In the interest of national competitiveness and the long-term sustainability of workers’ employment, the Chamber of Commerce appealed for a re-evaluation of the compensation for the higher electricity surcharge given across the board in this year’s budget.

In a statement, the chamber reiterated that the wage increases are not proportionate to productivity gains. It spoke out against the “dangerous precedent” that saw the cost-of-living-increase being adjusted to incorporate the impact of increased cost of electricity.

The chamber said this measure will dampen the private sector’s competitiveness and intensifies the blow already incurred due to the increased costs of fuel and electricity. It was also deemed unaffordable and unnecessary since, “not all workers pay electricity bills and that there may be more workers to electricity bill payers in a typical household,” the chamber said.

In the statement, the Chamber of Commerce gave a statistical example to illustrate this argument – shown in table below. This is the latest Household Budgetary Survey published by the National Statistics Office in 2000.

The number of households with one or more dependent children living with reference people in the 40-49 age-bracket and older (highlighted in table) are the ones relevant to the chamber’s argument.

These children are very likely to be of working age and indeed be employed. The table, therefore, presents a good indication of how many people will receive an unwarranted compensation in this year’s COLA, when in truth they are theoretically not carrying any or at least not the full burden of their household’s electricity bill.