Govt urges employers to hire mid-career PMETs as growing tech threatens to displace workers


More than half of Singapore’s local workforce are professionals, managers, engineers and technicians (PMETs), however, as the economy transforms and as technology advances, PMETs will stay relevant if, and only if they continually upskill and reskill.

This is according to Second Minister for Manpower and Home Affairs, Josephine Teo who spoke about the employment of mid-career PMETs at the 2-day Singapore Human Capital Summit from 20 September.

Acknowledging the deep frustrations felt by PMETs who believe that the gains from economic growth and globalisation have been unevenly distributed, Teo also addressed growing fears about machines replacing humans in millions of jobs, due to the escalating advancement of artificial intelligence.

To help PMETs cope with such rapid changes which have led to rising unemployment and underemployment, Teo said that the government is funding partial wages and subsidising training fees for those who switch vocations mid-career through the Adapt and Grow series of schemes.

In unveiling other schemes (such as the focus on Financial, Healthcare, ICT, Professional Services, and Wholesale Trade sectors which create potential for quality job creation for PMETs, as well as the focus on building a stronger Human Resources industry), Teo particularly touched on Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) which thousands of workers have gone through.

Teo categorised the workers who go through PCPs as talent from the “third source” – that is, mid-career PMETs in our local workforce. She said that the first and the second sources are the Singaporean core entering the workforce and the foreign workforce which complement new local entrants.

In the first half of this year, more than 1,500 people have already undergone skills conversion through PCPs, more than double the 600 people in the first half of last year. By taking advantage of such programmes, employees are expected to be able to move into new jobs with broader and more commendable prospects.



  1. PCP is something of a joke. Going thru it, most programme requires you to be employed 1st in another scope but Is it even possible to get employed in the 1st place when you got no experience in that industry? A simple example is “NTUC Foodfare” Try applying for a Supervisor post without any FnB experience and the HR tells you “We cant consider you for Supervisor post because you dont have FnB experience and the Salary is not even SGD1600 per month.

  2. Hey minister you won’t need to urge companies to hire singaporeans if only you thought of us from the start and not let the foreign trash invade our shores!!! PAP started this massive problem in the first place with lax immigration policies

  3. Urh! Small space white termite gang member at it again !! So now it is a problem born out of technology advancement!? what a convenient excuse !?
    Who started the trouble for Singaporean ?? Wonder why their pet policy ” Open Leg Policy ” is still running like never before !??? save it and save yourself some votes!!!! Nahbeh!!!

  4. According to the official (TAFEP) website, there is no legislation on workplace discrimination in Singapore because
    • The experience of other countries is that anti-discriminatory laws alone might not adequately change mindsets in this area.
    • Singapore has a strong tripartite partnership that allows us to use promotional and educational approach to effectively tackle the issue of discrimination at the workplace in a win-win fashion.

    Perhaps our authority’s perception of a “win-win situation” is very different from the common people on the street.
    • Does the proclaimed “win-win situation” take into consideration of the plight of victims of unfair hiring practices?
    • How do victims of discrimination seek justice and compensation in the absence of anti-discriminatory law and transparent mechanism for redress?
    • Is it for the greater good to withhold Singaporean workers of legal protection against discriminatory employment practices?
    • Who is the biggest winner for not enshrining victims’ rights in law? The government, employers or the employees?
    Wish the authority can be more empathetic towards our vulnerable workers and provide more effective measures in combating discriminatory hiring practices.

  5. Empty vessel.
    Urge? That is useless.
    Why not make it mandatory? Don’t give employers a choice. Just like we are not given a choice to vote for our president!!

  6. This Ministers is a useless Minister look at how she deals with transportation, milk power problems and birth rates and now employment her speech is just open her mouth to release bad breath, it’s a wrong choice that LHL promoted her.

  7. what about the govt taking the lead and initiative in this? Surely the million dollar ministers can come up with a better plan than just pushing it to the private sector when the going gets tough or are they just a bunch of parasites…

Comments are closed.