The issue of Ex-SAF hotshots sitting pretty in GLCs
-
Yes.Originally posted by Salman:How can they not be smart and hardworking and be a schorlar in the first place?
Do you think they get promoted solely on their degrees?
-
Then you are wrong.
-
High amount of academic ability, wrong field to apply it to.Nuff said.Originally posted by Salman:How can they not be smart and hardworking and be a schorlar in the first place?
Do you think they get promoted solely on their degrees? -
How do you know? Justify what you said.
-
Tell you also you won't believe.Originally posted by Salman:How do you know? Justify what you said. -
Try me man.
How we know what you said is true? -
Nope. What they face are not uncommon to non-civil servants... suppose you're employee in a big semiconductor MNC, serving 20 years, and you work your way up to be a manager earning $180k per annum. Suddenly, the semiconductor industry takes a dip and you find that you're out of job. No other semiconductor will employee you and other company wouldn't pay you that kind of money or make you an manager since you do not have relevant experience and you're too old to start all over.. what next?Originally posted by charlize:Ok, so now you are saying that govt scholars are useless and need govt assistance to help them achieve high positions, salaries and perks regardless of whether they are suitably qualified.
This is the concept of meritocracy?
Surely, you don't expect our scholars to be driving taxis??
Also, I think the comment that they run GLC like a close system is pretty narrow minded and sterotyping. Most of the scholars I know are very sharp.. too sharp and smart.
Granted that there are some bookworm types scholars but these are the ones that usually do not make it to the top. -
So which is which now?Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Nope. What they face are not uncommon to non-civil servants... suppose you're employee in a big semiconductor MNC, serving 20 years, and you work your way up to be a manager earning $180k per annum. Suddenly, the semiconductor industry takes a dip and you find that you're out of job. No other semiconductor will employee you and other company wouldn't pay you that kind of money or make you an manager since you do not have relevant experience and you're too old to start all over.. what next?
Surely, you don't expect our scholars to be driving taxis??
Also, I think the comment that they run GLC like a close system is pretty narrow minded and sterotyping. Most of the scholars I know are very sharp.. too sharp and smart.
Granted that there are some bookworm types scholars but these are the ones that usually do not make it to the top.
You say that:
"Unfortunately, scholars cannot fend for themselves without the government's help. Their so-called experience is irrelevant to the private industry and if the government doesn't step in, do you honestly believe that anyone will give them a management position??"
And then you say that:
"Most of the scholars I know are very sharp.. too sharp and smart." -
Is not taxi-driving an honest job? Is driving a taxi degrading to a scholar?Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Nope. What they face are not uncommon to non-civil servants... suppose you're employee in a big semiconductor MNC, serving 20 years, and you work your way up to be a manager earning $180k per annum. Suddenly, the semiconductor industry takes a dip and you find that you're out of job. No other semiconductor will employee you and other company wouldn't pay you that kind of money or make you an manager since you do not have relevant experience and you're too old to start all over.. what next?
Surely, you don't expect our scholars to be driving taxis??
Also, I think the comment that they run GLC like a close system is pretty narrow minded and sterotyping. Most of the scholars I know are very sharp.. too sharp and smart.
Granted that there are some bookworm types scholars but these are the ones that usually do not make it to the top.
Should our scholars be given special privilege simply for being a 'scholar'?
Why should they be afforded special status and spoon-fed a job when they get 'retrenched'? They should be sourcing it out just like the average joe.
Are you suggesting that the 'aristocrats' cannot fend for themselves? What then the common man? How often does a scholar lose his job compared to the average singaporean?
Isn't this another indication of the unfair weightage towards the supposedly 'cream of the crop'? -
elites and their friends bend all the rules to protect themselves. This happen in all countries.
-
In the army, yes.Originally posted by Salman:How can they not be smart and hardworking and be a schorlar in the first place?
Do you think they get promoted solely on their degrees?
A very capable diploma holder will find it almost impossible to be a full Col.
A mediocre (not too bad, but not very outstanding either) degree holder with 2nd upper honours will reach full Col with a half hearted effort.
I talked to a few high ranking officers when I was in NS. No, I cannot tell you who they are.
-
To put scholars in perspective, the majority are extremely pleased with having a career roadmap pre-planned for them, to have mentors hold their hand and guide them literally all the way.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Unfortunately, scholars cannot fend for themselves without the government's help. Their so-called experience is irrelevant to the private industry and if the government doesn't step in, do you honestly believe that anyone will give them a management position??
Those who work their way up and has tonnes of experiences, on the other hand, should be the ones who doesn't have to worry about getting a job and is the least concern of the government. The government, has an obligation to continue to provide for those who has given a large part of their lives to public service.
Frankly speaking, most of the scholars regret their decision. Compared to their classmates of the same "calibre", they are earning much less than what they could have/ should have. That... is the opportunity cost they give up and is what is government is compensating them for by giving them a position after their retirement from SAF.
Put yourself in their shoes.. how would you feel? Give a third of your life earning a slightly above average pay and abandon/lost at the age of 45??
You may say that it is not fair to those who slog day and night. But hey, wake up. Life is never fair. Who do you think the government should protect? Those who serve the country and those that do not. And on that point. I think the scholars deserves the perks and earned them fair and square.
Should we then blame their presumed inability to 'fend for themselves' on the govt scholarship system? Aren't they supposed to be the brightest, smartest cream of creams?
If these people cannot manage their own careers, what chance do the average singaporeans who incidently 'slob day and night' have?
Compared to these 'hotshots' who study on taxpayer's money and then work in the SAF, the average singaporean is probably stuck paying off study loans in the early stage of his/her working life.
The scholar is definitely entitled to his/her govt job 'fair and square'. It's when their contract ends that puzzles many singaporeans.
Why offer a post-retirement package to these aging warhorses that basically puts them into leading stat boards, where they sit out a comfortable live earning a big fat pay when it should have gone to a genuine contender?
What 'obligation' is the govt required to give to these ex-SAF people who have completed their public service at the age of 45? Isn't the reward of a straight path to the top coupled with a generous pay package and plenty of 'perks' sufficient? How many singaporeans get to climb such a rosy stepladder or smell the annual salary of these 'hotshots'?
And incidently, what kind of public service are they rendering by continuing in stat boards that put profit above service?
With the private sector always pegging salary and bonus per annum packages to payouts by the govt sector, how is it remotely possible in Singapore for a scholar to be earning less than the private sector?
Won't the govt have already considered the need for competitive rates to commensurate those in private enterprises or expect a mass exodus of scholars to the private sector? Isn't that why Philip Yeo detests scholars who 'break bonds'?
Retiring at the age of 45 from SAF should mean nothing to these 'hotshots' who should be wily enough to venture out on their own devoid of the govt's support. If they have nothing planned for themselves come 45, then are they truly deserving of a prestigious SAF scholarship in the first place? -
Its a fallacy to think that after 45, our top SAF officers are going to starve to death. They all get a huge sum of money (is it called graduity?) as a retirement benefit.
I think its well earned, but the cushy job they are given after that? Can we show that it is well earned? -
Well.. you don't hire a person and give him senior position just because he is sharp and smart. Neither do you offer a scholar a cushy after-SAF job just because he is a scholar..Originally posted by charlize:So which is which now?
You say that:
"Unfortunately, scholars cannot fend for themselves without the government's help. Their so-called experience is irrelevant to the private industry and if the government doesn't step in, do you honestly believe that anyone will give them a management position??"
And then you say that:
"Most of the scholars I know are very sharp.. too sharp and smart."
What I've been saying is that
1) The government only help those who has really proven themselves to be capable with a job in GLC.
2) The government has to help them or nobody will want to take up a scholar if it means jobless at 45.
3) The government needs to help them no because they are incapable but rather the harsh fact of life is that most private companies will not give them a senior position comparable to their previous post. -
You are contradicting yourself again.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Well.. you don't hire a person and give him senior position just because he is sharp and smart. Neither do you offer a scholar a cushy after-SAF job just because he is a scholar..
What I've been saying is that
1) The government only help those who has really proven themselves to be capable with a job in GLC.
2) The government has to help them or nobody will want to take up a scholar if it means jobless at 45.
3) The government needs to help them no because they are incapable but rather the harsh fact of life is that most private companies will not give them a senior position comparable to their previous post.
If they are proven "capable" people, why does the government need to "help them" by giving them a cushy job in a GLC after 45?
If they are truly capable, would the private sector pay them even more than what the govrnment can pay them and give them senior positions since private companies are seeking talented and capable people to generate profits for the company? -
It is very logical to leave scholars and talents to prove themselves rather than try to nanny them.Originally posted by charlize:You are contradicting yourself again.
If they are proven "capable" people, why does the government need to "help them" by giving them a cushy job in a GLC after 45?
If they are truly capable, would the private sector pay them even more than what the govrnment can pay them and give them senior positions since private companies are seeking talented and capable people to generate profits for the company?
If there are capable people, whether scholars or non-scholars, sooner or later they will prove to the market in building up businesses or upgraded industries but now we are pushing career paths for them through a closed door system.
If we still want to push for them because some people believe that they have the ability, let us not give them the silver plater or accelerated career path, let us look at their performance and results.
Have we indeed through these scholars turned around the moribund economy, upgraded the EDB or JTC into more entrepreneurial outfits that have created many new technology start-ups and jobs.
If we do not show the above-stated type of results, then let all the scholars go and join the various private sector companies without all the hand-picking or hand-holding.
We should not deprive opportunities of really good action-oriented men and we may have many of these men who have built empires and large businesses without all the degrees and scholarships.
These men should be identified and recruited to head various organization (at lower pays as well as these people do not expect very high salaries). -
Dear Charlize,Originally posted by charlize:You are contradicting yourself again.
If they are proven "capable" people, why does the government need to "help them" by giving them a cushy job in a GLC after 45?
If they are truly capable, would the private sector pay them even more than what the govrnment can pay them and give them senior positions since private companies are seeking talented and capable people to generate profits for the company?
Either I've not explain my points clearly or you simply choose to ignore/ not understand hiring concept. We must therefore, agree to disagree.
In my role, I've been ask to conduct hiring interviews many a times and the fact is that companies only will hire if
1) You have the right experience and the best fit amongst all and,
2) You meet the hiring budget
Someone may come along with excellent credentials, but with the wrong experience at the wrong field and if they simply cost too much to hire, their applications will be thrown out.
Scholars may be sharp and smart. They may have accomplish impossible task in management, roll out successful project, operate commands with thousands of subordiantes in the military but these are irrelevant to most industries.
I strongly believe that given the opportunity, they would have no problems proving their worth but who would give them that opportunity?
Some, may find jobs related to the defense/government industry on their own but most will have a hard time doing so. As such, it is necessary for the government to step in. Afterall, they've but given about 20-30 years of their lives serving the government.
I would be appalled if the government doesn't at least have the decency to do so. -
it works differenctly for people up there and the commoners.
different rules apply. -
I am also tired of replying that you are contradicting yourself.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Dear Charlize,
Either I've not explain my points clearly or you simply choose to ignore/ not understand hiring concept. We must therefore, agree to disagree.
In my role, I've been ask to conduct hiring interviews many a times and the fact is that companies only will hire if
1) You have the right experience and the best fit amongst all and,
2) You meet the hiring budget
Someone may come along with excellent credentials, but with the wrong experience at the wrong field and if they simply cost too much to hire, their applications will be thrown out.
Scholars may be sharp and smart. They may have accomplish impossible task in management, roll out successful project, operate commands with thousands of subordiantes in the military but these are irrelevant to most industries.
I strongly believe that given the opportunity, they would have no problems proving their worth but who would give them that opportunity?
Some, may find jobs related to the defense/government industry on their own but most will have a hard time doing so. As such, it is necessary for the government to step in. Afterall, they've but given about 20-30 years of their lives serving the government.
I would be appalled if the government doesn't at least have the decency to do so.
I leave the rest to debate with you. -
obviously it is one way the MIW attracts all the 'talents'. the guaranteee of cushy jobs after 'retirement' is hard to resist.
-
If offering a job after 45 to a select few of ex-SAF people who have 'proven themselves' capable, isn't that an already exclusive and autocratic move? Isn't it a classic case of the 'aristocrats' helping 'aristocrats'? By your definition, doesn't one HAVE TO BE a scholar before he/she qualifies? The only difference is that instead of direct entry, these cream of the creams have to be vetted a level further?Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Well.. you don't hire a person and give him senior position just because he is sharp and smart. Neither do you offer a scholar a cushy after-SAF job just because he is a scholar..
What I've been saying is that
1) The government only help those who has really proven themselves to be capable with a job in GLC.
2) The government has to help them or nobody will want to take up a scholar if it means jobless at 45.
3) The government needs to help them no because they are incapable but rather the harsh fact of life is that most private companies will not give them a senior position comparable to their previous post.
Is that just reward or further cronyism?
Where is it implied that if the govt stops pampering these 45 somethings, people won't flock to the ranks of the SAF scholarship? Isn't prestige and the 'honour' of serving one's nation the actual draw card? Unless of course the new generation of singaporeans have become much more money-minded and materialistic then true patriots.
Don't these candidates still queue up for acceptance interviews ? Is there not an annual huge pool of talent which the govt continues to cuddle and 'psycho' to join govt service?
To your last point, what is the purpose of a free economy if scholars EXPECT to be GIVEN high paying jobs after they retire? What kind of attitude are they sending out if that is truly their position? What example is this to the average singaporean?
Is that the way to prove yourself the 'elite of elites'? By expecting red-carpet treatment upon 'retirement' and riding on the coat-tails of your past exploits to garner a plump job in an exquisite office? -
Hi, perhaps we can look at this issue from an alternative point of view.
When these military hotshots are given cushy jobs in a totally irrelavent industry, with an incredible amount of useless military experience, do they do good work and justify their pay? Do they make things better or outperform the non scholars whose advancement they recently deprived?
If they can justify their pay and position with examplary performance, then the coporation benefits from their "scholar" capability. But if they are poor performers and merely warm seats and produce oxygen till their second retirement, then we have to ask ourselves why do companies want to waste money on them.
Remember, companies are profit driven. Money is the bottomline. -
That's if you are talking about MNCs and firms not controlled indirectly by GIC.Originally posted by SilverPal:Hi, perhaps we can look at this issue from an alternative point of view.
When these military hotshots are given cushy jobs in a totally irrelavent industry, with an incredible amount of useless military experience, do they do good work and justify their pay? Do they make things better or outperform the non scholars whose advancement they recently deprived?
If they can justify their pay and position with examplary performance, then the coporation benefits from their "scholar" capability. But if they are poor performers and merely warm seats and produce oxygen till their second retirement, then we have to ask ourselves why do companies want to waste money on them.
Remember, companies are profit driven. Money is the bottomline.
GLCs are deemed to have some national interest. -
a lot of people at the top are overrated and overpaid.
-
Originally posted by BillyBong:
You're talking about an idealistic world where people work for honor. That doesn't exist. People work for money. I do. And I'm not ashame to admit it. Do you?
If offering a job after 45 to a select few of ex-SAF people who have 'proven themselves' capable, isn't that an already exclusive and autocratic move? Isn't it a classic case of the 'aristocrats' helping 'aristocrats'? By your definition, doesn't one [b]HAVE TO BE a scholar before he/she qualifies? The only difference is that instead of direct entry, these cream of the creams have to be vetted a level further?
Is that just reward or further cronyism?
Where is it implied that if the govt stops pampering these 45 somethings, people won't flock to the ranks of the SAF scholarship? Isn't prestige and the 'honour' of serving one's nation the actual draw card? Unless of course the new generation of singaporeans have become much more money-minded and materialistic then true patriots.
Don't these candidates still queue up for acceptance interviews ? Is there not an annual huge pool of talent which the govt continues to cuddle and 'psycho' to join govt service?
To your last point, what is the purpose of a free economy if scholars EXPECT to be GIVEN high paying jobs after they retire? What kind of attitude are they sending out if that is truly their position? What example is this to the average singaporean?
Is that the way to prove yourself the 'elite of elites'? By expecting red-carpet treatment upon 'retirement' and riding on the coat-tails of your past exploits to garner a plump job in an exquisite office?
[/b]
Why are scholarships coverted by students? Because it is a guaranteed path to success. If that path is set to end at 45, even the average students would not take up the scholarship. These scholars would be smart enough to know that.
This has nothing to with being cronies. It about giving well deserving scholars an opportunity after their manadatory 45 years retirement. Otherwise, the other options would be to increase or do away with the 45 years retirement age but that would introduce a whole new set of problems wouldn't they?
Again, this has nothing to do with free economy. You are saying that it is unfair for the average Singaporean. True. But what has the average Singaporean done for that our government needs to ensure their continued employement after 45??
Also, no one expects to be given high paying jobs after their retirement. Only the selected few will be given the opportunity. There are incidents that some SAF Overseas Merit scholars are condemned and they didn't even reach LTC rank because they fail their tasks.