10
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
(c) Life insurance
24.8% considered that the employer should shoulder the full
responsibility.
43% considered that such responsibility should be shared between
employer and employee.
25.7% considered that the employer had no such responsibility. (page 56)
(d) Housing loan facilities
11.7% considered that the employer should shoulder the full
responsibility.
36.6% considered that such responsibility should be shared between
employer and employee.
42.4% considered that the employer had no such responsibility.(page 56)
Sharing of contributions
64.8% considered that the employer should shoulder the full contributions. As regards how the contributions should be apportioned between employer
and employee, the percentage suggested by employees averaged 84%. (pages 56-57)
Attitude towards compulsory participation on the part of employees
41% agreed that the proposed scheme should be made compulsory, 48% disagreed. (page 57)
Employees' assessment of their employers' possible objections to their
participation in the proposed scheme
41.1% thought that their employers would object because once they chose
to join the scheme, their employers had to pay their share of contribution.
29.3% thought that their employers would not object. (page 58) 59.5% thought that their participation in the schere would not
adversely affect their chances of getting new jobs because of possible objections from new employers. (page 59)
Estimated public support
71.2% estimated that the proposed scheme would receive general public support. (page 60)
Extent of protection provided for employees in lower-income groups
Employees in lower-income groups, particularly daily-rated and blue-collar workers, were found to be generally less protected by life
insurance, sickness insurance and retirement benefits. (pages 60
61)
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.