Union refutes security agency’s claim that attempted demotions would not affect officers’ salaries

The union added that the workers’ wages and prospects would continue to progress according to the Progressive Wage Model ladder. PHOTO: ST FILE

SINGAPORE - Attempts by a firm to demote 300 of its security officers were not approved by the workers’ union, and suggestions that their pay would have been unaffected were wrong, the Union of Security Employees Singapore (USE) said on Thursday.

“USE’s position is based on the fact that these officers would be better off had they been retained at their original job ranks,” the union wrote on Facebook, responding to the claim by security agency Apro that its demoted officers would still receive higher salaries from the progressive wage model (PWM) baseline wage.

To illustrate this point, USE explained that workers at the Senior Security Officer rank would be able to earn a PWM baseline wage of $2,950, according to the 2024 wage schedule.

“However, if demoted to Security Officer rank, these workers would only be able to earn a PWM baseline wage of $2,650 – this is $300 less than what they should be earning in their current job rank. The worth of $300 every month for these workers should certainly not be undervalued,” wrote USE.

The union added that the workers’ wages and prospects would continue to progress according to the PWM wage ladder.

The PWM, introduced in 2012, helps to boost lower-wage workers’ wages by mapping out a clear career pathway for them to rise along with training and improvements in productivity and standards.

The case first came to light on Tuesday, when NTUC secretary-general Ng Chee Meng said that a security agency was being dealt with for attempting to “reset” the wages of 300 officers by demoting them.

A Channel NewsAsia report on Wednesday said the agency showed an e-mail in which a representative from USE said “we are supportive on your offer to the affected employees”.

In response, USE wrote in its Facebook post: “Any suggestion of the union having agreed to unfair conditions is inaccurate.”

In response to queries from ST, Mr Ng said: “Fair market practices must be part and parcel of the tripartite mechanism. In this instance, this mechanism was not reinforced.”

The case is currently under conciliation at the Ministry of Manpower.

Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.