Your job, your responsibility – GLC or not

 Why should the taxpayer keep people in GLCs employed? The only true social responsibility is for the government to provide the right framework so that job losses are the exception, not the rule.

Petronas is laying off a few thousand employees. We’ve not heard much else from them, apart from the usual highly-crafted statements – i.e. communications that don’t say anything.

I don’t expect to hear much more from them, either: this topic is the hottest of hot potatoes, and they won’t touch it any more than they have to.

Petronas is what I call a “GLSS” – Government-Linked Something Something. Malaysia has many of these “something somethings”. We often hear about GLSSs when they lose money or are defrauded, usually internally, which happens a lot.

To be fair, Petronas is one of the better-run ones. I don’t have much of a clue as to what’s happening there. But if GLSSs are anything to go by, any decisions they make which are socially or politically unpopular, such as laying people off, are generally way overdue.

GLSSs obey their political masters. That they’re presumably acting with the approval, if not the actual blessing, of said political masters on this matter is something very interesting indeed.

Companies often lay people off if their existence is in jeopardy (the “burning platform” rationale) or because they’re under pressure to improve their financials, so the management can give their shareholders – and often themselves – bigger bonuses and dividends.

What’s the reason?

I doubt Petronas has any burning-platform problems, whether literally or figuratively. It’s likely they’re cleaning up house to deal with current and future business challenges.

This could actually be farsighted and wise, something we should be proud of from the custodians of our oil and gas wealth.

But perhaps it’s something else. As the horrible but still kinder, gentler times of Covid drift further away from our memory, we now have CEOs, these “masters-of-the-universe”, competing to show who can be more cruel, harsh and ruthless.

We’re after all living in the age of DOGE, the infamous US government’s Department of Government Efficiency, where cruelty, masquerading as efficiency, governs leaders’ actions.

Move fast, break things, bank in a few billions into your account. Rinse and repeat.

Behind the decision

Whatever it is, here’s one thing that I think most of us can agree on.

GLSSs in the private sector are generally less efficient than their private-sector peers. Their structure is often dictated by politics, and tends to be heavily, or overwhelmingly, or even exclusively, bumiputeras (read Malays) at the top.

Even if you’re not a believer of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) you would still agree this kind of set-up isn’t what business school textbooks tell us is optimal.

This is something easily proven right.

Many of those who decry layoffs by GLSSs will cite the “social responsibility” of these companies as employers of men and women who have family and other responsibilities. That’s all true. Letting one employee go will often have a larger impact – “collateral damage” as it was – to the community and even society at large.

But it exactly proves my point, which is that considerations other than business logic determine much of what GLSSs do. That sucks.

What it means to be poor

I grew up in the unlucky circumstances of being poor – not just humble, but really poor, even if luckily, if you can call it that, among others equally as poor and desperate as my family was.

When times were tough – and they were almost always tough – nobody came around asking whether we were making ends meet, or whether our “dapur berasap” (that our wood-burning stove is cooking something) – or if there were coins in the kids’ pockets when they went to school.

Nope. Only our votes seemed to matter, but not much else. We were the invisibles.

We dreamed of salaried jobs with the government or banks. We knew they offered stability and protection. For many people even today, that dream hasn’t changed.

Now you may argue, with some justifications, that those were the bad old days. That things are better now. I’d agree. Somewhat.

No guarantees

But if you’re poor and make your living the hard way – harvesting declining catches of fish, planting crops in harsh soils, hawking street food or doing other menial, dangerous jobs – life is still hard.

Nobody guarantees you your jobs, and nobody fights for you when you lose them. You’re on your own.

But if you’re working with the GLSSs, somehow it seems the taxpayers have a “social responsibility” to keep you employed! You get to keep your job even if it doesn’t make business sense to employ you!

I spent four decades in the private sector knowing that any day could be my last day of employment. Given that the bulk of the country’s taxes come from us and our employers, shouldn’t we be given priority when it comes to keeping our jobs?

I can even accept government employees getting a slightly more protected status. Many in public service accept lower pay in the name of serving the people, and a little bit more consideration for them isn’t out of place.

This doesn’t apply to those who step out of line obviously. The corrupt, the slackers, those who misuse their powers, should be dealt with possibly even. more harshly for betraying the public trust.

But for those in the GLSSs, competing in the private sector and often earning similar or even better pay, and often enjoying special treatment from the “G” in GLSSs, I don’t see why this logic should apply.

Take nothing for granted

I don’t want to sound cruel or unfeeling. In many instances in the past, such as the Asian Financial Crisis of the late 1990s, I’ve had to implement decisions by the owners of the business to retrench people.

This was especially unpleasant as it happened during a period of global economic slowdown. We couldn’t afford to give nice payoffs as our company was bleeding. Jobs were scarce, and even those who kept theirs worried about losing them constantly.

Remember, the job doesn’t belong to you. You’re employed based on a piece of paper: the letter of employment. You can leave your job, and so, too, the job can leave you, technically anyway.

In my working life, I’ve taken jobs away from people, and I’ve had my own job taken away. That’s how this thing works.

You never take anything for granted. Nobody owes you a living. Don’t use the loyalty crutch. For every single day you’re loyal to the company, the company is also loyal to you.

What you owe the company is to give your best, and that your best meets the company’s requirements. If something better comes by tomorrow, do what’s best for yourself, even if it means leaving your job.

Your employer may also decide you are surplus to its requirements. There are enough legal protections should the employer act in bad faith, but otherwise, they don’t owe you a living.

Government’s rightful role

The only true social responsibility is that the government must provide the right economic frameworks so that job losses are the exception rather than the rule, and that there are social safety nets should you need them.

To those losing their jobs, it’s not the end of the world. If you truly have marketable skills and experiences, you’ll find another job. If it’s better to sail into the sunset, do so. If you can’t find takers for your skills and experiences, then maybe you haven’t been managing your careers correctly.

And if the company letting you go is a GLSS, such as Petronas or a bank, they’ll pay you gratuities beyond what was your remuneration during your service. Spend the money wisely, and be thankful. Many of us elsewhere don’t get anything like what you’re getting, or even anything at all.

Remember, there are many millions of Malaysians, usually in places we don’t think about much, whether in the “ulu” places in the boondocks or right in front of our eyes, who can’t avail themselves of these goodies.

They’re the lowest and the weakest in our society, and to them we owe our best efforts to protect and care for. That’s where our taxes should go. That’s our real social responsibility. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.