bond breakers = suckers ???
-
GRRR.... me so mad when I saw tat bugger 'justifying' his cause on breaking his bond.
Those bast*rds are taking out a scholarship worth several hundred thousands and those $$$ come from us taxpayers. We pay these fellas hundreds of thousands to go overseas and study and to serve their time wif the government, hoping tat they would be groomed into the next generation of leaders.
Only to have these bastards breaking their bonds for their own career mobility?! One idiot even said tat having a government scholarship LOOKS GOOD ON HIS RESUME!!!!
The government outta make these bond breakers pay back double or even triple of what's the bond's worth. These bastards think they have $$$ can suka-suka break bond.
Sorry for my strong language guys. But I am really mad when I saw tat article. Wat do u fellas think? -
Think they are quite selfish as they think and believe that a scholarship comes without a price attached,obviously they never heard of the word "There's no free lunch in this world".I mean,if you wanna get a free education by getting a scholarship,you gotta serve a bond in return for your free education, and you are depriving another person of a chance to get the scholarship who really needs it.I don't think that who have the scholarship are really needy and desperately need the $$$ to continue their studies,some just want it so as to look good on the resume as 1 so aptly put it.To think the government so deluded and naive to award such people scholarships,eheheheh
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.
~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
my very own opinion...
jeff007, if you are bonded to this organisation for 4/6 years because of the scholarship you took up when you were 18 year old - the work sucks, your superior piles up endless amount of work on you, you colleagues have extra and higher expectations of you because you are after all, the company's scholar, attractive offers (better pay and job satisfaction) are knocking on your door - won't you be tempted to take up these offers?
i don't see how taxpayers' money are being wasted. scholars have to pay back the money if they break the bond. and they have to pay back 100% plus hefty compound interests and hefty administration charges. on a more general basis, it's not as if you will be paying less taxes if there are no scholarships.
as repeated and emphasised so many times from scholars, a scholarship is not awarded based on affections, emotions, empathy, sympathy. a scholarship is a commercial contract. and it is really just a pure commercial contract. both parties benefit. because of a scholarship, a student will have to work very hard for that 4-5 years of tertiary studies. if the student doesn't perform well, the organisation will simply terminate the scholarship and ask the student to pay damages. in the same way, if the organisation does not meet up to the student's expectations, why is it wrong for the student to terminate the contract?
if anyone wants to argue along the line that
a scholar has moral obligations. i think anyone on the opposition can also argue along the line that the organisation has equal moral obligations. scholar terminates bond - WRONG. organisation terminates scholar's contract - WRONG too! so let's have a debate on how morally wrong it is to terminate a hardworking scholar's contract.
regarding the scholar who said the scholarship will look good on his resume. i suppose that part of the speech was taken out of a long interview dialouge. and the papers chose to sensationalise that provocative interview portion.
of course, there will be this group of 'bad' scholars who are already thinking of breaking bonds without serving a single minute. and to equate this balance, there will also be this group of organisations who will treat their scholars like shit. i'll say these two parties best deserve each other.
just my opinions. -
accidentally clicked on "Submit" twice.
[This message has been edited by Spoofed (edited 19 July 2000).] -
I agree with Spoof...
Government jobs... when u first start out as a 'sin jiao' is very fucked up. You get bullied by the 'lao jiaos' and they pile shit on you.
Why I'm saying this? B'cos its all the same everywhere in the fucking Singapore govt. hierarchy... whether it's the ministries, boards or armed forces. They base their organization on rank and they say that you have to earn and work your way up for the privileges. (I'm from a PTE LTD co. attached to a Secondary Skool... so I KNOW!)
Unfortunately, the ones up there (who have suffered in the past) are privileged and follow the system... bullying the newbies.
Besides, bond breakers have to pay back big time wat... so wat's the problem...???!
SO I SAY TO ALL BOND BREAKERS.... IF YOU HAVE TO DO IT, JUST DO IT. The system sucks as it is...
------------------
theonethatnobodyknows -
Then shouldn't the onus be on the would-be scholar to do his homework and dig up information on the organisation that is going to award him the scholarship rather than once getting the scholarship and deciding to break the bond and pay the $$ back.It sure won't look good on the resume and cast doubts about that person if he is known as a bond breaker.Originally posted by Spoofed:if the student doesn't perform well, the organisation will simply terminate the scholarship and ask the student to pay damages. in the same way, if the organisation does not meet up to the student's expectations, why is it wrong for the student to terminate the contract?
just my opinions.
Biaxident : Not only gov organisations where the old birds bully the new birds,i bet even pte ltd also do that,but except gov organisation did it more obviously,hehe
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
actually, scholars do. scholars find out what industries the organisation is involved in, the kind of career advancement prospects etc. as for the actual working experience and environment, unless you have friends working inside, you can only rely on trips organised by the organisation itself. and by the time you immerse yourself in that environment 4-6 years later, your mentality would have changed, your expectations would have changed, your responsibilities to your family would have changed, your aspirations would have changed.Originally posted by moose:Then shouldn't the onus be on the would-be scholar to do his homework and dig up information on the organisation that is going to award him the scholarship rather than once getting the scholarship and deciding to break the bond and pay the $$ back.It sure won't look good on the resume and cast doubts about that person if he is known as a bond breaker.
i am now 22. i believe my mentality is very much different from the time when i was 18. then, i might have been happy signing up a PSC scholarship. but now, no no.
anyway, really just my personal opinion. -
Then they should also take into account their mentality,aspirations in the future before they sign on the dotted line as this is their future they are talking about,not some thing that will be over in a few months,heeh
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
Wah cow....these recent reports haf gotten me fuming mad....
But i suggest we should look at the crux of the problem. What is the underlying social reason behind these 11 potential bond breakers and perhaps more who are unwilling to speak out for themselves?
With the prosperity Singapore is having and the development of the new economy and globalisation...it seems that we the young generation seems preoccupied with $$$ and power...
Prob. its our upbringing, prob. it's how life is, pursuing things that involve $$$ for the world now revolves around it. It is this notion that the younger generation have that is worrying me and prob many of the ppl in here and around the world.
Some scholars i personally know fought hard to obtain the scholarship they want. To them, being a scholar is partly akin to having a financial backing for your studies, and also partly to fufil their dreams. One police overseas scholar i know told me once that it doesnt matter if the bond is long or short...what matters is that he is happy being with the police force, and that was the primarily reason why he chose SPF over the other scholarships, personal interest in being with the particular organisation.
What i realized nowadays is that ppl seems to be increasing more and more driven by money and not their own will and wish to be someone they want to be. Some ppl i know, for the sake of optimising their chances of being sponsored will fervently apply for a plethora of scholarships...without themselves asking whether they are suitable to the job-nature or whether they can forsee a future with that particular organisation.
Whats the point of scholarship then? Money status happiness fufilment?
I think it all boils down to our upbringing. And our fondness for money and status. -
heehee.Originally posted by moose:Then they should also take into account their mentality,aspirations in the future before they sign on the dotted line as this is their future they are talking about,not some thing that will be over in a few months,heeh
so many factors shape a person's personality, so it can't be that easy to predict how you will turn out in the future.
unless of course, you are mr.moose or spoofed...destined to be moosing or spoofing around. -
it's a social problem then. so $$$ drives singaporeans. more $$$ drives more singaporeans then.Originally posted by slorr:Wah cow....these recent reports haf gotten me fuming mad....
But i suggest we should look at the crux of the problem. What is the underlying social reason behind these 11 potential bond breakers and perhaps more who are unwilling to speak out for themselves?
With the prosperity Singapore is having and the development of the new economy and globalisation...it seems that we the young generation seems preoccupied with $$$ and power
.
.
[Spoofed's auto text reduction system in action]
.
.
the scholarship money is really just enough to get you by. not so well-to-do scholars will think of it as a mean of studying overseas. rich scholars won't even think much of it.
side-tracking to an interesting issue...
someone told me this quite sometime ago:
people are always saying "money isn't everything". the people who are in the position to say that are people who had actually been rich and knows what's in store for them after they have gotten everything. not well-to-do people will say that because they are jealous.
u agree?
i have no stand on this issue. but i do think i need $$$ to feed myself and my family, to have decent housing over my head. i'll comment on that if i am to make it rich. -
Of cos you can't make a 100% prediction,if not he will have better chances predicting every week's TOTO numbers.The very best the scholar can do is make a highly possible and reasonable prediction in the near future eg after they have gotten their scholarship and it's time to serve their bond,heheeOriginally posted by Spoofed:heehee.
so many factors shape a person's personality, so it can't be that easy to predict how you will turn out in the future.
unless of course, you are mr.moose or spoofed...destined to be moosing or spoofing around.
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
Dear jeff007, you can go on a government sponsored scholarship and then break the bond too if you want. Nobody's stopping you.
------------------
* -
Well, I feel that what Spoofed said rang some truth! I mean, an 18-year-old will have different expectation when they sign up for the scholarship bond and upon graduation, their expectations may have changed and may want to work in other fields instead of the government body they are bonded to. An unhappy worker is not an efficient worker. These scholars will not be able to perform well even if they continue to work in the companies they are bonded to. So, isn't it a better solution to break the bond rather than they continue serving the bond and yet not putting in their best work attitude and efforts? They will also be considered CHEATING if they continue to work in an efficient way or not giving their best shot and will you call that wasting tax-payers' money too since they are working in the government sector?
moose, I don't think it's right of you to say that these bond-breakers are depriving others of the chance to get the scholarship. There are always the black sheeps in a flock and it's not fair to pin-point those scholars. Others, given the bond, could have broken it too! Moreover, these scholars did work hard for their grades and it's not exactly an easy task going through the various interviews. Most often than not, when you face a whole panel of interviewers, one's knees can almost grow weak. Many of these scholars may really just want to get an overseas education because they cannot afford it, with no intention of breaking their bond. Maybe the work environment is really not suitable for them after all? Also, during their schooling years, they do have to answer to their scholarship board (their sponsors) with regards to their grades. They work hard too, to make that grade so it's not exactly an easy task. Can't we just give them the benefit of the doubt and stop reprimanding them? Besides, a scholarship will really look good on one's resume, even you have to agree that don't you?
During their academic years, these scholars will usually be attached to a government body and will be able to experience what it is like in their SUPPOSED working environment in future. Who knows? It could be during these attachments that they realise that they have no interest in working for that government body anymore and hence, decide to break their bond? *SHRUGS*
Our environment is changing everyday and so are we. It's really no one's fault. We jsut have to accept changes when they are due. It's enough that these bond-breakers have to pay back for their bond, why must we still reprimand them and start sprouting vulgarities because of this issue? They have every right to do what they want and it's NOT up to us to judge them, whether what they have done is moral or not. We can just leave that to their sponsors!
------------------
=================================
Do Pixies like a rainy day?
A-piping through the dell?
The Pixies must enjoy the rain;
Thats when they weave their spell.
Rain drops, rain drops
Play a Pixie-tune
================================= -
if it's as easy as you put it out to be, i don't think anyone in singapore (even people who are in 20s) will make a bad career choice. somemore, we are talking about JC students who are barely 19. let's not even talk about a span of 6 years, we consider 1 or 2 years. can you accurately predict how general environmental factors will affect you? fact is you can't, cos you don't even know how these environmental factors are going to evolve to. even big organisations have to restructure and adapt fast and often.Originally posted by moose:Of cos you can't make a 100% prediction,if not he will have better chances predicting every week's TOTO numbers.The very best the it's time to serve their bond,hehee
scholar can do is make a highly possible and reasonable prediction in the near future eg after they have gotten their scholarship and -
Well,the black sheeps you are speaking of are those from the bond breakers or those from the scholars?If they are from the bond breakers,then who are the black sheep in that group?If they are from the scholars groups,i presume the black sheep are those bond breakers rite?Kindly enlighten me ass i will reply once i get ur post and after i see my dino show,heheehOriginally posted by pixie_gal:moose, I don't think it's right of you to say that these bond-breakers are depriving others of the chance to get the scholarship. There are always the black sheeps in a flock and it's not fair to pin-point those scholars. Others, given the bond, could have broken it too!
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
Bond breakers. It is definitely very subjective as to who is right and who is wrong. All I can reiterate is that, bond breakers or not, everyone started off this competition for scholarship on an equal footing. No one can exactly say someone has an advantage over the other when the stages of psychometric tests and rounds of tedious interviews are known to weed out those with undesired character (and yes, that includes those considered not morally upright enough). Of course, these stringent tests are by no means 100% fool proof, but they do serve their purposes to a certain extent. Until a much better option is formulated, these filters will have to do.
And before everyone curse and swear about the government's choices, isn't it true that all the taxpayer's money used to fund those scholarships are forms of investments??? Surely for there to be good investments, there must be bad ones too. For the government to invest in these youngsters who might one day be our leaders, surely some risks are acceptable right??? So for the taxpayer's money part, well, I guess it is justifiably spent, with or without the existence of bond breakers.
And well, contrary to what many here said, I don't think bond breakers are loathesome people. Lots of people make a big hoohuh about it, but like I said, they earned their rights to the scholarship, be it for the prestige or for the money. They are, like any other, possible candidates for important roles in the future. And it is not only one person's decision about that, it is the decision of a panel of judges (if I could put it that way), which includes the likes of colonels, top notch representatives from the police force and other forces, as well as civil organisations, etc, in short, all very experienced people. If those guys can pull one off in front of so many of these people, no one can fault them for it right???
Anyway, a scholarship is, well, a scholarship, not a bursary meant only to aid those financially able. To my knowledge, there are definitely quite a number of scholarships around, and if you are able, you will be spoilt for choices. So there is definitely no such thing as starving other people of the opportunity to further their studies abroad. The opportunities are aplenty, it is up to the individual to grab them.
And regarding the comments made regarding the reasons to breaking bonds, I believe the media has somewhat made a mountain out of a molehill, but then again, this is sensational news, definite to bring about an uproar among the people. And yes, the media has succeeded, maybe better than expected. But think of it this way, do all bond-breakers really think the same way??? If you think so, think again. I shall leave it as that, else I get blackmarked by anyone here. Cheerios.
------------------
Style is knowing who you are, what you want to say, and not giving a damn. - Gore Vidal -
Not all bond breakers think the same,there was 1 example of a scholar who wanted to extent his studies to do a research project,but was rejected by the government organisation.Thus he was facxed with no choice but to break his bond.He had all intention to serve his bond,but alas,he could only do it after his research project while the organistation was unwilling to extent that grace to him.In this situation,i cannot fault him for breaking his bond as he had every wish to fulfill it,but didn't had the understanding of the organisation.But for those who join a scholarship with the intention to get a free lunch and to make it look good on their resume without ever thinking serving the bond back in return,those are the ones i fault as although i admit that scholarships are aplenty in Singapore,but those people who are fighting for it are even plentier,hehe
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
the views on scholarships are changing. 10 years ago,if a person got a scholarship it would mean commitment to the organization.it would have been a promise that must be fulfilled because people place great emphasis on keeping promises.
now scholarships carry with it commercial meaning.the organization has a right to break the bond if the scholar does not perform well, and scholars increasingly have the idea tt a bond is actually not really all tt bonded.
the implications seem to be that a bond has lost its meaning,and when an organization chooses a scholar,it can no longer b sure tt he will stay with it.then is the motivation for providing scholarships lost for the organizations?
also,what is happening to the moral obligation sense of scholars? if they seek a scholarship without the mindset of working for the organisation in the future,then are they just buying insurance for themselves? if they can't get better offers,then work in the company lor. if can,then give it up lor. the scholarship then becomes some kind of a loan to these people!
then issit better to work around these views and offer shorter bond periods,since a lot of ppl says tt perspectives do change before and after studying? are we addressing the problem adequately or are we encouraging ppl to treat bonds umimportantly?
well...just a train of tots..a rather long one though -
Well, in response to Moose, glad you know of that example too. There are a few more similar ones, but I shan't point them out one by one. Anyway, we have all been putting the blame on the scholars. Have any of us thought of it the other way round??? If the prospects or the working conditions within the government or in a firm were so attractive, no one would give it up no matter how u clobber them. As to date, I have yet known of anyone who have given up their President's Scholarship. There are people I know who never got the chance to do the subjects they wished to do, simply because they weren't allowed to by the Organisation which bonded them. Which means, well, once that signature is put on the dotted line, there goes freedom. Well, you are allowed a little space to exercise your limbs, but that's about it. Some people are okay with it, some people aren't. That is why you not only you have instances of bond-breakers in the form of those mentioned so frequently in this thread, but you also have those who choose not to complete their bonds.
I think Dr. Tony Tan came up with a very good suggestion in parliament not too long ago regarding this issue. It has been increasingly difficult to obtain the necessary fundings to go overseas without going through the scholarship boards, the only bank I know of that offer overseas study loan, was either DBS or OCBC, I can't remember which. I think it is the former. And, well, the loan isn't much. Two times the monthly salary of your guarantor, interests to be serviced during the span of the studies, entire loan to be paid upon return, else to be turned into a personal loan, which means, yes, higher interests rates. If such an option were to be open, I guess there wouldn't be talks about depriving others of the chance for overseas education. This actually brings about the comparison of a local and overseas education, which I think was discussed some time ago and I shall not touch on it.
And well, people with immediate intentions of breaking bonds are not plenty. I guess the sample pool taken for the interview is a misrepresentation of the actual statistics involved with the total scholar population. That I can be quite sure of. It is definitely not as alarming a figure as 1 in 3 (is that the figure??? can't remember) And well, there is an upper and lower limit which companies work upon and are able to massage, so if one is really good, he will get his necessary rewards and if he isn't as good, he won't get it no matter what. It is just like saying a snowflake doesn't make a winter. A potential bond-breaker doesn't necessarily deprive others of a chance of getting their scholarship.
Oh yah, I don't believe in free lunches too. Repaying the bond in full plus such high interests, I don't consider that a free lunch.
Well, since we are at it, if everyone is expected to be "moral" enough with regards to serving their bonds, how about more bondless scholarships, and let people who return serve their companies out of moral obligation then. If everyone is supposed to be of that standard, I don't think this will pose much problem right??
------------------
Style is knowing who you are, what you want to say, and not giving a damn. - Gore Vidal -
In this time and age,people who have such high moral standards are getting lesser and lesser so i think what you suggest won't work out becos the chances of a person returning to serve the company out of moral obligation is almost zero,heheOriginally posted by Revelations:Well, since we are at it, if everyone is expected to be "moral" enough with regards to serving their bonds, how about more bondless scholarships, and let people who return serve their companies out of moral obligation then. If everyone is supposed to be of that standard, I don't think this will pose much problem right??
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz -
Bingo dear moose. That is exactly the case. Therefore, the difference between a bond breaker and a non-breaker would therefore be the fact that one dares do what he thinks is right for himself (which in all fairness is justifiable in today's society), while the other just endure and who knows, some might enjoy their tour of duties?? Righto??
------------------
Style is knowing who you are, what you want to say, and not giving a damn. - Gore Vidal -
do you know why most organisations do not encourage their scholars to take up post-graduate studies? because they want to reap the rewards of their scholarship investments as soon as possible. many organisations encourage their scholars to attain the level of honours. and that's just it. 4 years and honours. anymore than that, and you will have to give a good explanation why you want to do Master/Phd. if it's of no obvious advantage to the organisation, they will reject you outright - which was what happened to the EDB scholar mentioned in moose's reply.Originally posted by moose:Not all bond breakers think the same,there was 1 example of a scholar who wanted to extent his studies to do a research project,but was rejected by the government organisation.
.
.
.
. -
You read the rules...i pay you, you study AND you work for me for this number of years. If all you clowns just want to study and f*** off after a few years, whats the point of the contract and bonding. Beside, you should know the price of bonding with the devil. Sure, free study and all, but your bloody ass belongs to me when you come back into my organisation and you bloody whims of a "goo niang" who can't even take a little hard work ah.
You had your deal and when you come back, be prepared to suffered.
Yup, time to ask my lawyers to draw up a new deal. This way, everybody happy.
------------------
The Far East Pilgrim -
What someone thinks is right for himself maynot be right in society's eyes.Originally posted by Revelations:Bingo dear moose. That is exactly the case. Therefore, the difference between a bond breaker and a non-breaker would therefore be the fact that one dares do what he thinks is right for himself (which in all fairness is justifiable in today's society), while the other just endure and who knows, some might enjoy their tour of duties?? Righto??
------------------
When you were born, you were hungry and everyone around you was full. Live your life so that when you die, you're the one full and everyone around you is hungry.~~~
Diablo 2 rockzzzzzz