Singaporeans have been barking up the wrong tree all this time by asking the wrong questions. Big time. Alamak you guys have been sangat salah all this time, aiyoh. The stupid lame-ass questions that Singaporeans ask is this, "Why can't these white expats get a job in their own country eh? Are they in Asia because they have failed to get a job in their own country?" Wrong wrong wrong. The fact remains that these white expats are being paid a truckload of money to do jobs that locals can do - finance is colour blind, I would gladly let anyone (white, black or Asian) manage my money as long as I can get a darn good return on my investments.
 |
| Why are there so few Singaporeans working in banking?!?! |
The question I want to ask instead is this: Why aren't locals working in financial services? What is it with Singaporeans that make them shy away from banking as a career despite Singapore being one of the world's most important financial centres? Why are locals leaving this big gap in the market for expatriates to fill? If the locals were to take all the best jobs in financial services, there wouldn't be anything left for the expatriates who turn up in Singapore hoping to get a plum job in banking.
Let's look at a very Singaporean financial institution: the Bank of Singapore. The picture on the top of their hierarchy is a pretty sad reflection on their current situation. Only 7 out of the 14 directors are local Singaporean - this begs the question. Were they unable to find the right talent within Singapore for the other posts?
I am wondering if it is possible to find a correlation between this issue and another one we have talked about earlier, that of the role of NS in infantilizing the Singaporean man. Perhaps we have had a culture that creates very efficient worker ants who are happy to slave away for long hours, obediently carrying out orders - but we are not creating the kinds of local talents who will rise to the top of the food chain and become industry leaders. There simply isn't enough cream rising to the top - hence the need to fill top posts in organisations like the Bank of Singapore with foreign talents. Has this got to do with the way men are nurtured (or rather, infantilized) in our culture?
 |
| Men are constantly infantilized during NS. |
Let's get real here - the ratio of MDs and CEOs to 'worker ants' is very small. For every one big boss, there are thousands of 'worker ants'. Thus there is nothing wrong with a system if it does produce a lot of very efficient worker ants as you really only need a very small number of big bosses, or 'towkays' as we call them in Singapore. However, despite the economic boom in Singapore, there doesn't seem to be enough locals stepping into the role of the towkay in Singapore - leaving this gap in the market for expatriates to fill. Why is this the case?
Perhaps the conventional wisdom is that such great leaders will rise to the top anyway - you can look at some of the great success stories like that of British tycoon Sir Alan Sugar who started with nothing after he dropped out of school at the age of 16 but through his natural business acumen, built up a business empire worth US$1.14 billion today. Men like Sir Alan are rare of course, but such people are going to be successful no matter what life throws at them. No amount of social engineering is going to produce people like Sir Alan - so why even try?
 |
| Billionaire Tycoon Sir Alan Sugar |
Well, I think there is a compromise between the two extremes - whilst no amount of nurturing can turn average guys into super-achievers, when you do find someone who does show exceptional potential, the question is: what do you do with him/her? Well the Singapore system is simple: give him/her a scholarship, fund his/her further education then make sure s/he works for a local company for at least 8 years. There are actually a wide range of scholarships available for those who are academically stunning - PSC (for the public sector including defence) and plenty in the private sector as well. So there is a system - but is it working? Aha. Perhaps this is where the problem is.
There is no denying the fact that Singaporean scholars are academically brilliant - but why aren't they rising through the ranks to fill the very top posts by the time they are in their 40s? Let's go back to the Bank of Singapore board of directors again - let's say their average age is about 45 (I could be wrong, but some of them look well under the age of 50 whilst some look older). Given that one applies for a scholarship at of 18 after one's A levels, then the time period we need to focus on is around the year 1985. What happened in the mid 1980s? After all, there were plenty of scholarships available then for brilliant Singaporean students in the 1980s - where are those scholars from the 1980s today? What are they doing? Why aren't they in the boardrooms running companies like the Bank of Singapore?
 |
| What happened to our scholars from the 1980s? |
Now given that I have no idea who the Singaporean scholars were from the 1980s, I am going to make a calculated guess as to what happened back then. The scholarships were given to the students who were the best at scoring straight As rather than those who should any true potential to be the next Sir Alan Sugar. Singaporean students were nagged at by their parents to study hard to prove their worth, rather than spend any time doing any activities that would not help them score those As at the exams. I remember how I was offered the chance to work part time during the school holidays when I was in JC and my mother was mortified. She put her foot down and said no, you must study for your exams - what the hell do you want to work for? Don't you have enough money for everything you need? Her attitude was pretty typical of Singaporean parents and it is still the prevalent attitude today as a whole generation of students were groomed to become extremely good at scoring straight As but were pretty clueless about the business world. Hence many Singapore students find that transition from studying to working a major shock to the system.
As I am now in a position to influence the hiring (and firing) of people in my company, I would always choose a well balanced individual with a wide range of experiences over someone who has straight As but very little work experience. I am hiring you to do a job for me, not to study and pass more exams. Now there is always a place for people who have that 'worker ant' mentality in the work place - these people will make pretty decent middle management where they can learn a process, memorize all the rules necessary and carry out their task with great precision. However, these people will always be just a small cog in a big machine, happily ticking away, playing their role - but they will never be able to function independently outside that framework.
 |
| Are you just a small cog in a big machine? |
Has the system in Singapore merely produced a lot of very efficient machine cogs and little else? Is this why there are so many highly paid foreign talents in Singapore taking up these really well paid positions at the top of the food chain in Singapore? Well, let me tell you what I think is happening: as a society, we paying the price for placing way too much emphasis on academic achievements. I primarily blame the parents but I also blame the system - the system rewards academically brilliant students and the parents are merely following the rules of the system. Too many Singaporeans blame the PAP for bringing all these foreign talents to Singapore - but the PAP can only shoulder a part of the blame. Each time a Singaporean parent says, "no you cannot go play basketball with your friends, you have to study for your exams," they are perpetuating a very flawed system that has failed to produce enough people who have risen to the top of the food chain.
It's not studying hard or scoring straight As that is the problem - the problem is two fold. Firstly, it is whom you decide to give those scholarships to. Secondly, it is what you do with your scholars. I am going to compare Singapore to two other Asian countries: Japan and South Korea. Now both Japanese and Korean students study a lot harder than Singaporean students and they are put under a ridiculous amount of stress to do well in their studies - yet you will hardly find any foreigners at the top of any Japanese or Korean organization (ref: Bank of Singapore). It would be unimaginable for a big Korean or Japanese bank to have half their board of directors comprising of foreigners - that just wouldn't happen in Korea or Japan. So obviously, they're doing something with the cream of the crop in Japan and Korea to nurture them in a way that Singaporean companies just aren't. What is it? What is this je ne sais quoi, this secret formula then?
 |
| What can we learn from the Japanese? |
Let me go back to the French and Kiwi guys I spoke to on my conference call - they are not doing something that radical. They are taking a kind of financial service that is tried and tested in the west and bringing it to a new market in Asia where it is not yet widely used. They're not reinventing the wheel, they're just bringing someone else's wheel to sell in Asia. It's not rocket science, yet these guys have had the balls to move halfway around the world, to countries where they don't speak the local language (neither of them spoke either Thai nor Malay) and yet they have managed to become extremely successful. Why? They were at the right place, at the right time: they spotted a gap in the market and their natural business instinct kicked in when they realized there was a profit to be made.
Sadly, I know there will be some very stupid Singaporeans who will see the French and Kiwi guys and smirk, "Look at those two angmohs, what are they doing in Asia? Can't they get a job in their own country?" Well, I tell you what they are doing in Asia - they are making millions of dollars and earning a lot more money than you because you don't have the balls to do what they did. These guys saw a business opportunity emerge and they jumped in, seized the opportunity and took a big risk. The French guy told me, "I can't believe no one in Asia had the foresight to see what financial instruments people in Europe were using and then just copy the formula. Instead, I had the chance to be the first in Asia to do this - and I was merely doing what I was already doing back in France, it's not a new product at all." So before you Singaporeans wanna bitch about FTs, consider this: they could be working back in their home country, but they are making so much more money in Asia so they are here for the money. Bwahahahahaha.
Now I don't think Singaporeans lack this natural business instinct - there is no reason why the French or Kiwis should have more natural business instinct than us; but the difference is whether or not one has the balls to act on one's business instinct when we sense an opportunity on the horizon. Are Singaporeans so risk averse they willingly let golden opportunities slip by time and time again? Are they simply not garang enough to seize upon such opportunities?
 |
| Do you have the balls to act upon your good ideas? |
Well, that may well be the case. We have a culture that infantilizes our young adults, especially the men when they serve NS. Our culture stresses conformity and stifles creativity - it can be extremely intolerant to anyone who doesn't fit the mould. How is all that going to encourage a whole generation of Singaporeans to be garang enough to grab every opportunity that comes their way? No, instead you have created a kiasu, kiasi risk averse generation of Singaporeans who don't have the confidence to aspire to anything more than big a small but efficient cog in the big machine we call Singapore Inc. Tsk tsk. Who do we blame for this monumental cock-up on a national scale?
So, you only have yourselves (and the parents) to blame for all these FTs in Singapore. It's time to stop blaming the PAP for this situation and start pointing the fingers elsewhere. You know I hate the PAP so much, but in this case, it wouldn't be fair to completely pin the blame on them when it is the Singaporeans parents who are major part of the problem. If you don't agree with me, feel free to leave a comment below. Thanks for reading.
What insight Limpeh. Whilst I may not agree that BOS* is the most illustrative representation of the lack of talent in Singapore, I do agree on many of the points you have raised about the quality of our people.
ReplyDeleteAs you have so accurately pointed out, the crème of our Singapore crop just can’t compete with the best there is out there from US and Europe especially in the banking sector.
A Peek at Reality
A lot of it boils down to regional and overseas exposure. What do I mean? Many of these European talents who descend on our shores particularly at the C level (ie CEO, COO, CRMO etc) have stellar achievements gained from global establishments working in far flung places in addition to the elite school and MBA qualifications. Many recruiters I know often observe how local profiles don’t exhibit the breadth nor depth of experience to be a C level exec. Local CVs inevitably disappear into proverbial dustbin of oblivion when being considered for the very top roles. Why is this overseas experience crucial, one would ask? Because Singapore is competing at the highest level with other financial heavy-weights like New York, London and HK. In the past, only the big I-banks hired Americans, but a look at BOS management has shown that Singapore-grown companies are no longer relying on low-quality, low-cost officers. Hell no, if BOS wants to be the best private bank in the region, they have some serious competition in UBS, CS and the likes. Banking is all about people. Without them, you have no business model, no growth strategy and no revenue. Simply put, the big local companies cannot ignore the foreign talent when choosing the best.
Now some would say but aha, these foreign guys probably lack Asian or China experience but with the influx of European, Australian and US expatriates in HK and Shanghai since the 1980s, there are some seriously qualified finance bosses sitting just up in N Asia with CVs that would make mine or most local CVs look like a dog’s dinner. And guess what? With Singapore topping several living standards surveys, all of them are rather drawn to us now. Not because they couldn’t command another job or their home economy is doing so crap but because salaries for these guys at starting rate $500k-750k (excl performance bonus, sign ons,etc) are looking bloody attractive especially with a strong Sgp $. Comparing HK to Singapore, we are on par in terms of pay, coupled with the increasing pollution and health scares and lack of good international schools in HK, many have and more are beginning to see better prospects in Sgp. I know those were our circumstances when my FT husband was offered work in Singapore.
Singaporeans don’t have that punch
ReplyDeleteOften times, one overhears a bunch of Singaporean office workers lamenting they work so hard and yet they compete with FT for housing, jobs, school places. This has always been the case in big cities. Great cities are not great without the foreign talents they attract. HK as a work place environment is much tougher, driven and plain hungry. We Singaporeans are just softer in comparison. Particularly the generation which has grown up with a scholarship-saves-the-world-and-my-future attitude. Most elite performing students propelled into scholarships very often fail to see how long and deep rooted (and rotten) this path can be if you are truly brilliant and want to make a difference, an impact, break out from that generation cycle. Frankly this isn’t even a debatable topic (since I share the same view as you and many others).
What’s important to note is that scholars are the not the answer for tomorrow’s economy, not in Singapore or anywhere in the world. If we are striving for prolific, game-changing, inspirational leaders in finance and other industries, we need to invest in a vision beyond our shores, encouraging our youths to live outside their comfort zone, be that venturing overseas for a new life, embracing a career change, taking a risk in a new start up. They add up to life experiences, which make damn fine people, and damn fine people go far and up to the very top regardless of FT or local. One thing I have learnt from many senior execs (yeah those plump, overpaid guys you Singaporeans dislike). None of them fell neatly on the path of success at 18 years old with a scholarship. The road was often windy but they kept calibrating, re-focusing and pushing through when they hit one failure after another hurdle. Those who think they will rise to the ranks of CEO by taking a scholarship and waiting for all the best jobs to fall into your lap along the way ought to review your competition in Singapore and the rest of the world, because foreign talents here are relentless.
Thanks for your insightful comments S Muller. Spot on, you've hit every nail on the head. I love this part, " If we are striving for prolific, game-changing, inspirational leaders in finance and other industries, we need to invest in a vision beyond our shores, encouraging our youths to live outside their comfort zone, be that venturing overseas for a new life, embracing a career change, taking a risk in a new start up. They add up to life experiences, which make damn fine people, and damn fine people go far and up to the very top regardless of FT or local." So so totally true, you've expressed it so eloquently as well!
DeleteI do see 2 kinds of Singaporeans though amongst my peers from my JC cohort. There are 25% who are seeking to enrich their experiences and working in places like Africa, Middle East, Europe, N America, China, Oz and various parts of Asia. And there are 75% who have settled into the kind of small cog in a big machine role. The thing though, is that this 25% who left Singapore are never coming back - it's not like they are collecting all these brilliant experiences and then coming back to Singapore with a much better CV to compete with the best in S'pore. The term 'brain drain' describes this situation. Maybe this is just a reality we have to embrace - as more expats come to Singapore and more Singaporeans go abroad: this moving around is necessary to enrich one's international experiences. We cannot turn back the clock to the 1970s and 1980s when people were far less likely to move around like this.
Limpeh, maybe we should term this fluidity of skilled Singaporeans and Expats a “brain exchange/flow” and not “brain drain”.
DeleteWithin my circle, my best friends were made overseas during uni and early career. Some of them Singaporeans continued living abroad although many I know have returned home to pretty exceptional roles ranging from banking, medicine, technology etc. Oddly and rather ironically, none of them have complained about the influx of foreigners in their work place. In fact, most of them are rather complimentary and grateful for a vibrant, dynamic workplace with plenty of inspiration and brains to go round! Perhaps the only explanation I can conceive is these Singaporeans had the chops to excel in their careers in HK or NY but some moved back for personal and family reasons, but talent is talent, whether foreign or local, black, white or yellow.
Quality people believe in their skills, their role, their passion and they push through despite the challenges and competition. Forgive me if I am abstract. My point here is about perspective and attitude. Picture the bitter, disgruntled Singaporean who worries foreigners are sweeping every job, woman, primary-school place from beneath their carpet. Now picture the "garang" Singaporean who's too busy winning that new contract at work or wooing that hot babe every angmo is eyeing. Who looks like a winner to you? Let's plug the fear and quit this odd psychological state called self-fulfilling prophesy. Let’s stop feeling sorry for ourselves. It’s tedious and rather boring don’t you think Limpeh?
The government has achieved a fine job of the education system, if you ask me. (Gasp)
DeleteTheir goal in the 80s was mass-producing factory-grade high school and university graduates all ready to be fed into an economy like paper to a printer. Homogenous, A4 sized, preferably unblemished, PAP white, 2 dimensional, squared cornered dummies. We all voted PAP, we adored our MNC jobs even if it was at the factory line so life was pretty jammy in the ol days. We were all ready, eager beaver worker ants, competing to win the longest serving award to prove our loyalty to the grand masters of European and American MNCs. Some of us even made it to elite schools like med or law school, NUS no less. Scholarships were of course the epitome of success. These mini gods were on the career CTE to ermm where Woodlands?!
SCREECHHHHH....
Sorry this is such a bad joke. My bad on Woodlands, nothing against it.
My previous post on education erred on whimsical mockery. Forgive me.
DeleteBasic education is fundamental for any developed world and I don't think Singapore has faired badly if you compare literacy rates in the 70s/80s to what they are now. There are other barometers of an educated society which I am sure one can pull out of MOE statistics. PAP can rest assured they have done enough to equip us with basic English, Mandarin and Math to get through in life.
So where has it gone awry? Many of those born in the 80s & 90s have gone on to university and possible consider ourselves high achievers, ready to be PMET (new phrase i've learnt since being back!). What university has not done for some of us Singaporeans is taught us life skills We expect the direction we take at 18 (for girls) and 21 (for boys) to pave the way for a bright future leading us to senior management in our later career. Say if one embarks on an economics degree, we hope to work in a leading finance or related industry, supplementing our economics degree with time on the job which culminates in a fat, cushy role as chief economist in a top establishment. Now I don't know many who enjoyed such straight-forward success with a linear upward trend from graduation to retirement. In Singapore we take our degrees very literally. Youths are expected to know their life dreams at 18 or younger and determine with great fortitude our future from that point. Does anyone here notice this appalling incongruent concept? I was barely self-assured about my fashion sense at 18, let alone my life path. Thankfully I had rather liberal parents who was against any scholarship bond, encouraged me to embark on a degree of my choice which interest me and I knew I would excel in, aiming for nothing less than first class. Learn discipline and responsibility, but be young, silly and daring because in the safe haven of a tertiary institute, all those little failures will teach you something about the real world without meeting with career braking calamity. Those were the wise words of my folks, well, probably expressed differently.
I knew a guy who had dreams of being a lawyer at 16. He was playful and loved his music too much to focus on getting As at O levels, so he ended up in a paralegal course at the polytechnic. His head (and all his Singaporean instincts) chose to pursue a law degree in the UK but his heart led him closer to his passion for music. Fast forward 6 years, and he has now won a scholarship for his Masters in voice/music after graduating from an exceptional music school in NY. During his time in NY, he has set up a music company back in Singapore where he performs every summer. The road was a tough one for him but he has blossomed into a damn fine musician. His future now is brighter than if he ever attempted a law degree from some 3rd tier UK uni. What was distinctly different about him? His maturity and courage to follow his passion and believe in his talents despite all the criticism and negativity he faced from people who didn't care nor matter.
DeleteLet's treat our young with care and fragility. No point heaping onto them all these silly expectations of being something they will never be. What is the point of being second best, just a "small cog in a big wheel"? Whilst we are at that, let's not fool ourselves, not all university degrees are created equal. It's hardly clever to waste time and money on a rubbish degree in a godforsaken uni in some "ulu" Angmo countryside unless you think you stand a chance of differentiating yourself in the interview seat upon graduation. Find that something unique about your talents outside school be that sport, music, arts, etc and excel in that too. Embracing diversity has never been so important in our development as it is now.
Well said - esp ref: the degrees from chapalang angmoh univerisities.
DeleteJust wanted to pick up on your point about "brain exchange/flow" - yeah I've seen people like that. Can I just remind you of the NS factor? I have this old friend from Singapore who is now a commodity trader and he makes/loses millions and is doing pretty well for himself - he has chosen to base himself in various places: Oz, USA, HK even Malaysia for a simple reason: his work is important. If he chose to return to Singapore, he would be liable for reservist work and you're expected to drop everything and respond to the call of duty ... and he doesn't have a job which gives him that luxury. He would need to be able to watch prices and react to the changing market conditions and that means going without sleep sometimes or working with a PA who would stay awake whilst he sleeps and then wake him up the moment there is a price spike/drop. It's crazy but he is making SO MUCH MONEY it's unreal. And he's been based in KL before so he can have easy access to S'pore but still be officially based outside S'pore so he is exempt from reservist obligations.
DeleteIf you have a pretty straight forward 9 - 6 job, or a job where things are structured (eg. a teacher) then it's not so much a problem, eg. a teacher can inform his school of his reservist activities and the school can arrange for a relief teacher. But for others who have real responsibilities, it is a real pain in the butt and if I had been working in S'pore last year as a S'porean rather than a foreigner - then I would have had all that reservist crap as well and my boss would not be sympathetic to say the least as he depends on me to run a lot of things ... So at least for the men, there is an incentive to stay away and a big disincentive to return.
For those who return, yeah I know of this tax-consultant who worked in various parts of Canada + the US before returning to S'pore and she is doing so well because her international credentials have put her in a great position in the fiduciary industry. She is advising HNWIs who have assets spread over several countries about their tax liabilities - now I would trust someone like her to manage my father's assets (spread across M'sia and S'pore), far more than someone who has never ever worked outside Singapore.
We do not ask “Why cant they find a job in their own country”. We ask: Do they come here for the higher status, easier pickings & more willing girls? Why cant they stay in their own country and have a level playing field?
ReplyDeleteThe post-colonial hangover guarantees them respect, worship & glamour here, which they wouldn’t get in their own country. So we think there is something wrong with these people, because they seem out to take full advantage of us & our Chinese mentality cannot accept it. (We are more into concepts like honour & humbleness.)
As for us locals, you are looking at people in their 40s & 50s asking: Why are there so few highflyers from this generation? That too is a “wrong question”, the question really is: Why have so few of us joined the financial sector?
Business people in Spore are either old uneducated ones who set up shop because they were unemployable, or young educated ones who choose to work for themselves. Between these 2 age groups, there is a dearth of risk takers. The problem is not that Spore breeds infantilism, but that the education system in the 80s did not encourage kids to become entrepreneurs, financiers or investors.
POA (Principles of Accounts) was not offered in most secondary schools. Good students would take the “Triple Science, Double Maths” route. In junior college, those from Arts or Science who opted for “odd combinations” were not allowed to mix Commerce (POA or Business Management) with other subjects. Yet, these are deemed extremely important today!
We were advised to choose pure academic disciplines so we could “study higher”. Our minds were abuzz with the mantra: “bachelors, honours, masters, PhD, post-doctorate”. Everybody thought the higher your qualifications, the better you do in life. Well THAT certainly turned out to be a BIG FAT LOAD OF CRAP and I’d like to KILL whoever sold it to me! (But I blame myself even more for BUYING IT.)
Actually, I didn’t study that high, because I couldn’t make it.. BUT I still resent that constant emphasis on academic credentials, at the expense of life skills & character traits such as leadership/ perseverance.
These qualities cannot be learnt from books, but experience has taught me they make MORE difference to your destiny than what you studied in school.
Hi Lam Toh,
DeleteMay I refer you to S Muller's comment above - she explains it very well and answers your question as to why they are not staying in their home country (where there is a 'level-playing field').
"A lot of it boils down to regional and overseas exposure. What do I mean? Many of these European talents who descend on our shores particularly at the C level (ie CEO, COO, CRMO etc) have stellar achievements gained from global establishments working in far flung places in addition to the elite school and MBA qualifications. Many recruiters I know often observe how local profiles don’t exhibit the breadth nor depth of experience to be a C level exec. Local CVs inevitably disappear into proverbial dustbin of oblivion when being considered for the very top roles. Why is this overseas experience crucial, one would ask? Because Singapore is competing at the highest level with other financial heavy-weights like New York, London and HK."
I could quote more, but just read her post, she hits the nail on the head in her analysis. As for white expats taking advantage of Asians... Well I disagree, Asians have every right to tell them to go away but instead Asians welcome them with open arms. The fact is you cannot take advantage of someone unless they ALLOW you to do so. Some Singaporeans (women, HR managers etc) have given their consent, maybe it's not something you would've agreed to - but the fact remains, consent has been given.
You did hit the nail on the head when it comes to the BIG FAT LOAD OF CRAP relating to the education system. I would disagree however, on the impact on one's career though. I just have to share this story with you. When I started working for my current employer (a fund management firm in Luxembourg), my mother commented that my boss must have been impressed with my S paper distinction in economics and I'm like, OMFG, are you for real woman? You think my boss actually even took a look at my A level results? You think that employers out there in the real world actually give a shit about A level results? I got the job because he knew me from my last role in my previous company and observed me in action - and he was like, "if you ever leave that company, give me a call and you can come and work for me." I took him up on that offer - that's how it works in the real world when it comes to recruitment, you observe someone actually WORKING, like you know, doing real stuff for the company and you judge them on that basis - rather than their A level results. But such is my mother's attitude, she doesn't understand the real world, she was a teacher whose only, very limited experience, was imparting that mantra of "study hard and you will be rewarded" so it's people like her who misled you.
Mind you, if you go to my boss and asked him, "do you know what degree Alex has, from which university?" He would have no freaking clue - but he would be able to tell you why he gave me a job. So yeah, you and I (and my boss) are on the same page on that issue.
@Chin Lam Toh
DeleteYou said: "We ask: Do they come here for the higher status, easier pickings & more willing girls? Why cant they stay in their own country and have a level playing field? The post-colonial hangover guarantees them respect, worship & glamour here, which they wouldn’t get in their own country. So we think there is something wrong with these people, because they seem out to take full advantage of us & our Chinese mentality cannot accept it. (We are more into concepts like honour & humbleness.)"
Oh, spare me! And how insulting to the local women to boot! Those white men who are into glamour and white-men worshiping flock to Patpong or Patong Beach sweetie (apologies to Thai readers). And seriously, what about the white women? Why do they come here then? Also, what about Singaporean Chinese men working in China? Did they move for the same reasons too? (Look, are there a**holes among those who come here to work? Yes, just as there are a**holes amongst the local population...)
BTW, re: honour and humility, well, these are practised in Europe too, especially in Central and Northern Europe.
You make valid points, but your opening paragraph lets you down. You know, some established foreign companies in Singapore like Microsoft, IBM, do have locals at management levels, and this shows that Singaporeans do have what it takes to get to the top. But this did not happen overnight.
That the new world order requires less of vertical thinking, and more of lateral thinking is patently clear.
(Sorry for butting in Limpeh....)
Totally Anthea, tell it like it is!!! You rock guurrrlll!
DeleteI want to point the fingers back at the Singaporeans.
You claim Angmohs have higher status in Singapore - let me point the finger back at Singaporeans: why you all so bloody bodoh, so goondu? Who give the Angmoh higher status? If you guys didn't give angmoh that status, would they enjoy it? Compare that to Bangladeshis - why do Singaporeans disrespect Bangladeshis all the time but worship Angmohs?
You created the situation, it's entirely your fault you Singaporeans. As we say, you've made your bed now lie in it. Don't blame the angmohs, blame your fellow Singaporeans lah!
2. SPGs: local girls who like Angmohs.
Same as above. It's a gift from the locals to the Angmohs. Don't blame the person receiving the gift, blame the locals offering the gift.
3. Post colonial hangover. You want to blame angmoh for that or blame stupid idiotic Singaporeans for not waking up and realizing that it is 2012, not 1952?
By all means, bitch about fucking idiotic Singkies who are too fucking stupid to stand up for themselves - but how can you blame the Angmohs? It's time to point the fingers at Singaporeans and put the blame on them - specifically, the fucking stupid 60.14% who voted for this.
Stop blaming the FTs, start pointing the finger back at fucking stupid Singkies.
i do have to disagree with some of your points. if you look at the make-up of MNCs in singapore in the 90s and early 2000, singaporeans probably were the MDs, GMs and what-nots running the companies. however with the economy slow-down in the west and also singapore's more liberal policy in welcoming foreigners, slowly but surely more of these so-called expats started coming in and taking over the top positions. and then naturally these people will then bring in more of their kind as jobs back home started drying up. the vicious cycle then starts whereby the heads will say the locals dont have the necessary exposure and then bring in someone overseas and then the local never gets the necessary exposure and thus dont get promoted. i refuse to believe that no locals can run these MNCs in singapore cos they were run by locals in the 90s and 2000, unless we mean to say that come 2012 all the local talent died out.
ReplyDeletealso there is a certain mentality of 'white men know best' in asia, including singapore thus the preference for these expats even though our locals may be as good or even better.
Hi Lumos, thanks for your comment.
DeleteI think S Muller has provided the answer to your point - please have a read of her post above, but on the topic of the evolution of the management of MNCs in Singapore.
"Many of these European talents who descend on our shores particularly at the C level (ie CEO, COO, CRMO etc) have stellar achievements gained from global establishments working in far flung places in addition to the elite school and MBA qualifications. Many recruiters I know often observe how local profiles don’t exhibit the breadth nor depth of experience to be a C level exec. Local CVs inevitably disappear into proverbial dustbin of oblivion when being considered for the very top roles. Why is this overseas experience crucial, one would ask? Because Singapore is competing at the highest level with other financial heavy-weights like New York, London and HK.
Simply put, the big local companies cannot ignore the foreign talent when choosing the best. Singaporeans don’t have that punch
Often times, one overhears a bunch of Singaporean office workers lamenting they work so hard and yet they compete with FT for housing, jobs, school places. This has always been the case in big cities. Great cities are not great without the foreign talents they attract. HK as a work place environment is much tougher, driven and plain hungry. We Singaporeans are just softer in comparison. Particularly the generation which has grown up with a scholarship-saves-the-world-and-my-future attitude. Most elite performing students propelled into scholarships very often fail to see how long and deep rooted (and rotten) this path can be if you are truly brilliant and want to make a difference, an impact, break out from that generation cycle. Frankly this isn’t even a debatable topic (since I share the same view as you and many others).
What’s important to note is that scholars are the not the answer for tomorrow’s economy, not in Singapore or anywhere in the world. If we are striving for prolific, game-changing, inspirational leaders in finance and other industries, we need to invest in a vision beyond our shores, encouraging our youths to live outside their comfort zone, be that venturing overseas for a new life, embracing a career change, taking a risk in a new start up. They add up to life experiences, which make damn fine people, and damn fine people go far and up to the very top regardless of FT or local. One thing I have learnt from many senior execs (yeah those plump, overpaid guys you Singaporeans dislike). None of them fell neatly on the path of success at 18 years old with a scholarship. The road was often windy but they kept calibrating, re-focusing and pushing through when they hit one failure after another hurdle. Those who think they will rise to the ranks of CEO by taking a scholarship and waiting for all the best jobs to fall into your lap along the way ought to review your competition in Singapore and the rest of the world, because foreign talents here are relentless."
OK that was S Muller's POV, now here's my response to you Lumos.
Delete1. Singapore has evolved over the last 2 decades - growing in wealth and international importance. A large part of Singapore's success is being able to punch above its weight on the global scene - take the financial services industry for example: Singapore is a prominent global financial centre and it is servicing a client far beyond its shores. The financial services is not dependent on just the domestic market. Can Singapore become internationally competitive whilst relying entirely on local talent or does playing at that level mean adopting an international outlook and getting staff who do have the right kind of relevant experience? The risk-averse Singaporean worker who has never ever worked outside Singapore just doesn't cut it - if there are Singaporeans who have the right kind of international experience, then sure they will rise to the top of the food chain, but such people are rare. Many Singaporeans who work abroad have little or no intention of returning: it's called a brain drain and all you have left are risk-averse Singaporeans who are probably still living with their aged parents. It's a catch-22 situation.
2. Let's compare Singapore to Wenzhou in China, because it is a city with an identical population size at 5.17 million (in the Metropolitan area) - compared to Singapore's 5.18. Yet few people outside China have even heard about Wenzhou because it simply doesn't have an international outlook. The economy is very much local and whilst it is by no means poor, it is by no means international either. It reminds me of Singapore back in the 1980s when we were doing okay but few people in the west have even heard of the name 'Singapore' then - unlike today, when it is a city that is so famous. You cannot expect to achieve this kind of success whilst adopting a model like Wenzhou where practically all aspects of the city are local and inward looking. OK so the PAP has chosen a strategy of aggressive growth with an outward-looking, international model with the help of FTs, you may not like that decision but it is one that wouldn't have been possible without FTs.
Singapore was a different city 20 years ago - it was far more like Wenzhou then, with an economy driven by local demand, hence local talents with little or no international experience were perfectly adequate to run the show. But in this day and age, if we want to play on an international level, then the rules have changed and we need talents with international experience and if we can't find them locally, then we have to use FTs. (Ref: S Muller's points)
3. It's bullshit that jobs are drying up in the West. Utter bullshit and you know that. Yes there is a recession but the unemployment rate is 8% in the UK, it is not 80%. With an unemployment rate of 8% - who do you think is unemployed?
Deletea) the bottom 8% who are stupid, unskilled and lazy
b) the top 8% who are intelligent, highly skilled and motivated
Unless you have a catastrophic collapse of the entire economy (eg. Zimbabwe in the 2000s when they had hyperinflation), those who are talented, intelligent, hard-working and highly skilled will always be able to find work. A recession merely means an increase of unemployment from a usual 3-4% to around 10% - but that means it's the bottom 10% who have to suffer unemployment, not the top 10%! So even if say a company collapses (eg. Lehman Brothers) and some highly skilled people become unemployed as a result, guess what? Are they going to stay unemployed for long if they have skills that are in demand? Hell no.
I have an ex-colleague "CH" who didn't see eye to eye with my boss over many issues and eventually she had to go - guess what? She emailed me earlier this week and she has resurfaced in another company doing something similar. She wasn't going to end up unemployed and starve to death just because my boss sacked her, hell no. She was going to go to one of our rivals and work for them instead. Go to any big city in the west: London, New York, Paris, Frankfurt, Chicago, Sydney, Toronto, Stockholm etc - and you will find that the top 90% of the population are getting along just fine thank you very much. It is usually only the bottom 10% or so who are the ones who are badly affected - and let me assure you, your competition in Singapore, these FTs you talk about - are not from the bottom 10% - they are from much higher up the food chain.
Like I said in my article, the FTs who are in Singapore (and other parts of Asia) are not there because they cannot find a job in their home country, they can but if you are given a choice:
Deletea) work in your home country for £2000 a month.
b) work in Singapore (or whatever country) for £3000 a month + generous housing allowances + flights + perks + the chance to gain international experience
Then it's a no-brainer. You take the higher paid job. This is why I have followed the money and have worked in many places around the world from Prague to Dubai to Istanbul to London to Singapore. Money is a great motivator.
That's the problem with you Singaporeans - you are totally unable to see things from a point of view other than your own. I get it: you guys are risk averse and you like the familiar, that's why you are still living with your parents in the same room since you were a young child. The thought of changing your routine or trying something new probably scares the shit out of you, that's why you settle into the same routine day in day out, functioning as the little cog in the same machine, performing the same task day in day out over and over again.
People like you can't imagine how someone like an FT would go and work in a country halfway around the world, or how someone like me could end up working in Prague or Istanbul - it's just too freaking scary for you to even contemplate. So you jump to the conclusion that we only embrace such 'scary' opportunities because we have no other choice, that we are only forced to do so because we can't find work in our familiar home environment.
Well guess what? You're wrong. You're oh so wrong. Some of us have balls, some of us are extremely garang and are risk-takers. We'll gladly jump in the deep end of the pool and take a job in a foreign country and if it works out, we may reap great rewards, if it doesn't then we'll still have an adventure nonetheless and it will be fun. We like adventure - we love the change of environment and the chances to live in a foreign country (especially one where we have to learn a new language) is exciting! I left Singapore because I was so freaking BORED with Singapore and I wanted to see the world - I guess that's something a lot of you Singaporeans can never appreciate as you cling to your one little corner of the world where everything is so freaking familiar. It's your choice to do what you wanna do with your life - I am just asking you not to judge others by your standards.
hi LIFT, if u noticed what i was mentioning was the vicious cycle of the top guy coming in then bringing his own people along and consequently the local does not get the necessary exposure to move up to the chain. in any case, i have relocated to thailand with my husband cos we believe that working in singapore our whole lives is not good for us career wise so i'm not one of those singaporeans who wants to be in singapore my whole life :)
Deletei have nothing against the CEOs or C-suites from overseas if they have the right skills etc, what i am against is them coming in and then bringing their own or recruiting their own (i have seen it happen in many places) no thanks to PAP's liberal policy of welcoming all and sundry and then the locals dont get the chance to be posted to the overseas offices to gain the necessary exposure. and i was also talking about the 90s and 2000s, definitely not the 80s :)
in your article, you mentioned the korean and japanese banks which have local koreans and japanese right at the top. i believe this is in part to their country's policy of not bringing in foreigners unless absolutely needed and them posting their local hires to other countries to gain the necessary exposure. if we are to have the same policy in SG, i do believe that we may have some foreigners right at the top but also quite a few locals as well
oh btw i think it takes more balls to move to another country where you don't speak the language, and my hubby is not on an expat package, however much everyone likes to think so :)
Deletei appreciate your posts but sometimes u do have to agree its not so black and white all the time whereby the singaporeans are all lousy and not garang enough, it is also a result of policies working against them sometimes. of course there will be incompetent singaporeans but there will also be competent ones. do we want our companies to be staffed by all foreigners right at the top or do we put in policies and processes that allow local talents to be groomed?
Sawadeekarp! Good for you for making that move to Thailand, how is the Thai coming along? I have started learning Korean and let me tell you, the Korean script is making my head hurt and I have memorized the alphabet but reading it is painfully slow. Argh. It'll probably take a year or 2 before I get to a decent standard in Korean but I am sticking with it.
DeleteAs for CEOs bringing in people from their own country, well - if you don't see eye to eye with your boss, then leave. I've done that before and I've seen others do it - my attitude is, "Limpeh talented, Limpeh will find work elsewhere, Limpeh不需要呆在这里看你的脸色, bye bye." Yes it takes a certain amount of self-belief and guts to be able to get up and leave like that, because you are leaving the security of paid employment and going into an unknown, unwritten next chapter of your life - but like the way you have taken that adventurous step into Thailand, sometimes in life, you just have to embrace the risk and adventure to reap the rewards.
And of course I do totally recognize the policies working against poor Singaporeans - esp the males. Good grief. First we serve NS, then we have to do reservist, then we have to compete against FTs (and females) with no reservist obligations - that's why I refused to work in Singapore as a Singaporean and I have only worked in S'pore as an FT on a British passport.
This is why I am questioning the failure of our 'scholarship' process because clearly, it's not delivering the right kind of talents to run Singaporean companies when boardrooms in Singapore are full of foreigners. It is time to go back to the drawing board and ask ourselves, what kind of talent do we need locally? How do we groom them?
There is an album from the year 2002 by the Russian group Tatu called "200 km/hr in the wrong lane" - that sentiment comes to mind when I look at the way Singaporean parents are bludgeoning their kids through a very unforgiving education system. Are we going 200 km/hr in the wrong direction or in the wrong lane? Are we headed where we want to go or are we headed for a big crash? Clearly the system has not delivered what is needed, isn't it time to re-evaluate the process and see how we can improve it?
sawadika, now trying to learn conversational thai, thai has 44 consonants and god knows how many vowels, quite a nightmare to learn the alphabets, on top of that they dont have spaces between the words, you somehow magically can read it though
Deletetrue true that you can always leave the company if the bosses dont promote you and give u the necessary exposure but its probably not that easy.
also i could be wrong but i dont think banks actually give out that many scholarships, the private scholarships that i know of in my time tend to be from GLCs and not MNCs and i think its safe to say most of the time these scholars hardly leave the companies they are bonded to since they are assured of a more or less good career path there.
maybe we are muddling the 2 issues here, scholarships and lack of local people at the top
Good luck with your pursuit of the Thai language, I like the first steps when doing any language - it is easiest at the beginning 'cos they start you off gently with the easy stuff before they give you the harder stuff later. Korean has 14 consonants and 10 letters BUT the way it is written is not linear (like Thai, English, Malay) - the letters are then constructed into characters so your eyes dance around the word to pick out the letters and it's like K...I...M... "Kim" so reading is so so painfully slow for now but they promised me the more I get used to it, the easier it'll become, LOL.
DeleteAs for leaving the company ... I've seen my sister in that situation. She has just started a new job and new her boss is TERRIBLE and half my family say, "just quit lah, why go and suffer like that? You'll find something better, you're so smart and experienced." The other half say, "Try to work things out, win your boss over, you have to prove yourself in these places, he is your boss not your uncle..." And yeah, split right down the middle and she is tempted to give up and quit but not yet.
Perhaps we are muddling 2 issues here - but I am trying to establish a correlation between the 2 (I could be wrong, of course), ie. what was the point of giving out all those scholarships in the 1980s if the boardrooms of Singapore today are full of foreigners? Surely when they gave out all those scholarships in the 1980s, they would've hoped that in 2012, these people would rise to the top of the food chain and run Singaporean companies. Instead, we have to get so many foreigners in to run our companies? Something went wrong along the way in this process.
PART I
ReplyDeleteStart of rant - Can we be more judicious in using the word "talent"? Which genius working for the Government came up with "foreign talent" anyway? Skilled? Yes. Talent? No. This word should be sparingly used, and only for those who truly deserve it; otherwise it makes a mockery of the word, and we'd be more likely to miss a true talent, even if it were to come up and slap us with a cold, dead fish. Which means, probably at least three quarters of the foreigners working in Singapore (employment pass holders and above, if there is a separate category) are skilled, and not necessarily talented. - End of rant.
Look, Singapore's aim of being a financial centre (wealth management mind you, not investment banking) of some reckoning is a recent ambition, and it came about in part (I assume) with the ascend of the rich in Asia, lack of banking-friendly countries (with an independent judiciary) in Asia in general, and tightening of laws in Europe, particularly the pressure piled on Switzerland. Despite this, and because of the long tradition of banking on the continent, Europe is still the leader when it comes to financial products and services, and still has a sophisticated banking system compared to Singapore. In contrast, the financial sector in much of Asia is still in its infancy stage (esp at managerial levels). And this, together with the flow of assets to Singapore being faster than anticipated, could be a reason why the manpower supply has not kept pace with the demand.
Now, I read recently that there is a dearth of wealth managers in Singapore (in Switzerland, they are called Client Advisors, but I digress). There is no reason why Singaporeans cannot be trained for these positions, provided they possess the necessary soft skills, because at the end of the day, wealth managers are but sales people. Whether Singaporeans do have the necessary soft skills (and realistic expectations of what the job entails) is another matter altogether. Furthermore, whether the wealthy clients prefer to deal with a Caucasian or an Asian, well, that is a tinderbox of a discussion, isn't it?
Well there's no reason why Singaporeans can't run wealth management firms like Family Offices - I know of a few in Singapore and they are founded by former private bankers who have left the big private banks and set up smaller, more boutique operations. But you did hit the nail on the head, do the locals prefer to deal with a local family office run by Singaporeans or do they prefer to deal with an angmoh wealth manager?
DeletePART II
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned Korea and Japan, - and I would include India in the list too - that the C-suite and board members are usually locals. I suspect that, discounting any labour laws, this has a lot to do with these cultures' non-acceptance of foreigners at the top in general (look at Japanese and Korean companies abroad - how many are helmed by non-Japanese or non-Koreans?). As for the Kiwi and French you mentioned in your piece, not to belittle their achievements, surely it has something (however small a part) to do with the visa (non) requirements of the countries they are residing in? I mean I have met Singaporeans and Malaysians in Switzerland who came here in the 1970's when visa rules were lax, and they have made something for themselves here. That would be somewhat impossible in today's climate.
Singapore is unique in that it truly has a free and open labour market, and employers do have the freedom to employ almost anyone from anywhere (Europe has a free movement of labour too, albeit limited to citizens of Europe only). And I wonder what the sentiments would be if the conditions were similar in Australia, NZ, USA etc?
The challenge for Singapore (indeed any country) is to ensure that the locals are not shut out from the opportunities that this growth industry brings (as far as Singapore is concerned mind you; worldwide, the banking industry as a whole shrank as much as 20%, esp in investment banking), not to put all its eggs in one basket (look at other growth industries too), that its citizens have the necessary skill sets (in the West, at least in the US and Switzerland, it is all about having enough STEM graduates to meet the demand in future). The next step lies with the individual themselves. Singaporeans need to recognize that as a very small country with a limited number of citizens to begin with, foreigners will be part of the landscape, whether one likes it or not, esp if the country hopes to be a financial powerhouse serving the world (like Luxumbourg or Switzerland for example), punching above its weight. This is true esp at managerial levels, esp when competition for jobs means you compete with people from all corners of the earth, and esp when the labour laws are not tilted in favour of citizens (unlike Western countries for example). To think that one could appoint Singaporeans for every top job in every industry is a pipe dream.
Sorry, the truth is, it's brutal, very brutal, in Singapore.
What puzzles me is the fact that YES Singapore wants to become a banking hub, YES there is money to be made, YES it is good for Singapore but why aren't more S'poreans benefiting from having good jobs in banking? That's the million dollar question ...
DeleteHmmm ..... are Singaporeans really under represented in the banking sector, or is this just a perception, or is this under representation only limited to the top, highly skilled jobs (which is the case in Switzerland too) which are fewer in number? Honestly, I don't know. Banking jobs vary, from control to legal to accounting to marketing to sales to IT to product innovation. Face it, with labour laws the way they are in Singapore, there is fierce competition for these jobs (up to mid management at least I'm sure), from all over the world, esp from other parts of Asia. Also, Singapore banks have not quite made it to the top league which could make all the difference. As I mentioned before, wealth management is still in its infancy in Singapore, and therefore any shortfall in skills within the local population needs time to be rectified. And if you do want to become a banking hub quickly, then you do need "outside help" don't you?
DeleteBut it's a complex problem made worse by having a small population and a (one-way) free labour market. At least in Europe (EU), movement occurs in all directions.
Aaaah, you see, Anthea, you clearly understand the industry very well. I am guessing you work in wealth management - or at least some related area of finance, am I correct?
DeleteSo someone like you can have a look at the situation and say, "well, let me explain to you exactly what is going on" - whilst the vast majority of Singaporeans don't understand the financial services industry as well as you do, so they come up with a lot of xenophobic rhetoric. Cue palm to forehead.
I am just hoping that my blog and our conversations will go some way in eradicating mass ignorance. Thank you Anthea.
I agree that there is a group of FT in Singapore that are well qualified and do contribute to the economy. However, there are also some that are not so deserving. The following is what I heard from company insiders from 2 companies, not in the finance sector.
ReplyDeleteMany businesses in Europe are not doing well, and will not do well in the foreseeable future. The natural thing to do would be to retrench staff. However, when you retrench someone in Europe, the payouts could be sky high. For staff that stay 2 years in the company, payouts could be in the region of 1 to 2 years salary on top of other benefits. To avoid retrenching, some European companies post some of their "excess" staff to Singapore. These are people in junior to mid management. Some of them have less than 5 years working experience, total. They are here on local plus package. Salary less than S$10,000 a month with an additional S$3000 to S$4000 housing allowance.
Are they real talents?
You are right about the over-protective labour laws that have put a lot of companies in hot water in Europe when it comes to redundancies! Spot on! I have read about Spanish companies who don't have the luxury of off-loading employees to their international offices - they cannot afford to hire the same number of staff as the demand for their goods & services have dropped (due to the recession). However, as laying off staff is so expensive, they cannot afford to find the money to pay out all these generous redundancy deals - so you know what happens? There was a story of a factory which employed 100 or so Spanish people and they couldn't afford to make 15 people redundant give those conditions, so the WHOLE factory shut. Great. So instead of 15 people being unemployed, we now have 100 people being unemployed. Way to go Spain, how's that for a law that is supposed to protect the rights of workers. That's why Spain is in such deep shit now and the Spaniards are paying the price for such cuckoo laws that on the surface seem to protect workers (wow, if they wanna make me redundant they have to give me so much money!) but in reality does little to protect them. I can't even begin to tell you how screwed up the Spanish economy is - that's why so many of them have just left Spain and are in London, looking for work as we have a free labour market in the EU.
DeleteSo the big MNCs who have the luxury of moving their staff around internationally - they're lucky. Many European companies are so screwed by the labour laws here, like that Spanish factory which was forced to shut.
I say Limpeh, why throw a strop when some Singaporeans remark that white expats relocate to Singapore because of lack of jobs in their home countries. Your answer should be "Hell yeah! Don't you just admire their chutzpah?" There is nothing wrong, in fact a lot to admire, in upping stakes, moving across continents when opportunities dry up at home, and making something of yourself in a foreign land. Your Frenchman is a good example: he moved to Asia to flog a product that is common in Europe and made himself rich in the process. Bravo, I say! (Of course, 'tis not only limited to the skilled. Look at the domestic and construction workers - don't they do the same, only in worse conditions?)
ReplyDeleteAnother example - many Australians came over to work in Singapore in the mid-nineties because of the bad economic situation back home. Some I knew said they had no intention of staying on, and would be on the first plane out as soon as the situation improved in Australia. So the concept of people flocking to Singapore to try their luck when things aren't rosy at home is nothing new.
Just as there are expats who are posted/headhunted to Singapore by companies, there are also many more who choose to come here of their own accord. Most people will have no problem in "importing" skills that are hard to come by locally, but when one is shut out because of perceived "unfair" labour practices, because (i) there is no real awareness of the skills that are in short supply (blame the government I say for a lack of transparency), and (ii) with companies not having to prove that local equivalents are hard to come by (unlike say in the US or Australia), then that's when the trouble starts. And, reading the comments on a couple of Singaporean websites, one gets the impression that the competition for the skilled jobs is mainly with those from India, China and the region, mainly at the lower to the mid-levels, who are able to undercut the locals in terms of salary for instance, and who apparently are hired because they are of the same nationality as the hiring manager. (If truth be told, I've seen the latter first hand, at the first company I worked for in Singapore. It was American, but the GM was a Brit who hired other Brits for key positions. Things were certainly not hunky-dory in the company, esp between my boss who was an American and the GM.)
Or do you read the situation differently?
A few quick points for you darling.
Delete1. I love that Yiddish word 'chutzpah' - totally. As someone who has worked in places like Bratislava, Prague, Istanbul and Dubai, I know exactly what you mean!!
2. There should usually be some kind of protectionist measures to protect the locals in their national job market against competition from abroad - as you've pointed out, many countries do have such measures but they are non-existent in Singapore.
3. Why? Cos the PAP wants more FTs and they know that the 60.14% of the locals are too fucking stupid anyway to know when they are shafted with the king size PAP dildo. In any other country, such a ruling party would've been kicked out decades ago, only Singaporeans are that fucking stupid to vote to be fucked like that again and again.
4. It is time to blame fellow Singaporeans who have created this situation, rather than blame the FTs or even the PAP. After all, 60.14% consented to this - so there are many, many Singaporeans who are responsible for this big shitstorm.
5. I say to those unhappy Singaporeans, rather than get pissed off, just pack up and leave lah. Changi airport is that way - just go, the PAP won't miss you, neither would the rest of S'pore. Do yourself a favour and go see the world. You might actually like it.
Actually I think Singaporean bring this onto themselves. Usually the companies that fill their top management team with foreigners are Singapore companies. Case in point? Out of the three public universities, only NUS has a local as their top executive. Banks? You bet. previously only UOB is headed by a local. Airlines, yes. Tiger Airways and Scoots, anyone? How about quasi government institutions such as Sentosa Development Corporation? I assume it is a quasi government institution because of the word Corporation in their name. Heck, you guys even considered getting a foreigner to manage S$193 billions of your money.
ReplyDeleteYou mean out of so many people in Singapore you cannot find three people to manage three universities and have to import them from foreign land? Running a bank and leading them to become regional powerhouses is an huge challenge so that might be excusable, but relying on foreigners to oversee the development of a small island or to manage low cost airlines is just plain absurd. From what I see, it's more of superstition of angmoh's superiority (you will never see foreigners from a country Singaporean deemed lower than them in these elite position, save a few notable exceptions like BoS and DBS).
Singaporean, I plead with you to give your own kind a chance to prove themselves, to take risk with your own people.
My 2 cents. Please don't flame me.
Hi there Rosmah, thanks for your comment. Very valid points indeed. If Singaporeans are willingly kowtwoing to the angmohs, then whose fault is it? The Angmohs or the Singaporeans? I say it is the Singaporeans, for they don't need to do so yet they choose to do so.
DeleteI assure you my blog is a flame free zone. Thanks again.