His emphasis on the need for them to be proficient in English may, therefore, be misplaced.
Except for those who work in the service industries in which being in contact with the general public is a requirement, and hence the need for them to be proficient in English, it is highly unlikely that foreign workers such as domestic workers and other manual workers would mix with the local population.
Mr Goh's comparison of Singapore with countries such as Australia and the United States was obviously specious.
Singapore has four officially- recognised languages but in those countries he mentioned it is only English, as the majority of the population there are English speaking.
Of course, it would be advantageous for foreign workers in Singapore to have some working knowledge of English, but as a writer to The Straits Times Forum rightly pointed out recently, there is no real necessity for this requirement when the worker's job scope does not require him or her to be in contact with the general population at large.
In any case, most Singaporeans do not hobnob with foreign workers.
Moreover, these workers are here on short-term work permits, which give them no flexibility to change jobs. They are here to earn money to provide a better life for their families at home. That is their primary motivation.
There is nothing else to compel them to assimilate into our culture, unlike what Mr Goh said in his letter.
If they can perform their duties adequately to the satisfaction of their employers, why should we add other parameters, such as specific language skills, to their condition of employment?
