A life ruined by SAF
-
I feel MS has an idealised and rose tinted vision of the private sector. I have worked in the private sector for many years, including local, european, japanese companies and have seen the same problems there MS is accusing SAF of.
Malingers? Plenty. I know colleagues who would take MC at least once a month. They use company medical plan of cos, and also ask for vitamins and birth control pills from the doctor. I have a friend who works in an EU company, and holds a middle position and he even blatantly told me over MSN at work, that he has a REGULAR MC day, a rest day he bestows upon himself once a month, on the 2nd week! He blatantly says he calculates the maximum no. of days he can take MC and maximise it by spreading it over 12 months! And he does not hold a junior position.
Play rank? Plenty. In private sector it is actually worse because your rice bowl is less certain. Anyone can be asked to leave anytime, so piss off the wrong people, or rub the wrong people the wrong way, and you can be booted out anytime, unlike in SAF where people sign contracts, sometimes when an officer desperately wants to get rid of a super incompetent fuck he also cannot.
Because of this, in the private sector there's equal, if not more cocksucking, sordid events like female account or sales exec sleeping with clients to keep their jobs or further their careers? Hello APLENTY! Esp in select industries. Affairs with bosses and colleagues to play rank and politics, aplenty.
I've had many SAF scholar (the really motivated kind) friends tell me on different occasions how they're upset and frustrated with the incompetencies of people whose assistance is vital to the performance of the battalion/coy, eg specialists who hold important appts like CSM and they cannot do anything abt it, their hands are tied, they cannot get rid of the person, and how these people have a "eat already waiting to die" attitude in the SAF, just there to pass their time, book in and book out and collect their pay at the end of the month knowing that they have a contract and SAF and the officers can't do anything to them.
Golden handshake? MS keeps on griping and whining about how SAF asks people who is no longer 'needed' to leave like that? SAF is an employer like any other company. Do you expect the SAF to operate like a charity? Frankly from what you write, you certainly do. In the private sector it's much worse. People are retrenched all the time, if the economy is in the red, that's when you see it happening rampantly in the private sector.
When there's a recession, people in SAF are only affected in that they don't get as high a bonus compared to good years. SAF does not retrench people according to the economy. You think that's not a small issue? Wait till you get a big recession like in 1999 when so many companies ask people to go and it's so hard to find a job at another place fast and you have a mortgage to pay. And then you wish you never left SAF.
It's true that SAF has streamlined its operations on some occasions and this involves having some people go. What makes you think these people have contributed a lot? Do you have hard proof? Do you know the performance on black and white of these people? As it is, it's harder to numerate the output of personel in the armed forces, compared to say sales in a bank, and you want to claim now boldly that all the people given the golden handshakes were wonderful great performers? What do you know of their competency before they were given the GS? Is the GS not kind enough? And why is asking people to go in order to fulfil operational needs of an organisation "mean" or "immoral"? Is SAF a charity? If that happens in the private sector, or even the civil service, why not in the armed forces?
Please note that when SAF streamlined its organisation and asked certain underperformers to leave, it was never due to a recession. I know this because I know when SAF did that and it was never in line with economic changes.
The SAF compensates its combat personnel well, paying them well above market rate salaries for the kind of skill set and education they have, compared to what those malingers can get in the private sector. Do you dare say that most of the farmer/combat personnel now, if they are in the private sector can command the pay that SAF is giving them now?
You need to wake up. It also fulfils its duty as a govt company giving personnel perks like FLEX $, am I not right?
I think your groans and gripes come from your unrealistic expectations you emplaced on SAF. Its like you have the mentality that they owe you a living. That's clear from what you have said and how you expect them to treat you.
-
Originally posted by cookiecookie:
I feel MS has an idealised and rose tinted vision of the private sector. I have worked in the private sector for many years, including local, european, japanese companies and have seen the same problems there MS is accusing SAF of.
Malingers? Plenty. I know colleagues who would take MC at least once a month. They use company medical plan of cos, and also ask for vitamins and birth control pills from the doctor. I have a friend who works in an EU company, and holds a middle position and he even blatantly told me over MSN at work, that he has a REGULAR MC day, a rest day he bestows upon himself once a month, on the 2nd week! He blatantly says he calculates the maximum no. of days he can take MC and maximise it by spreading it over 12 months! And he does not hold a junior position.
Play rank? Plenty. In private sector it is actually worse because your rice bowl is less certain. Anyone can be asked to leave anytime, so piss off the wrong people, or rub the wrong people the wrong way, and you can be booted out anytime, unlike in SAF where people sign contracts, sometimes when an officer desperately wants to get rid of a super incompetent fuck he also cannot. I've had many SAF scholar (the really motivated kind) friends tell me on different occasions how they're upset and frustrated with the incompetencies of people whose assistance is vital to the performance of the battalion/coy, eg specialists who hold important appts like CSM and they cannot do anything abt it, their hands are tied, they cannot get rid of the person, and how these people have a "eat already waiting to die" attitude in the SAF, just there to pass their time, book in and book out and collect their pay at the end of the month knowing that they have a contract and SAF and the officers can't do anything to them.
Because of this, in the private sector there's equal, if not more cocksucking, sordid events like female account or sales exec sleeping with clients to keep their jobs or further their careers? Hello APLENTY! Esp in select industries. Affairs with bosses and colleagues to play rank and politics, aplenty.
Golden handshake? MS keeps on griping and whining about how SAF asks people who is no longer 'needed' to leave like that? SAF is an employer like any other company. Do you expect the SAF to operate like a charity? Frankly from what you write, you certainly do. In the private sector it's much worse. People are retrenched all the time, if the economy is in the red, that's when you see it happening rampantly in the private sector. When there's a recession, people in SAF are only affected in that they don't get as high a bonus compared to good years. SAF does not retrench people according to the economy. You think that's not a small issue? Wait till you get a big recession like in 1999 when so many companies ask people to go and it's so hard to find a job at another place fast and you have a mortgage to pay. And then you wish you never left SAF.
It's true that SAF has streamlined its operations on some occasions and this involves having some people go. What makes you think these people have contributed a lot? Do you have hard proof? Do you know the performance on black and white of these people? As it is, it's harder to numerate the output of personel in the armed forces, compared to say sales in a bank, and you want to claim now boldly that all the people given the golden handshakes were wonderful great performers? What do you know of their competency before they were given the GS? Is the GS not kind enough? And why is asking people to go in order to fulfil operational needs of an organisation "mean" or "immoral"? Is SAF a charity? If that happens in the private sector, or even the civil service, why not in the armed forces?
The SAF compensates its combat personnel well, paying them well above market rate salaries for the kind of skill set and education they have, compared to what those malingers can get in the private sector. Do you dare say that most of the farmer and combat personnel now, if they are in the private sector can command the pay that SAF is giving them now? You need to wake up. It also fulfils its duty as a govt company giving personnel perks like FLEX $, am I not right?
I think your groans and gripes come from your unrealistic expectations you emplaced on SAF. Its like you have the mentality that they owe you a living. That's clear from what you have said and how you expect them to treat you.
well said man. =)
-
I wonder why everyone down here and at other forums dare to say so much, but yet at the NSF forum in ns.com, not a single sound is being made even though it's the most direct method to get attention from the SAF.
-
Originally posted by annoy-you-must:
I wonder why everyone down here and at other forums dare to say so much, but yet at the NSF forum in ns.com, not a single sound is being made even though it's the most direct method to get attention from the SAF.
dun be a kuku leh... ns.sg forum when u logged in, u r tagged to ur nric... readily and easily traceable and trackable.... here... unless court gives power to authorise the ISP to release the ip address... similiar case with the odex anime sole distributor rights and anime downloads... -
Originally posted by annoy-you-must:
I wonder why everyone down here and at other forums dare to say so much, but yet at the NSF forum in ns.com, not a single sound is being made even though it's the most direct method to get attention from the SAF.
Do you hear the best debates and intellectual arguments at the ST Forum Discussion Boards?
No.
In any case, there's always been a perception that any feedback channel linked with any organisation in question is never fully objective in the treatment of that said feedback.
The concept of LO (Learning Organisation) in the SAF has been implemented for a very long time, but when all these incidents both public and anecdotal pop up, it just shows that there is still a lot of institutional resistance on the part of certain personnel to resist this evolution.
As to why the blogger may have chosen to remove the post, put yourself in his shoes, and you'd understand the impact that any "order" may have on him. I for one will give him the benefit of the doubt, as I have seen such cases during my time.
-
Originally posted by del_co:
well said man. =)
MS. you seem to think that SAF owes you a living. Yes you signed on as a specialist and it did not work out for some reason. Don't always be so quick to blame the organisation and system before you do soul searching on yourself and other variables.
I personally feel that SAF is a very merciful and kind employer. Why? Simple. Having been an NSF and having many regular friends and having been in the private sector for eons, I have seen SAF condone and retain so many people, that I dare say cannot last and hack it in the private sector. Throw these people in the private sector for one day and they'll combust within the first hour.
The SAF pays its personnel very very well, far above what these people can command in the private sector. That is a renowned fact, and has always been the case. Go around and ask anyone out there. And this has been the case even before SAF recently increased the pay for its personnels. Now it's even more pronounced.
Take officers for eg. Let's not talk about high flying SAFOS who have US$200K per annum offers from consultancies and investment banks upon graduation from Harvard and MIT, and PhD offers aplenty that they can't take up, for obvious reason- their bond. (wanna bet? I have many close SAFOS friends who have such offers, from Merril Lynch and Mckinsey)
The typical farmer diploma holder who signs on as officer or even specialist gets way more than what he can get with his diploma in the private sector, good and bad times. Most dip holders in the private sector take on support job functions. Eng dip holders are Engin Assistants. Accounts dip holders are Acct assistants and get less than 1.8 to 2K or they do sales jobs with low base salary of around $1.4K. Even for graduates. Do you know how much SAF pays its farmer graduates?!?! The typical farmer graduate can NEVER command that kind of salary that SAF pays its farmer officers, even young CPTs. If you're talking abt MAJ and LTC, which a lot of farmers do end up, the difference between their pay in SAF and what they can get once they leave is even more phenomenal!
Wanna talk about BS politics and rank pulling? From your stories you write it as though you were so aggrieved, like you never encountered anything so heinous but honestly it sounds very amateurish. Why? The encounters are very normal of any company in the workforce, it's the way you portray it and your reaction that makes it really amateurish sounding man!
Wanna talk bout backstabbing, bitching, politics, bullying? YOU aint seen nothing yet.
I have friend who are junior lawyers, who are bullied and verbally abused by their superiors. I have journalist friends in big listed company (no need to say which one) who get yelled at by their superiors and colleagues in the middle of the newsroom. My good friend, a young graduate journalist then was called by her editor to the latter's cubicle, the latter had her work pinned up on the wall, she made my friend stand in front of the piece, and yelled at my friend and went through each line at the top of her voice and she told her that she's a useless fuck and the whole work floor heard everything.
A friend in the advertising industry, whose direct superior was trying to get close in a more than professional way with the male HOD. When the male HOD was interested in my friend and got very close to her, the direct superior rallied everyone in the team and form an alliance against my friend and bullied her and ousted her out.
Another friend in a public listed GLC whose superior, a bitchy woman didn't like her for no reason (just not shiok lah) even though her work was good (can be proven because she's always had a good ranking and good performance and joined the company way earlier before the superior joined), and during ranking exercise verbally abused her and told she'll never cut it in this industry and told her to wake up and get lost.
Politicking and backstabbing are even more prevalent in the private sector because people are not on contracts and people can be fired. Cocksucking, alliances for survival and backstabbing are the order of the day man.
In the armed forces, the male dominated environment makes it very egostically charged and that's the cause of a lot of the competitiveness but in the private sector it's worse, if not equal because women are harder to deal with, and it's a matter of survival because it's not an iron rice bowl. Not only rubbing people off the wrong way in ONE company is bad, if you garner a bad rep in one company, it spreads to the whole industry.
Seriously when i read what you write - your self righteous and self centred whinings about the SAF, it concludes to me clearly that you simply 1) did not make it in the SAF 2) you took it upon the SAF and never questioned whether it was due to any OTHER factor than the organisation wronging you 3) you expected SAF to spoonfeed its personnels and act like a charity.
What? Do you think just because SAF funded by the government, it's obliged to act like a charity and retain people in spite of its own organisational and operational needs and betterment? How do you think that makes taxpayers, who are in effect funding the SAF feel? Now that you're in the private sector and are one of them, can't you feel that? Of cos you can't. Because you see yourself as a maligned, aggrived and hard done by victim of SAF when it did nothing to you.
The SAF is a company like any other. Too bad it didn't work out there FOR YOU (But i can assure you that I have high flying friends whose careers not only work out but are well treasured by the SAF and they're very dedicated to the organisation).
Your skills did not fit the organisation's needs and what the organisation wanted to offer you best to what it deems to be YOUR abilities was not sufficient for you.
Move on and let go. SAF is NOT a charity.
-
Originally posted by MS:
(1) SAF is a big organisation which stresses heavily on regimentation.
It's a big organisation, so what? It's the civil service! Hello! Why regimentation? cos it;s the army? get real even a primary school kid knows. It's the nature of the organisation/job. If you don't like, leave. Simple as that. The army is the cup of the tea for some people. Don't be sore if it;s not yours. I've heard someone say.
-
Originally posted by MS:
(1a) Rank speaks in the SAF.
Not just SAF. ALL armies in the world. Try the armies of the other 200+ countries in this world. Same hor. Don't like? Leave the army?
-
Originally posted by MS:
(1c) The SAF culture owes many servicemen their rights and payment. But no serviceman can owe the SAF anything.
Do you mean NSF or regular here? please note that regulars are paid as career soldiers and they do owe their organisation/boss something. Their pay. They had better get off their butts and work. How often do i hear about condemned farmer regular officers/specialists (WHO REALLY DESERVE IT) coming in to camp and blatantly sneaking into his regular corner to sleep everyday? He told his officer that he regreted signing on and just passing time cos he can't get fired. How often do we hear about ppl signing on just to make use of SAF with intentions to come out and be a salesman?
You get what you give. if ppl don't take their jobs seriously and take SAF for a ride, they shouldn't expect to be treated like princes. I've heard of so many stories of incompetent CSMs and farmer officers from my frustrated friends, ppl who have a "chi bao deng si" (full already waiting to die) attitude to their work and career in the SAF, I don't blame SAF for giving them the axe.
SAF is already very kind for tolerating and retaining such ppl for so long compared to any other company in BOTH the public and private sectors.
-
Originally posted by MS:
(1d) The SAF fears bad publicity. Therefore any articles which threatens the brand name of SAF will be put down in the quickest possible time.
Please inform us of one branch of civil service, stat board or private sector company (Mcdonalds, Starbucks) that does not fear bad publicity. if you can find, I can find the tooth fairy for you.
-
Originally posted by MS:
(3) SAF Culture Vs EU Corporate Culture
As the culture of SAF, you need many good officers to make things go well. But all you need is 1 bad appple to drag the whole unit down. As I stated in (1a), it will be worse off if the bad apple is of much higher rank. Imagine the effects it can cause.
However, in the private sector especially in a non Asian environment whereby regimentation is not as strongly emphasised, things are more democratic and the chances of having one having absolute power over everything is very much lower compared to SAF. Work becomes easier. Good ideas are more visible. And everyone watches their back as in do not go around using ranks to stamp anyone. Rather use strong reasoning to back their arguments.
(4) It is simply not sensible to think that SAF is an organisation which practice righteous and integrity carrying ways. If you are not standing in the way to affect anyone's ricebowl in the SAF, you are lucky. But if you are, even though you are right, you will have to be prepared to meet strong obstructions. This is all thanks to the SAF culture which many people practice it unconsciously.
(5) Pardon my bluntness, indeed, I can tell that you have yet to experience real dirty politics before. I have been through 6 years in the SAF, from units to units. My colleagues who spend over 20 years in the SAF. Some warrants and officers who contributed their entire youth in the SAF. And it was very saddening to see the 50 year old warrant removed from office during his most vulnerable period. Jettisoned from the force before his compulsory retirement when he is not prepared for his retirement plans. How clean can the organisation be? And he is not the only senior who was given such treatment.
What you said about the so-called EU culture is really ridiculous. I've worked in many private companies before and don't agree with your testimony. And do note it's not helpful to your case to say anything so flippant and sweeping without logical substantiation like this "It is simply not sensible to think that SAF is an organisation which practice righteous and integrity carrying ways." It's like me saying "it's simply not sensible to believe anyone who badmouths SAF after he left on a bad note."
-
Originally posted by MS:
(
During my recent ICT, one of the SSG expressed his fears of losing his ricebowl.
As an organisation, if you are clean and upright, will you dump those who contributed vastly in the past but now 'old and useless' staffs? Then in the first place why should I even bother to contribute and stay if I know my ending will be as tragic.
Tell the SSG to work harder. I know specialists who are so good, they get their Warrant Officer rank in their early 30s. I'm sure these guys will not fear not getting a 2nd contract or being let go.
Also, define "old and useless". Everyone in the SAF, public and private sector has to perform. Underperformers should not expect to be fat cats of an organisation, hold an iron rice bowl and when it's seized from them cry foul. Fat cats are people who do not perform in a large organisation and stay comfortably there, don't get fired cos of the duration of their stay. It's prevalent in GLCs and ministries too and clearly I can tell the government has been making efforts to reduce this fat cat phenomenon in its sectors and I applaud the government for that! I'm very proud of it for doing so. Kudos and finally. Streamline and remove the ppl wasting the organisation's time, impeding its efficiency and wasting $.
You said that the SAF should not function like a private sector organisation, which is really unorthodox and extremely misguided mentality. Edwin 3060 was right in that you held the iron rice bowl mentality that contributed to your resentment.
What about the civil service then? What about the ministries? Any different? Why should any of the ministry absorb people that no one else wants? So why should the SAF pick up the buck?
Why is ANY sector of the government expected to pick up the buck of taking and retaining people that cannot hack it anywhere else? As it is the SAF has already done that duty more than any other organisation. Want to compare with the private sector or stat board?
-
Originally posted by MS:
(5b) Who does not need to use a contract to bond anyone eg. management trainee.
All armed forces in the world have a unique HR structure that is different from other companies. How can you possibly believe that SAF can adopt the same HR management methods as other companies when it is an armed force?
To illuminate to you, if tomorrow a CO of this battalion decides to RESIGN cos he wants to go to Namibia and become a mercenary. Who's going to fill his position? Where is SAF going to find someone to replace him? What's going to happen to that unit?
They can anyhow find tom, dick and harry to replace him ah? Advertise in the papers ah? Or maybe go thru Jobsdb or HR agency like Kerry Consultings to interview for someone with military skills to be CO? Or move a CO from another unit ah? Then the other unit how? Do you not know it takes TIME to train someone to become ready to be a CO/OC/RSM/CSM? Someone who is CO has to go through TOURS in the ARMY itself? Can anyhow employ from the market one ah? Is there a ready pool of ppl with career soldiering skills in the HR market out there that can respond to the ad and go for interview and become the CO ah?You think it's like advertising for writer/banker/salesperson/lawyer?
MS i seriously advise you to think through your head carefully what you say before you say it, examine yourself with a measure of self-enquiry and not be so quick to blame other people and exercise some critical thinking in your thoughts.
Afterall it's a quality coveted by SAF. And will benefit you in other places as well now that it didn't work out with SAF.
-
Hi cookie,
I hope you're not taking things personal as what I've written are based on true accounts. Even when I disagree with edwin, we're speaking up in regards to the matters only and refrain from personal attacks based on malicious intend.
Before I go ahead to break your bubble, I apologize in advance if my words do not sound appealing. But I do find your words very childish. I will try to explain again as you don't understand what I am trying to get across.
Malignerism is common everywhere and you find people who pretend to work in any sector. Just the same way you find people who contribute. This is something you must accept. But there is a distinctive difference between people are treated in the SAF and a private organisation especially a EU based MNC.
As an organisation, the staffs forms one of the assets the organisation owns. When a staff is offered a career, the company has to ensure that it is a long term planned career whereby contracts signed for must be honoured. And this is a basic requirement between 2 parties who're willing to come to an agreement.
To remove a staff prematurely from office without a good reason as in staff misbehavior constitues to a despicable policy.
When faced off with a challenge from the staff on certain unfulfilled or breech in contracts, using force to suppress the voice is also not honourable. This we have seen too much taking place in the SAF.
No doubt there're also politics in the private sector, but you do not have regimentation whereby you can be charged for 'insubordination' in the most vague methods. This raises the fear in people to speak up or work against the 'common policy'. But not obvious in the private sector.
However, SAF plays down with the following:
(1) Changes the policy even with sevicemen who have signed for.
ie. JPSDS (cbt-tech scheme)
(2) Premature removal of servicemen from the office.
In the first place, SAF being a government body should carry more integrity than a civilian corporate company. How on earth can the organisation get the potential regulars to trust the SAF when they are sincerely looking for a career?
I hope I have managed to clear your doubts as I will not reply any of your posts should it look malicious.
-
Originally posted by MS:
(5c) Who does not require to use moneytary bait to entice the unaware?
Did YOU yourself not enjoy this? I think having been an regular who decided to leave because you didn't climb in the way you like, you have less rights to complain about SAF's high pay compared to those of us who never signed on.
The SAF has to offer "higher than what most of them can command outside" pay to entice pple to sign on because it has to fulfil a minimum no. of people in the rank and file to maintain operational fitness. If it doesn't fulfil, the army doesn't happen, that simple.
Even as a civilian who never signed on, I can appreciate it and understand that SAF has to do this with taxpayers' money (which I contribute). If not enough ppl, the army cannot do ops, simple as that.
As for most of the kind of ppl that they end up signing, I just hope ppl with genuine intentions for soldiering sign on and not just use SAF for their own motives. Even if they have other plans, I hope they have the integrity to give back to SAF what they're paid for dollar for dollar WHILE THEY'RE THERE, in the name of being a capable and worthy person and not adopt a "chi bao deng si" attitude, which is prevalent in a number of people I know. This is not SAF's fault as they have to fulfil what they need to fulfil. In fact I feel bad for the organisation, and think it's really very kind and merciful to tolerate such ppl for so long, which anywhere else will boot in one day.
-
Originally posted by MS:
To the top managment, the people are just statistical. Because that is the best way for management to see the actual performance of the organisation. I did management in a private organisation before and sometimes really hate the idea of knowing some of my friends is amongst the numbers.In the SAF, I have met some really good officers who stood up for men. BG Ong Boon Hwee, LTA Jeremiah Ong Kian Ann, CPT Tan Teck Kim are real good examples. These Armour officers are like everyone of us, limited as a man. But when they knew something went wrong, they stood up and did their best to right the wrongs. Yet at the same time, they are also subjected to the harshness of the SAF culture or commonly known as words twisting. One of my fellow spec asked the commander,"Sir, you all always tell us to take care of your men, then who takes care of us?" Indeed, if the officer take care of his men, but who takes care of him?
FYI Its CPT Jeremiah Ong now. he's been captain for ard 2year plus liao.
-
Originally posted by MS:
To remove a staff prematurely from office without a good reason as in staff misbehavior constitues to a despicable policy.
The problem is you have an iron rice bowl mentality towards SAF, which all of us can see and also know to be unorthodox in this day and age. I hate to be the one to burst your bubble but no free lunch in the world man.
All organisations put the betterment of the organisation over the individual and are not expected to retain (inapt) people while compromising this goal. Next, I don't think SAF removes good performing people in the streamlining exercises it's done so far. Can you prove that any of them were good performers? I doubt it, but even if you can, it doesn't detract that ALL organisations do what they have to for the betterment of the WHOLE organisation and not towards a few individuals.
-
I believe I need to stress the importance that I am not whining or complaining abt the SAF as I have not done well in it. In fact, I did perform during my stay in the SAF. My superiors were consistantly pressing me to stay, even had to resort to attempt to entice me with promotions several times given the condition that I continue to sign on. Which of course I rejected many times as I already decided to leave on my 6th year. I was last managing the equipments in the technical aspects of 3 classified battalions after being selected by my unit's management which also includes management of payment.
After the BG's interference against the bad politics that brought me down, my career eventually got a headstart in the technical aspect 7 years back which formed the foundation of my current breadwinning career. And I believe I will continue to stay in this line as my passion lies in automotives.
I have previously mentioned some officer's names. Because of these people, I manage to achieve what I have today. I am now in my late 20s, working as an engineer in a EU MNC taking charge of the region in the automotive engineering industry. I am going to Germany for training this year, received good commendations from my S.E.A Regional Manager shortly after my confirmation. In the company before I came to my current company, I received a double increment, promotion and top 10% ranking in a government related company all in 1 shot. For the past year I have been driving my own car bought from vantage auto something which I will never be able to afford if I stayed in SAF until my current age. Even though not yet to my benchmark, I am drawing a pay that will only be in my dreams if I stayed on in the SAF till my current age.
The reason why I am raising all this issues in this thread is to remind people of the culture in the SAF. This culture have led people to be so accustomed to the extend of playing the dirty politics with the abuse of 'regimentation'. I have been through it. Many others have also been through it. And it will remain a cycle just that the victims and aggressors change everytime.
-
Originally posted by snk86:
FYI Its CPT Jeremiah Ong now. he's been captain for ard 2year plus liao.
He's one of the very rare gems who will stand up against odds to protect the interests of his men if he knows his men is in the right & taken advantage of. He knew about what happened to me and was extremely pissed with the organisation. But having limited power, there was only so much he could do but he didnt spare any effort to ensure his men get their due welfare and punishments for those who deserve it.
Jeremiah is one man you can follow with faith.
-
Originally posted by cookiecookie:
The problem is you have an iron rice bowl mentality towards SAF, which all of us can see and also know to be unorthodox in this day and age. I hate to be the one to burst your bubble but no free lunch in the world man.
All organisations put the betterment of the organisation over the individual and are not expected to retain (inapt) people while compromising this goal. Next, I don't think SAF removes good performing people in the streamlining exercises it's done so far. Can you have prove that any of them were good performers? I doubt it, but even if you can, it doesn't detract that ALL organisations do what they have to for the betterment of the WHOLE organisation and not towards a few individuals.
Again... you still don't get me. I have not said anything about iron rice bowl in the SAF.
It is the way how SAF breeches the agreement made between servicemen and the organisation that makes it despicable.
I have seen good performers removed from office prematurely. During my recent ICT, I was shocked to know an extremely high flyer volunteerily resigned as he was totally pissed with the organisation's way of handling the staffs. But I shall not name them in this public forum.
And you are really naive to think that it is the SAF culture to only keep performing staffs. There are also staffs who're able to do well leaving volunteerily at the end of the contract refusing every opportunity to extend the career inside.
However we can take it as incompetency and honest mistake.
But if the SAF in the first place is unable to ensure the very agreement they made with the servicemen, then how on earth do you think the SAF values integrity and honour?
(1) Pre-mature removal of staffs from office
(2) Failure to fulfill the contract's agreement eg. JPSDS by ensuring that the staffs are able to transit to the tech phase as agreed during signing.
Talking about money entice, which organisation with good staff retention rate need to use money to entice people. It is only those who foolishly thought that the money was attractive that they took it and realise why the money was there in the first place later. I have to admit that I was one of those who thought "Don't worry, SAF will take care of me." Only to be laughed at by seniors who're regulars and ORD personnel. And mind you, I didn't enjoy a single moment with the money after knowing the price tag behind the money.
-
Originally posted by MS:
As an organisation, the staffs forms one of the assets the organisation owns. When a staff is offered a career, the company has to ensure that it is a long term planned career whereby contracts signed for must be honoured. And this is a basic requirement between 2 parties who're willing to come to an agreement.
How can private companies plan "long term planned career" for its staff when staff are not bound under bond AND in fact can be let go at any time for any reason the company dreams of (superior doesn't like your guts)? There is no such thing, no iron rice bowl in the private sector (and now SAF too HURRAY!). All companies work this way. They like you, they employ you. Anytime they like they ask you to go. They like you, they promote you. Anytime you like, or have a better offer elsewhere you go.
Even for top performers in top banks, there's no "long term planned career". In large companies like GLCs there's ranking exercise to appraise each person and those ranked well get to advance further and if their bosses like them, they may be given better opportunities. This only applies VERY selectively and not on all employees in the private sector. Do you honestly believe the recep or the data entry clerk has their "long term planned career" with their companies?!?!
In fact there's more job security in the SAF for the mere fact that it has no choice but to sign people up through contracts that can't be breached so the person is ensured of employment for at least the duration of the contract terms.
-
The few examples you raised, you said they resigned. if they left on their own, why are you complaining and using that to say SAF asks people to go? That I don't understand. Quote "During my recent ICT, I was shocked to know an extremely high flyer volunteerily resigned as he was totally pissed with the organisation" and "here are also staffs who're able to do well leaving volunteerily"
I hope you can try to collect your thoughts and write coherently for our understanding.
Also about the money bit to entice ppl. I don't think that SAF giving good monetary incentives to entice ppl to sign on is an indication of the organisation. It's an indication of the people it signs on.
If there's not enough ppl in a society who want to be career soldiers, what's SAF to do? We've established that SAF needs to fulfil a minimum no. of people for operational fitness. Of cos it has to use monetary incentives to attract them since it's the only thing these people respond to.
It's the way they perform when they're in the organisation, after enjoying the $ that determines whether they have integrity or not. And unfortunately, we've known too many cases of regulars who have a chi bao deng si attitude after they sign on and enjoy the fruits of the monetary incentives.
In any case, I think we can agree to disagree, if you know what that means. Clearly I feel you have an axe to grind and don't agree with your points and I certainly think your comments on the private sector are naive and inaccurate.
Since SAF is so hateful to you, I wonder why you even bother hanging around in the SAF forum. Doesn't it give you bad memories?!
-
Originally posted by cookiecookie:
How can private companies plan "long term planned career" for its staff when staff are not bound under bond AND in fact can be let go at any time for any reason the company dreams of (superior doesn't like your guts)? There is no such thing, no iron rice bowl in the private sector (and now SAF too HURRAY!). All companies work this way. They like you, they employ you. Anytime they like they ask you to go. They like you, they promote you. Anytime you like, or have a better offer elsewhere you go.
Even for top performers in top banks, there's no "long term planned career". In large companies like GLCs there's ranking exercise to appraise each person and those ranked well get to advance further and if their bosses like them, they may be given better opportunities. This only applies VERY selectively and not on all employees in the private sector. Do you honestly believe the recep or the data entry clerk has their "long term planned career" with their companies?!?!
In fact there's more job security in the SAF for the mere fact that it has no choice but to sign people up through contracts that can't be breached so the person is ensured of employment for at least the duration of the contract terms.
You don't seem to understand me despite my relentless attempt to explain.
It is not about the iron rice bowl nor the job security. It is how the contracts were mete out.
Perhaps it will sound clearer if I stimulate an example.
A young recruit with a poly diploma signed on with the SAF at the age of 21 for 10 years. However he is free to leave at the 6th year if he did not take his start advance of $10K. At his 6th year, he decided to continue his remaining 4 years and took his start advance. Before he finishes his 4 year, he was told to leave. The reason given was that his service is no longer required.
This is just like the case of the pre-maturely removed 50 year old warrant who made it to the news lately.
It is essential for an organisation to keep to it's original agreement to complete the entire contract. And by removing people prematurely is as good as breaking promises. If this is the benchmark of the SAF integrity, then how on earth is SAF going to get people to trust the brand name of SAF again! The long term career is at least to keep to the contract.
However in the civilian sector, it is essential to pave a career path for the new employee. We need to look at things far and by having a possible career path, it becomes a target for the new employee to look forward to and not be afraid when is the day you will come to lose your job unknowingly even though your performance is good.
You have never done career planning for yourself or your subordinates before? Like what is the benchmark pay and rank you should achieve by the time you reach your 3rd 4th 5th etc year of service. Also at the same time, segregate the jobs clearly for your men in order to prevent double jobs and fully exploit the potential of your men in this way everybody gets to keep their jobs and you manage your labour size adequately. This is some basic middle level management skills.
I hope I am wrong. But what you've been portraying is that it is normal and absolutely OK to break the agreement in the name of progress.
For your info, I never believed in iron rice bowl. That was why I have never used this to support my argument. The only way to keep yourself employed is through good conduct and reasonable performance.
-
Originally posted by MS:
I have previously mentioned some officer's names. Because of these people, I manage to achieve what I have today. I am now in my late 20s, working as an engineer in a EU MNC taking charge of the region in the automotive engineering industry. I am going to Germany for training this year, received good commendations from my S.E.A Regional Manager shortly after my confirmation. In the company before I came to my current company, I received a double increment, promotion and top 10% ranking in a government related company all in 1 shot. For the past year I have been driving my own car bought from vantage auto something which I will never be able to afford if I stayed in SAF until my current age. Even though not yet to my benchmark, I am drawing a pay that will only be in my dreams if I stayed on in the SAF till my current age.
Hi I'm not interested in your current CV or how fabulously you're doing now compared if you had remained in the SAF because it's irrelevant to this discussion about SAF. None of us also held illusions abt how you'd have done in the SAF.
-
Originally posted by cookiecookie:
The few examples you raised, you said they resigned. if they left on their own, why are you complaining and using that to say SAF asks people to go? That I don't understand. Quote "During my recent ICT, I was shocked to know an extremely high flyer volunteerily resigned as he was totally pissed with the organisation" and "here are also staffs who're able to do well leaving volunteerily"
I hope you can try to collect your thoughts and write coherently for our understanding.
Also about the money bit to entice ppl. I don't think that SAF giving good monetary incentives to entice ppl to sign on is an indication of the organisation. It's an indication of the people it signs on.
If there's not enough ppl in a society who want to be career soldiers, what's SAF to do? We've established that SAF needs to fulfil a minimum no. of people for operational fitness. Of cos it has to use monetary incentives to attract them since it's the only thing these people respond to.
It's the way they perform when they're in the organisation, after enjoying the $ that determines whether they have integrity or not. And unfortunately, we've known too many cases of regulars who have a chi bao deng si attitude after they sign on and enjoy the fruits of the monetary incentives.
In any case, I think we can agree to disagree, if you know what that means. Clearly I feel you have an axe to grind and don't agree with your points and I certainly think your comments on the private sector are naive and inaccurate.
Since SAF is so hateful to you, I wonder why you even bother hanging around in the SAF forum. Doesn't it give you bad memories?!
I do not hate SAF for your info. I do have friends serving in the SAF as regulars or NSF and still kept in contact with many of my ex colleagues.
But I do not agree to the tactics used by the force to get things done sometimes. And this is attributed to the culture of the force. And it becomes dirty politics once the culture materialise into actions.
hey come on... I'd be delighted to start a discussion with you or even healthy argument. It doesn't matter if we beg to differ. But if you start taking things personal, then it will be very hard for us to make progress.
Maybe I think we shouldn't discuss further. Feel free to PM me and I'd be very glad to make a friend out of you.