Is Holding Directorship Justifiable?
-
Many of our top SAF officers, from COL to LG holds director appointments in companies like ST Electronics, SembCorp etc etc....
I do not think its fair. Its like as though they are holding two or three or four jobs !
And why is a civil servant made director? What is the justification of all this?
Example
http://www.stee.stengg.com/aboutus/directors.html -
fact is most senior commanders are invited to the Board of Directors to many of the government linked firms or Stat Boards. This is part of MINDEF's grand scheme of things to allow top military officials to gain some pte sector experience whilst in the army, making a smoother career change after Army.
Most board of Directors in many listed or public entitites have senior civil servants sitting on the board... it sort of strengthen the portfolio of the Board, and i think in some boards, MPs also have a place there in the Board of Directors or Council. There's also the point of having 'neutral' parties on the board... to make less biased judgements. Ok, all these are just my personal take on things...
We may lament that these army officials are already getting their 5 figure salary, surely they don't need extra income right? well yes i feel the same way... KNNB all our tax payers money go into their deep pockets.. but it's SG's way of keeping the brightest minds within Singapore and in the many govt linked firms... -
But its like so wrong.
SAF is becoming like a business company already. And not a military entity.
Sigh... -
Welcome to Singapore!!!~~~
-
there is some truth in that, but the main bulk of the SAF still runs like a military entity. of course amongst service we can tell that the Air Force almost runs like a corporation.. whilst units like SOF and NDU are so different in their mode of operation, it's somewhere you can feel what it really means to be ' in the military'Originally posted by mhcampboy:But its like so wrong.
SAF is becoming like a business company already. And not a military entity.
Sigh...
In many countries their armed forces have also reorganised itself, making them more leaner, more versatile and less stick-in-the-mud. It's about opportunity cost and sometimes in the process of re-defining the force, we lose the sense of what it means to be a uniformed organisation.
It's a fact of life and the SAF chose to gear itself to becoming more like a corporate organisation, 'promoting- advertising' their top brass as capable board of Directors and future CEOs/COOs of govt linked firms.
SO much so i think we can call it SAF Inc, or SAF Pte Ltd. hahaha...afterall we're like a HR firm... churning out since the 70's manpower to fill the Cabinet and the civil service.