all. Matter of fact I never get upset on this forum. However, I do know when I'm flogging a dead horse. And in this case, when your sparring partner is bull-headed and refuses to do some reading of his own, it become a exercise in futility trying to have a discussion. That's what this has turned into.

sms

[carteki]

Why an employer would fire an employee for changing their work permit status is beyond me - but then again this is Singapore and there is very little logic to this place! But I do agree that the employer needs to submit a cancellation letter.

Your PEP approval in principal has a 6 month validity. If you think that this is the case, I would sound out the employer on what they think about the change in status. If you fear that your job may be in jeopardy then you can look for another job (and convert your status when you have that job) or just ask MOM to cancel the PEP. In order to do this you need to send a letter explaining why and it takes about 1 week. I don't know how this will impact any future applications for PEP (also, hopefully the job market will be better in 6 months). Then you will just continue with your EP as per normal procedures.

Hope this helps.
Kim

[mugsey68]

I am still unclear - can my employer refuse to cancel my EP or are they obliged to do so?

Alternatively, do I have to cancel the in principle application, or can I just let it lapse?

[sundaymorningstaple]

They don't have to, if you are granted PEP, then MOM will cancel it for you. But they will be obviously notified.

You employer will also know about the in principle approval as well if they check up regularly online to see the status of their employees. We do it weekly to keep tabs on our foreign staff as they will pull a quick one more times than not and leave us with government contracts and no staff (penalties abound). The MOM website will let us know if there are any applications submitted, pending or IPA's but it will not tell an employer who applied for the new sponsorship. Of course, an PEP application will obviously be made by the employee themselves with no sponsorship required.

If they haven't already found out, the only thing you can do is withdraw the application. If you decide to let it lapse, it will stay there as "approved" for 6 months. The longer it stays up the more chance of your employer seeing it. Frankly, I, like cartiki, have never heard of an employer firing somebody because of obtaining a PEP. PR yes, but PEP....... there is not any additional cost to the employer but again, if employees have burned the employer before by leaving soon after arrival and not working out their first term of contract (duration of the first EP), it's possible that the employer has become, understandably, vindictive.

[carteki]

My employer didn't check up on my status - they actually sent me the renewal form for my EP before they realised I'd received the approval!

There is a far less "hurtful" way of dealing with employees who leave before the term of their contract is up - and that is to pay them retention bonuses or to charge a "exit fee" if they leave early. At least then both parties are aware of what they are up against when employees leave.

SMS - I understand why you need to ensure that you know whether or not you have the correct number of employees, but do you find that those employees that just leave like that are the one's that you would happily see the end of? Are they worth "getting upset over"?

[bogdang]

or just ask MOM to cancel the PEP. In order to do this you need to send a letter explaining why and it takes about 1 week. I don't know how this will impact any future applications for PEP

You can get PEP only once.