Thursday, November 18, 2010
- DLI is human right;
As a human right, it has several characteristic. The international community has agreed several key characteristics of human rights, they are:
- Universal: human rights belong to everyone in the world
- Equality: All rights are equally important
- Inalienability: rights cannot be taken away from people, but can be limited through legally sanctioned processes
- Indivisibility and interdependence: all the human rights are equally important for people to flourish and participate in society.
- DLI is Family wage
A family wage is a wage that is sufficient to raise a family on. This contrasts with a living wage, which is generally taken to mean a wage sufficient for a single individual to live on, but not necessarily sufficient to also support a family. As a stronger form of living wage, a family wage is likewise advocated by proponents of social justice.
The notion of a family wage traditionally assumes a household consisting of nuclear family with a single wage-earner, namely the man, with the wife staying at home and raising the children, and thus the assumption that the man's wage should support his wife and their children. This is in contrast to a multi-generation household, consisting also of the previous generation, or to single parent households or dual-earners. With the entry of women into the paid labor force, this model has been complicated, with some households having two wage earners, some one (and others none).
- DLI is adequate
It is not easy to understand the meaning of "adequate", because to this day there is no agreement or restriction or understanding of the adequate. For your consideration we are going to present below some adequate definitions according to some dictionary:
- Sufficient to satisfy a requirement or meet a need.
- Barely satisfactory or sufficient
- able to fulfil a need or requirement without being abundant, outstanding, etc.
- having the requisite qualities or resources to meet a task
- Equal to some requirement; proportionate, or correspondent; fully sufficient
Thursday, November 18, 2010 by IYCW ASPAC · 0
In the Philippine, the labour regulation stipulates that between men and women receive equal pay, but in practice there is little difference. 55% of respondents said men received slightly higher wages than female workers but not so clear why men received slightly higher wages. Between public and private sector workers do not have big differences, they could even be said to have same wage rate. It is perhaps in the Philippine labour laws apply uniformly to all sectors.
By contrast, the ratio of wages between the formal and informal workers. Formal sector workers receive the wages of two times higher compared to informal sector workers. So do not be surprised if many organisations in the Philippine in their campaign demanding a formal status of each of its members. There are also differences in wages between shift workers and non-shift. Shift workers receive higher wages than non-shift workers, it is likely that night workers get paid extra because they face a higher risk.
The level of education affects the wage level earned by a worker. The higher the education level, the higher the wages they could receive. 47% of respondents who answered our questions are workers who graduated from secondary school, and on average they receive a wage of USD 154.98 per month. While workers who finished primary school (22%) received a wage of USD 89.18 per month. Workers who graduate diploma (19%) received a wage of USD 195.37 per month, whereas those who had completed university (7%) received much higher wages is, USD 385.29 per month. Education seems very important in the Philippine, so that in many companies seems to have firm rules that give some prestige for the workers who have high educational background (university.
Marital status and number of family members is not an important consideration in determining wages in the Philippine. In fact, our research shows that single workers to receive slightly higher wages than those who are married or divorced. This is almost similar to other developing countries such as Indonesia and Thailand. At least, until now the family wage was initiated by rerum novarum is not addressed properly by the government in developing countries such as Philippine
Period length of a work also does not affect the amount of wages they receive. A worker who works 10 years receive a wage of USD 233.78 per month, while those who worked one year receive an average of USD 181.97 per month, only a little difference in their wages even though their working period far adrift. This fact shows us that the promotion system is not affected by length of employment, but more on the education level of a worker
Total hours worked in the comparable week straight with the amount of wages, workers who work less than 40 hours per week receive lower wages than those working 40 hours per week. But for the Philippine case, we find irregularities that those who work more than 40 hours a week receive lower wages than those working 40 hours a week or less. We suspect it was caused by the type of work and their educational background.
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
In Australia we will not find wage discrimination between men and women, wages in Australia are not based on gender. In fact, grass-roots research we found the data that women receive higher wages than men, due to differences in education levels. Employees who complete UNIVERSITY receive higher wages than those who only graduated from high school or college diploma. Arguably, a large (71.79%) of respondents in Australia were graduates of University, 23.08% were graduates of diploma and 18.82% of high school and secondary school graduates. There are no respondents who graduated from elementary school. This means that education plays an important role in Australia to get a good job. By contrast, the type of work, those working in the public sector receive higher wages from working in the private sector. Our study showed significant differences in wages, public sector wages two times higher than in the private sector. Also looked sharp wage differentials between formal and informal sectors. Formal sector workers in Australia receive much higher wages compared to workers in the informal sector
Family size and marital status had no effect on the amount of wages received by workers. Among single workers and workers who are married and have children receive the same relative wage. The duration of employment of a worker determines the amount of wages they receive. Our study found gradual differences of workers from one year to five years. The longer the period of their employment, the wages they receive are also higher. Total hours worked per week also affects the amount of wages they receive. Workers who work less than 40 hours a week receive lower wages than working 40 hours or more a week. Those who work 40 hours a week receive lower wages than those working more than 40 hours a week. Most workers in Australia work more than 40 hours a week. Respondents in our study, 86.11% worked more than 40 hours a week, 8.33% work less than a week and only 5.56 work 40 hours a week.
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
A Decent Living Income is an income which is based upon the cost of living in an area, rather than an arbitrary minimum. Under an ideal decent living income, someone who works an ordinary 40 hour per week job would be able to afford shelter, food, health care, and other basic necessities of life. The amount of a decent living income could potentially vary quite a bit, as standards of living are different in different parts of the world, and the overall cost of living is also subject to extreme fluctuation.
Proponents of the concept of a living income argue that everyone is entitled to a comfortable standard of living which is comparable to that enjoyed by other people in the same society. Living income are not designed to eliminate class differences; obviously, some people make much more than others, and this would continue even under a living income. A decent living income would ensure, however, that everyone in a society would have access to the same basic privileges and services.
Many countries around the world have what is known as a minimum wage. In these areas, all workers must be paid at least the minimum wage for their hourly work, although many governments stress that the minimum wage is a base wage, and that ideally people should make more than minimum wage. Unfortunately, the cost of living often increases much more quickly than the minimum wage, causing economic hardship for people on the lower end of the pay spectrum.
Within some larger countries, individual provinces, states, and cities have set their own minimum wage in an attempt to compensate for cost of living increases, and in a few of these areas, the new minimum wage has become a living wage. Living wages are calculated on the basis of what it costs to live a fairly ordinary life in a simple house with basic needs. Ideally, workers should not spend more than 30% of their income on housing, devoting the rest to food, transportation, health care, education, recreation, and other needs.
People who support the decent living income argue that in many areas, people who work minimum wage jobs are actually below the poverty level. It is common for people to work multiple jobs to support themselves, especially if they have children, and in some communities people with full time employment have been forced to rely on homeless shelters, food banks, and other social services because they cannot keep up with the cost of living.
Opponents of the living wage argue that it could potentially hurt the economy, by forcing employers to compensate their employees at a higher rate. Some have also suggested that the institution of a living wage could lead to unemployment, as small businesses might be forced to let workers go because they could not afford their wages. While these arguments are valid, some people feel that ensuring the same basic standard of living for all citizens is worth a brief period of hardship in the transition stages.
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Living wage rate estimates in this paper implicitly assume that a poor person’s only source of income is from work. Although obviously an oversimplification, this assumption should not cause major problems for calculating cross-nationally comparable living wage rates. First of all, the poor rarely have substantial income earning assets on which to rely. Indeed, the opposite is often true, as the poor often have debt and must pay interest to debt collectors. Second, the fact that many poor families receive transfers which help them out of poverty - - from relatives and friends (particularly in developing countries) and/or from the state (particularly in higher income countries) - is not especially relevant for estimating living wage rates, since one is interested in how much a full-time worker needs to earn in order to support a small size family at an adequate minimum living standard. The basic premise of a living wage is that full-time workers should receive sufficient compensation from their work to be able to support a small family at least at a minimum acceptable living standard. Living wage rate represents the hourly pay rate a full-time worker needs to earn to be able to support a small family at the poverty line.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010 by IYCW ASPAC · 0
The living wage is a term used to define a “fair and decent” level of income that would enable workers to meet their “basic needs.” There is no agreed upon definition of what specifically “basic needs” are nor is there an agreed upon methodology to determine basic needs; however, it is generally agreed that “basic needs” means more than mere physical subsistence and includes social needs that would allow a household a comfortable and decent standard of living. There appears to be general agreement that a living wage should provide a nutritious diet, safe drinking water, suitable housing, energy, transportation, clothing, health care, child care, education, savings for long term purchases and emergencies, and some discretionary income. However, even with this more detailed definition there remains a significant difference of opinion as to what specifically is required in order to achieve these more specific objectives. In addition, some have argued that the living wage is not just about wage levels but also must concern itself with conditions of work; a maximum hours of work (usually 48 hours) is often part of the living wage discussion. There are a number of U.N., ILO and OAS declarations and conventions concerning the right of a worker to receive an adequate wage but these provide no precise definition of what that wage should be or how it should be determined.
There are a number of organisations and researchers currently involved in the living wage issue and they have different objectives, different methodologies, and have generally concentrated on different countries. In the developing world the living wage movement has concentrated on raising wages for unskilled workers in export processing businesses or multinationals. There have been several conferences (such as the Living Wage Working Summit in Berkeley during July 1998 and the Global Living Wage Workshop in Atlanta during January 1999) which have brought together a number of the major participants involved with living wage issues in an attempt to establish a more uniform definition and methodology as well as to coordinate strategies for raising wages to living wage levels. Determination of a living wage has many similarities with national attempts to set minimum wages and poverty levels since these latter two measures are normally defined so as to ensure some minimum living standards. Although the ability of the minimum wage or the poverty level to satisfy some level of basic human needs is generally considered as an important factor in their determination, especially in the lower income nations, the specific method by which human needs are incorporated into the process of determining minimum wages and poverty levels is often not transparent. In addition, since minimum wages and to a lesser extent poverty levels, are incorporated into legally binding commitments they must be consistent with other national economic objectives such as efficiency, international competitiveness, price stability, unemployment, and fiscal constraints. The living wage, however, does not explicitly address any of these other economic objectives explicitly but focuses solely on what wage level is necessary to achieve “basic needs” without regard to whether or not such a wage is economically inconsistent with the other national economic objectives. As such, that is the major advantage but also the major disadvantage of the concept.
The overall objective of establishing a living wage is usually not made explicit. It is not clear as to whether the living wage is being suggested as a proposed minimum wage, or as a proposed wage for only some workers (perhaps those working for multinationals, producing for export, or working for governments), or is being proposed only as a reference level. Most estimates of living wages are higher than current legal minimum wages.
A 1973 study by Kilpatrick calculated the budget costs from 1905 to 1960 of a basket of goods or services in the United States, which Ornati had determined a household would need to live at three designated levels of well-being --- minimum subsistence, minimum adequacy and minimum comfort.3 The latter two levels represented standards of living higher than minimum subsistence or poverty and therefore were in spirit similar to current living wage definitions. Kilpatrick found that the minimum adequacy level rose by 0.88 percent in real terms for each 1.0 percent increase in real disposable income per capita; the corresponding minimum comfort level increased by 0.998 percent. Gordon Fisher has found similar (e.g., close to one) income elasticities for poverty using several different approaches for the United States, Britain, Canada, and Australia. An exception to this pattern is the U.S. official poverty line which has remained fixed in real terms since it was established in 1969; Fisher concludes that this has happened for political reasons (no Administration wants the poverty rate to go up during its tenure) and because the official poverty level is determined by theoretical statisticians instead of workers in the field.6 Thus although the living wage is often discussed as a living standard that meets some minimum absolute level of well-being, it is apparent that living wages are culturally defined and based upon and move in tandem with the general living standards of the society.
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
The living wage is a concept central to the Catholic Social Teaching tradition beginning with the foundational document, Rerum Novarum, a papal encyclical by Pope Leo XIII issued in 1891 to combat the excesses of both laissez-faire capitalism on the one hand and communism on the other. In this letter, Pope Leo affirms the right to private property while insisting on the role of the state to require a living wage. The means of production were considered by the pope to be both private property requiring state protection and a dimension of the common good requiring state regulation.
Pope Leo first described a living wage in such terms as could be generalised for application in nations throughout the world. Rerum Novarum touched off legislative reform movements throughout the world eliminating child labor, reducing the work week, and establishing minimum wages.
- "If a worker receives a wage sufficiently large to enable him to provide comfortably for himself, his wife and his children, he will, if prudent, gladly strive to practice thrift; and the result will be, as nature itself seems to counsel, that after expenditures are deducted there will remain something over and above through which he can come into the possession of a little wealth. We have seen, in fact, that the whole question under consideration cannot be settled effectually unless it is assumed and established as a principle, that the right of private property must be regarded as sacred. Wherefore, the law ought to favor this right and, so far as it can, see that the largest possible number among the masses of the population prefer to own property."
- "Wealthy owners of the means of production and employers must never forget that both divine and human law forbid them to squeeze the poor and wretched for the sake of gain or to profit from the helplessness of others."
- "As regards protection of this world’s good, the first task is to save the wretched workers from the brutality of those who make use of human beings as mere instruments for the unrestrained acquisition of wealth."
- "Care must be taken, therefore, not to lengthen the working day beyond a man’s capacity. How much time there must be for rest depends upon the type of work, the circumstances of time and place and, particularly, the health of the workers."
In Quadragesimo Anno, Pope Pius XI clarifies Rerum Novarum by warning that, in seeking to protect the worker from exploitation, society must not exploit the employer. "...The wealthy class violates (the common good) no less, when, as if free from care on account of its wealth, it thinks it the right order of things for it to get everything and the worker nothing, than does the...working class when, angered deeply at outraged justice and too ready to assert wrongly the one right it is conscious of, it demands for itself everything as if produced by its own hands, and attacks and seeks to abolish, therefore, all property and returns or incomes, of whatever kind they are or whatever the function they perform in human society, that have not been obtained by labor, and for no other reason save that they are of such a nature."
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
Income as economic and political control
Wages more a tool of political and economic control rather than a means for the welfare of workers. From year to year, although the cost of living is getting high, but wages remained suppressed at the lowest position. By fixing the amount of wages received by workers menaing that ruler and employers also pegged the economic and political people power. This will make easier for the authorities and employers to break every strategy that is built by workers in order to establish equality in society.
Capitalists are well aware that workers have the terrible power to control production. Authority was also terrified of the fighting spirit of workers who at any time will control the government. That consciousness is what forced the government and the capitalists struggled to suppress political and economic power of workers through national low wages policy.
Low income as investment security tool
The objective of the capitalist is to achieve capital gains as much as possible by holding down wages as low as possible. National wage policy is always in favor of progress and the security of investment and neglect the welfare of workers. By reason of maintaining economic growth, the ruler always looking for a safe position (in doubt) between the interests of bourgeois and proletarian.
Gain on investment in a country does not necessarily provide a positive influence on wage increases and welfare of workers. The character of capital will always put capital profit to the next investment. So the obsolescence promise of capital that will give bonuses to workers is an empty promise that is always used to lull workers. Economic rationalization is still one weapon to force the unions to agree and accept the concept of capitalism with the lure of social welfare. As long as the state is the incarnation of the greed capitalist, all the capital profit will not be used for the welfare of the people but to strengthen the position of the status quo of a government.
Low income is un-dialogue-able issue
Democracy characterized by popular participation in decision-making. Similarly, in terms of wages, workers who are directly interested in it, must be actively involved in determining wages. So it is not a surprise if in many countries we can find bipartite and tripartite institutions. This institution served to make the dialogue for all types of employment issues, including wage issues.
However, all the ideas above are only touched on the level of ideology and not practical. In fact wages remain the sole authority of the government. Although there are preconditions of wage determination in the form of meetings that are pretty intense, research, and many seminars, but it's all nothing more than a political ritual of state budget expenditures that have been approved by the government that in fact it is the people's money.
Wages, then became the anti-dialogue area. Dialogues which happening is only the outer wrap and rough. But the core in wage setting is entirely in the hands of authorities with due regard to economy and investment security. Welfare workers absolutely not a consideration in the process of wage determination.
Low income as poverty scheme
Wages become a powerful tool to keep workers poor, foolish and weak. It is used by capital to secure the movement of capital by hiring workers as low as possible and workers will continue to be poor. At the time of poor, the workers would be willing to work longer to earn extra income. Risks that directly suffered if the workers are poor because of low wage is that they and their families can not live healthy, the intake of nutrients into the body must be very minimal. In addition, school of the children would not be paid, the children of workers became backward in education that will result in a lack of employment opportunities. This becomes an endless chain of Satan if workers do not have collective consciousness to change
Moreover, workers trapped in a debt circle, dig and cover hole endless. Workers are forced to work harder and longer because they have to pay the debt. Clearly there is no ability for workers to improve their living standards over the wages are still pegged at the minimum position.
Low income is anti trade union
Low wages are always threatening the existence of trade unions. When workers receive low wages, there is a possibility they will soon leave his job or keep working, but longer each day so they do not have time to be active into trade union. Another possibility is the workers will look for outside employment as additional work in order to meet basic daily needs.
This situation is exacerbated by passive mentality that believes that what happening today is better then no job, so, why fight, fortunately having job and wages each month is luckier the others, out there are still many young people are unemployed. This mentality is very difficult to be invited to fight, it is a sign that workers are not aware of the contradictions which exist in the production process.
Low wages also increase stress levels in society. Families to be not in harmony because they often quarreled due to economic necessity was never fulfilled. If the dispute is not quickly resolved, then the divorce is likely to occur. The next result is abandoned children, it is no wonder if (especially) in big cities, the number of street children are getting a lot. They do not go to school because they had to be street singer for the rampage of life.
Even if parents do not divorce, but both had to work from morning till night, so they do not have quality time for their children. Children no longer get attention because their parents came home exhausted after working late at night. In another part, especially in developed countries like Japan, low-wage workers are not confident to get married, they were pressured by the shadow of miserable family life, the birth rate is very low and even not impossible will happen lost of generation. This self-distrust also trigger high rates of youth suicide, they feel they have no value in society because they can not have what they want because their wages are very low.
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
Minimum wage in Asia
Minimum Wage
Minimum wage is the minimum amount that must be paid to the majority of the workers of a country, generally on an hourly, daily or monthly basis and which is ideally fixed in such a way as to cover the minimum needs of the worker and his/her family, in light of the prevailing national economic and social conditions.
The facts on minimum wages:
- There is legislation regarding minimum wage fixing in more than 90% of countries.
- The level of the minimum wage in the lowest 20% of countries that have a minimum wage is US$57 per month, less than the two-dollar a day poverty line.
- The level of the minimum wage in the highest 20% of countries that have a minimum wage is US$1185 a month, about US$40 a day. This results in a ratio of 1 to 21 between the lowest and the highest minimum wage countries.
- In 10% of countries, the minimum wage represents less than one-fourth of GDP per capita, a very low figure per se. On average, the minimum wage represents two-thirds of GDP per capita.
- The median minimum wage in the world is US$213 a month or US$7 a day: 50% of countries have minimum wage rates below this figure.
How is the minimum wage fixed?
- A single minimum wage is set for the whole country (or by region) and is determined by the state or a tripartite body (or, in very rare cases, by collective bargaining) in 61% of the countries.
- Sectoral and/or occupational minimum wages are set by the government or by a tripartite body in 21% of the countries.
- Sectoral and/or occupational minimum wages are set through collective bargaining in 8% of the countries.
- A combination of two or three of the above systems of minimum wage fixing in 11 % of the countries.
The History of the minimum wage
Minimum wages were first proposed as a way to control the proliferation of sweatshops in manufacturing industries. The sweatshops employed large numbers of women and young workers, paying them what were considered to be substandard wages. The sweatshop owners were thought to have unfair bargaining power over their workers, and a minimum wage was proposed as a means to make them pay "fairly." Over time, the focus changed to helping people, especially families, become more self sufficient. Today, minimum wage laws cover workers in most low-paid fields of employment.
The minimum wage has a strong social appeal, rooted in concern about the ability of markets to provide income equity for the least able members of the work force. An obvious solution to this concern is to redefine the wage structure politically to achieve a socially preferable distribution of income. Thus, minimum wage laws have usually been judged against the criterion of reducing poverty.
Although the goals of the minimum wage are widely accepted as proper, there is great disagreement as to whether the minimum wage is effective in attaining its goals. From the time of their introduction, minimum wage laws have been highly controversial politically, and have received much less support from economists than from the general public. Despite decades of experience and economic research, debates about the costs and benefits of minimum wages continue today.
The classic exposition of the minimum wage's shortcomings in reducing poverty was provided by George Stigler in 946:
- Employment may fall more than in proportion to the wage increase, thereby reducing overall earnings;
- As uncovered sectors of the economy absorb workers released from the covered sectors, the decrease in wages in the uncovered sectors may exceed the increase in wages in the covered ones;
- The impact of the minimum wage on family income distribution may be negative unless the fewer but better jobs are allocated to members of needy families rather than to, for example, teenagers from families not in poverty;
Direct empirical studies indicate that anti-poverty effects in the U.S. would be quite modest, even if there were no unemployment effects. Very few low-wage workers come from families in poverty. Those primarily affected by minimum wage laws are teenagers and low-skilled adult females who work part time, and any wage rate effects on their income is strictly proportional to the hours of work they are offered. So, if market outcomes for low-skilled families are to be supplemented in a socially satisfactory way, factors other than wage rates must also be considered. Employment opportunities and the factors that limit labor market participation must be considered as well. Economist Thomas Sowell has also argued that regardless of custom or law, the real minimum wage is always zero, and zero is what some people would receive if they fail to find jobs when they try to enter the workforce, or they lose the jobs they already have.
Who is covered and who is excluded?
The vast majority of wage workers in the world are legally covered by minimum wage legislation. This is obvious from the examples of China, where virtually all wage workers are covered, and of India, where numerous unskilled occupations in the unorganised (or informal) sector are covered. Brazil also has universal coverage, while in countries where the minimum wage is fixed through collective bargaining, such as Denmark or Germany, the coverage level is generally high (respectively 90 and 70% of all workers are covered in these two countries).
Yet, not all categories of wage workers are covered by minimum wage legislation. Amongst these, the situation of domestic workers and farm workers is of particular importance because they often form the bulk of poor workers. In some countries, domestic workers are entitled to minimum wage protection (Brazil, China), sometimes at a reduced rate (Chile, Lesotho), while in others, they are left without protection (Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Morocco, Tunisia, Sri Lanka). The same is true for farm workers who benefit from minimum wage protection in India, Guatemala and South Africa, but not in Botswana, Cambodia or Malaysia.
In general the earnings of workers in Asia particularly in South and Southeast Asia are very low in both the formal and informal sectors. Here are some of our results of wage research:
No | Working | Philippine | Indonesia | India | Japan | Australia |
1 | Male earns | 180.34 | 91.68 | 94.01 | 1754.02 | 4937.22 |
2 | Female | 158.02 | 101.07 | 81.63 | 2098.57 | 4236.55 |
3 | Formal | 218.94 | 96.56 | 123.44 | 2232.83 | 4731.19 |
4 | Informal | 108.38 | - | 88.79 | 1489.94 | 1650.00 |
5 | Shift | 259.45 | 99.95 | 129.43 | 1922.49 | 4350.00 |
6 | Non shift | 142.14 | 91.48 | 88.11 | 2124.57 | 4651.92 |
With the wages received by workers at this time, it is very difficult for them to meet basic needs such as food, drink, clothing and housing especially for those who are married. If a decade ago the wage a worker can meet a family's life, but on this day wages of a laborer can no longer meet the needs of the workers themselves. At the same time, prices of daily needs soared far exceed their wage. The next result is that the purchasing power become very weak and is many of them suffering from financial deficit.
The above situation lead to poor nutritional intake levels of the society, the health level decreases - the price of medicines is also very expensive - plus it costs a hospital very unreasonable. Workers and families become resistant to the disease and being not productive. On the policy side, until now the countries in Asia have not fully provide health insurance for the community. In general, society live in very low quality of life followed by the high cost of national education. Clearly the workers and their children do not have the ability to achieve porridge higher education (diploma / university).
The series of woes is the cheap wages scenario capitalist rulers who deliberately impoverish and ignorant people. Today, workers are still poor and not a few unemployed in Asia.
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
In the analysis and action, we are in need of legal reference, in this report, we are also going to present the minimum wage according to the legal rules in some countries in Asia and the Pacific. The minimum wage that we fit here is according the rules that apply perched mid-2010.
Comparative Wages in Asia and Pacific (June 2010)
Country | Monthly Wage | |
In country currency | In US$ | |
Cambodia (Cambodian Riel) | 213,186.00 | 50.00 |
Vietnam (Dong) | 1,000,000.00 | 52.15 |
India/Tamil Nadu (India Rupees) | 2,400.00 | 53.12 |
Pakistan (Pakistani Rupees) | 7,000.00 | 81.77 |
Sri Lanka (Sri Lanka Rupees) | 10,000.00 | 89.56 |
Indonesia/Jakarta (Rupiah) | 1,020,000.00 | 112.00 |
China/Shenzhen (Yuan Renminbi) | 850.00 | 124.93 |
Thailand/Bangkok (Baht) | 6,090.00 | 187.24 |
Philippine/NCR (Peso) | 11,460.00 | 246.32 |
Malaysia (Ringgit) | 1,570.00 | 485.99 |
Taiwan (Taiwan Dollar) | 17,280.00 | 538.91 |
South Korea (Won) | 960,000.00 | 795.84 |
Hong Kong (Hong Kong dollar) | 6,720.00 | 861.54 |
Singapore (Singapore Dollar) | 2,835.00 | 2,044.42 |
Japan (Japan Yen) | 189,840.00 | 2,124.52 |
New Zealand (NZ Dollar) | 3,000.00 | 2,126.00 |
Australia (Australian Dollar) | 3,434.40 | 2,998.95 |
by IYCW ASPAC · 0
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
