Mr Tan: "The Ministry of Manpower wants employers to post jobs on Jobsbank.gov.sg so that priority can be given to Singaporeans when we hire before we are 'allowed' to hire foreign workers because we cannot find suitable local candidates. The irony is that after posting the job listing on jobsbank.gov.sg, only foreigners have been writing in for the jobs, that means that even if I want to consider hire a Singaporean instead of a foreigner, I can't even do so."
(Singaporean friend): We need to implement singpass logon for job application.
Mr Tan: Singpass lor. What if foreigners hack them to get to the jobs? I would hire that guy for his finesse leh. But seriously, if got Singaporean apply then I will of course see if I can hire them lah, but really don't have leh. Why young Singaporeans don't want to apply and then still kaobehkaobu say cannot find work? Even if you implement Singpass logon and no Singaporeans apply, then I bo pien still end up employing PRC or Malaysians. I am offering standard industry rates for my positions.
You get the idea - I have already blogged on this previous and have bemoaned how the government's FCF scheme is terrible ineffective. But Mr Tan's status update tells me two things: firstly, that there are jobs in Singapore for young people, the Singaporean economy is robust and employers like Mr Tan are indeed hiring (and offering quite attractive packages in fact for the right candidates) and secondly, these foreigners are far more hungry and proactive when it comes to applying for these jobs. Okay, I know we're just talking about one Singaporean employer's experience here but I do have some questions I would like to ask my Singaporeans readers as I want to understand this situation please.
I don't know what the answer is, I'm not in Singapore anyway so I am opening this up to my readers in Singapore to try to answer that question. Kindly use the comments section below to share your thoughts, many thanks for reading.
The problem here is that majority of Singaporean are too choosy in applying for a job.
ReplyDeleteMost of them want a 5 days work week and in working office hour. If they pick retail or FnB industry, most of them do not want to work in weekend and public holiday as well as choosing for 5 days work week in the industry.
I feel that one's expectations when it comes to working conditions and pay should depend entirely on what you are worth and what you can contribute to the company. If you are a scholar from Oxford or Cambridge, then by all means state your demands because you're worth it. But if you simply don't have the skills and qualifications to back up your demands, then the Hokkien phrase "tan ku ku" (wait long long) comes to mind. Get real.
DeleteMy observation is that Singaporeans generally shun the more niche or technically challenging jobs that requires a certain degree of hands on skill e.g. ME, CE, pharma industry etc. The premium choices tend to be in high paying industries but where skills may be more general e.g. marketing, corporate banking, sales etc. It also does not help that most Singaporeans will shun local SMEs preferring instead the well known MNCs and "big guys". There is less of that adevnturous startup spirit here. And I have also noticed that foreign applicants especially from India are super hungry and aggressive in landing a job here and they generally push hard at every opportunity. Perhaps our locals simply feel that even if they do not land it now, they can wait and try another.
DeleteHappened that the industry I am in is super niche and specialised, so most of our hiring really depends on peer referrals and word of mouth rather than through standard hiring channels. Most of my team is local / Malaysian. But can't deny that we had seen a lot of foreign applicants who although clearly not qualified made super hard attempts to land an interview. Perhaps us locals should be a bit more thick skin.
Well Shane, thanks for your comment - I think this discussion has been really interesting (have a read of the other comments here) and it does explain why there are so many foreigners working in Singapore. The attitude of Singaporeans is part of the problem at the end of the day, so they should not blame the government or even the foreigners for this situation. It is regrettable that (as you've pointed out) foreigners (esp those from India) are hungry for the opportunity and locals are not.
DeleteI have the same situation here in the UK where Eastern Europeans are perceived to be hungry for the opportunities and will work much harder than local Brits. This is not just a racist perception (British = lazy, Eastern European = super hardworking) but gosh, I've seen it in real life and it's true, unfortunately.
Yeah have read some of the other comments. Perhaps as some have described, Singaporeans do come up short due to this sense of entitlement. Or what my father will described as being used to eating "soft white rice". Fact is our developing neighbours have plenty of mobile, super hungry workers who are more than willing to sacrifice themselves and uproot to Singapore for a shot at a job that will more than feed their families back home. Yeah, its going to be very tough and a lot of personal sacrifices have to be made. After all that they have done to uproot themselves, are we surprised they fight nails and claws to secure a job? We should respect them for that fighting spirit. When there is no need to claw for survival, of course we get rather more complacent.
DeleteIts a similar case of why it seems those foreign students who are self financing all somehow seem to ace the exams despite that they have to temp over weekends and after school just to earn pocket money. You are put in this survivor situation (i.e. you can't afford to flunck your studies) and its amazing how much more resourceful and "work smart" one gets when you just got to do it. Thus I think those migrant workers you see in UK and here in Singapore are like the self selected bunch of go-getters while the locals being contented with status quo gets perceived as being lazy. Its all a matter of perception and different priorities.
Certainly its no fault of govt or leaders and I especially take issue with those people who kept harping that the govt let in the deluge of immigrants. If anything, protection of local workers to me simply means that any worker be it foreign or local should be paid the same wage commensurate with their jobscope and experience.
Probably because the position isn't an atas job, etc in the field of electrical/mechanical engineering and nursing. These kind of jobs are considered to be "low-class" by many Singaporeans.
ReplyDeleteYoung Singaporeans are most likely to prefer atas jobs like being a banker, aerospace engineer, accountant, lawyer...
Whilst these are entry level positions in a media company, Mr Tan is paying quite respectable salaries for these positions. He is not looking for people to clean his toilets, we're talking about a really good job with a successful local Singaporean company. It would suit young graduates just starting out, looking for a first job.
DeleteYou wanna be an accountant - get the relevant accountancy qualifications first. You wanna be a lawyer? Go to law school first. You wanna be a doctor? Go complete a degree in medicine first. You cannot seriously be telling me that all the young people in Singapore looking for a job at the moment have law, medicine, accountancy, engineering degrees from good universities and are all overqualified for a graduate position with a respectable starting pay?
No, you can't all go for atas jobs. Somebody has got to do the more humble jobs and if you won't lower yourselves to be humble enough, then foreigners will fill that gap.
The majority of them are not willing to do the more humble job. If they are willing they demand the pay of at least $2500 to do these job citing that these jobs cannot sustain them due to the high cost of living in Singapore.
DeleteThey even said that they are willing to take the job of labourer if the pay is $3000 a month.
But Kelvin, you should be paid what you are worth. Your salary should depend on what you can do for the company, what your contribution is - rather than what the cost of living in Singapore is. If you wanna demand $3000 a month, then that should be based solely on what you can do for the company, you need to justify that you are worth that $3000 a month.
DeleteIf somebody starts making demands on the salary based on the cost of living, I would instantly reject that person. Never make that mistake in an interview. You wanna earn big bucks? Then make a big contribution to your company and make sure your employer knows how good you are.
I want to be a social scientist, because my personality and autistic features render me useless retail, FnB or construction. Am I being choosy?
ReplyDeleteDavin, that depends entirely on whether or not you have the qualifications and skills to get you where you want.
DeleteNot entirely - it's a two way market (ignoring self-employment). Even if you have the qualifications and skills to do a desired job, you're SOL if there are no employers offering the job.
DeleteUnless you meant qualifications and skills that employers want - which I agree plays the most important role but does not guarantee the specific job you're looking for.
Meh. I have to return to Singapore for 6 months before I get to graduate next year, and in the meantime my Dad is pressuring me into interning for a local chemical engineering NGO. I personally don't think I'm qualified for that organization since it requires folks with chem engineering or business administration experience, while I've spent all my time thinking about geopolitical trends and international security. I don't have the skillset for that organization and I feel like I'm not qualified for any position in it, but I may end up having a position there anyway because my Dad's bugging the CEO to get me in.
DeleteI feel really awful about it, to tell you the truth. I don't want to be idle for the next 6 months, but I have job offers for other kind of things (i.e. retail at a tabletop games store or to help out at this cybercafe I used to work at for 18 months) and I want to do something I like before going balls deep into academia.
Sigh.
Sorry to hear about your situation Davin, this transition is never easy and once you get through this patch and make the switch from student life to working life, you'll be able to look back and think, hey that wasn't that bad. Good luck.
Delete1 way to explain... before your post i don't even know Jobsbank.gov.sg there is such a web...
ReplyDeleteWhen i want to look for a job... it's classifieds, jobsdb, jobstreet, monster, etc... maybe i'm just a lonely frog in the well...
In any case, the gov's way of create a website, post jobs there for 2wks then go hire foreigners is fundamentally flawed...
just went to the site to take a browse... only about 1.5k of postings... does it mean only about 1.5k+ openings looking for "Singaporeans"... thank you for proiritizing Singaporeans.
To be fair, even I have heard of Jobsbank and I am here in the UK, I am not in Singapore, I am just a blogger who happens to blog about Singaporean stuff and I have talked about the Fair Consideration Framework on my blog before.
DeleteClearly, the government and the team behind Jobsbank can do a lot more to promote it to job seekers in Singapore.
I would think most young Singaporeans do not want to do certain types of jobs eg.
ReplyDelete1. Job that requires travelling out to sites often (may need own transport) to meet people and coordinating to get things done.
2. Jobs involving doing sales and with targets.
3. Working in local SMEs (small and medium enterprises) . They prefer working in MNCs, govt and govt related sector where welfare and benefits are perceived to be much better.
4. Dead end and routine/with shifts jobs and interacting with people, eg retail, F & B, maintenance, or even teaching etc.
Perhaps your friend Mr Tan 's type of job falls in the above categories.
And lastly also perhaps they can afford to be choosy or even jobless for some time in their job search.
Hi David, allow me to respond please.
DeleteI know the position that Mr Tan is recruiting for and:
1. Yes the job requires traveling out to sites to service the company's clients - but as you will need to be carrying a lot of barang-barang for the client, the company has a fleet of trucks/vans so you're not expected to have your own transport. The company provides the transport for the employees.
2. N.A. - no it doesn't.
3. Yes it's a small company in the Eastern part of Singapore, run by 2 guys, employing 40-50 people. But come on lah, it's a success story, 2 guys with a vision, using their own resources, growing a business out of nothing to the point where they have dominated a niche market in Singapore - if I was a young person in Singapore, I would wanna work for Mr Tan and learn from him, rather than be a tiny cog in a big machine like an MNC or government department. It's a dynamic, exciting, growing company. We're not talking about a tiny company, this is a medium sized local company.
4. N.A. - we're dealing with new media here, not retail, not F&B, not maintenance and certainly not teaching.
So yes to point 1 (partially - why is that even an issue aiyoh) and definitely point 3, but no to point 2 and 4.
As for young S'poreans being choosy and jobless - I blame the parents. The parents should be saying, "get off your lazy ass and find a job, you're an adult and I'm not supporting you. Go earn some money now and stop being so fussy and choosy."
Its pretty disturbing (though not entirely a surprise) that many Singaporeans consider teaching, retail etc dead-end jobs, and that jobs that involve interacting with people are not desirable.
DeleteI think that is in part linked to a sense of self entitlement I.e I'm a graduate and a Singaporean, so I can only be a manager/banker/consultant/doctor/lawyer. Everything else is beneath me. And for the jobs that I do apply for, I'm not going to bother with brushing up on communication, presentation skills or cultivate a good attitude. Because a degree and a red passport is good enough. And then they wonder why they can't get hired.
I feel your pain, Mr Tan!
Thanks for being the voice of reason Rach!
DeleteHmm I don't live enough time in Singapore to comment on the issue. But let me offer a perspective from the academic research world. In universities of developed countries, many departments are dominated by foreigners, and often, foreigners of developing countries. In the department of the university where I did my PhD in the Netherlands, there were almost no locals - most came from Indonesia, China and ex-USSR countries.
ReplyDeleteWhy it was like that? The salary of a PhD candidate wasn't so bad, 2000 euros or about 3400 SGD/month for a PhD, zero requirements other than a degree. For a postdoc salary was about 3000 euros. Hiring a foreigner was by no means easy - in the Netherlands, you can only hire a foreigner if you give proof that you tried and couldn't find a local acceptable for the position.
The thing is that there are better jobs for locals. An academic career doesn't give much long term perspective for most people - too few permanent positions. However, for foreigners, especially from developing countries, this kind of job is nonetheless very attractive as it gives a "footstep" into the Netherlands. It's the same in universities in other developed countries. For example, there is not a single Singaporean working in my laboratory other than my boss.
But like Singaporeans complain about foreigners, academics in US and Europe do complain about importing some many people from Russia, China, India, etc. to their universities. Namely, they claim that universities depress the wages and create far more temporary than permanent positions due to this influx of foreigners. Anyway, it is a hot debate in academia.
Hi, I have a friend looking for a job in media.
ReplyDeleteCan you kindly direct me to the job posting so that he can apply for the position if it's suitable? I know he did media in Uni but unsure exactly what he focused on.
If it is inconvenient to post here, can you drop an email to worsty@gmail.com?
Thanks.
Much appreciated.
Hi Worsty, let me double check with 'Mr Tan' first to see if the position has been filled and I will get back to you if it hasn't been filled yet. Cheers.
DeleteOne thing that you seem to have predetermined is that the job pays an acceptable salary or head sufficient future prospects to support a Singaporean with future liabilities in Singapore as opposed to a foreigner with cheaper liabilities in his home country. I don't believe in the young people are spoilt argument. That's like those old men who sit around bemoaning the good old days. It's more likely that young people figured that their future high coat of liabilities from living and raising a family in Singapore means that they cannot take up certain types of jobs that do not offer sufficient upside. You can find some research on the Web. I think this is also partly a phenomenom of globalisation
ReplyDeleteHi there - allow me to explain this to you. I had a discussion with Mr Tan with regards to the salary and it is acceptable for the junior position he has advertised. Is it a very well paid job? No it isn't - but is it a reasonable and fair offer for a junior position? YES, it is.
DeleteLike I have said before, your pay depends on what you can contribute to your employer - it should NEVER depend on what your liabilities are or even what the cost of living is. Of course employers should offer a fair wage and never exploit workers, but you cannot expect an inexperienced 23 year old to command the salary of a CEO just because this 23 year old has a child and has a lot of responsibilities. The boss is simply going to turn around and say, "the fact that you have responsibilities has nothing to do with what you can bring to the company - what can you do for the company?"
Furthermore, when you are a young person, you start off with a relatively low salary but it doesn't have to stay low. It increases over time as you prove yourself to your employer (or other employers) and you will be rewarded with a better salary over time - but that depends on you proving yourself to your employer.
So what is a better option I ask you? Staying unemployed and expecting your aged parents to support you and pay your bills (whilst you bemoan how unfair society is) - or accepting a lower salary and working your way to a better future step by step?
You seem convinced that young people are justified in choosing to remain unemployed and sponge off their aged parents and have the right to reject lower paid jobs (which incidentally, this is not one of them - it is a well paid position for a graduate) - well I turn the finger back at you because you've failed to acknowledge that not all young people deserve a high salary. If you want a high salary, prove yourself to your employer: earn it. You will be given it if you're worth it. And some young people are spoilt, lazy and unskilled - they certainly are not worthy of it.
1. people are more attracted to MNC's because of too many horror stories of SME bosses overworking and underpaying staff. I am not suggesting your friend is one such person but like how some bosses characterize locals as unwilling to work hard due to personal experiences locals also might assume all SME bosses are blood suckers.
ReplyDelete2. working time, it has been reported time and time again that singaporeans work the longest hours in the world. normal office hours used to be 9-5 , nowadays its 9-6 without including OT which is in many places mandatory. so what is the working hours in your friends firm? if it is 9-6, is your friends employees unable to finish work as they are slow or are they overworked.
3. salary, i saw your reply above that one cannot be paid according to cost of living, and you would not consider one who says as such. however everyone has to be paid enough to live with a degree of standard of living. I mean why would I work in an office in a mentally demanding job with sub par pay when I could apply for the countless FnB places near my house for a similar sub par pay. If one was in sales it would be easier to quantify their pay by seeing their sales, but most jobs do not work that way. It is more of a guesstimate.
4. ponzi demographics, is your friends success driven by a larger population?. first more foreigners are brought in for jobs that locals do not want. such as construction. but these workers need to be housed and ferried around. and for that we bring in msian drivers. those drivers buy food in shops. those shops need more people to man the counter and so on and so forth. that may not be a bad thing for an individual firm but as a country there will be a breaking point............................and this whole ponzi demography will come crashing down.
5. strong sing dollar, foreigners can afford to work for very cheap pay. I personally have seen resumes of people with masters asking for less than 2k. I think you would know why that would affect a local's salary prospects....
but that aside, just post on your blog the job ad your friend posted together with pay, working hours and benefits without revealing his firm............and I think readers will tell you if he is paying well and no one is responding or his compensation is inadequate and only foreigners are willing to work due to exchange rate.........
Hi Peter allow me to respond.
Delete1. Whilst some SME bosses may indeed be as bad as you've described, not all are like that - and indeed in big MNCs, you could also encounter a nasty boss if you're unlucky.
2. Mr Tan offers OT pay rates when his employees have to stay late.
3. I still don't understand why you people go on and on about the cost of living when you totally ignore what the employee does in his role. Why are some jobs more well paid than others? It varies according to what you are doing for the company - living in an expensive city does NOT entitle you to a high pay, high salaries are reserved for those who deserve it.
4. If S'poreans are willing to do these jobs, then there wouldn't be a need for people like Mr Tan to hire PRCs and M'sians.
5. I have talked about this before: http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/facing-up-to-cheaper-foreign.html
6. I refuse to indulge you in your ridiculous request to discuss the details of this job offer because you and I disagree on one fundamental point: you seem to think that Singaporeans deserve high pay because the cost of living is high. I think that's utter total stupid bullshit. I think that your salary should be based entirely on what you can give your employer, what you can contribute to your company and if your contribution is minimal, then you deserve to get paid peanuts and starve. If your contribution is great, then you deserve a huge pay packet. It's that simple.
"I refuse to indulge you in your ridiculous request to discuss the details of this job offer because you and I disagree on one fundamental point: you seem to think that Singaporeans deserve high pay because the cost of living is high..."
DeleteThe way you replied to peter leong sounds like an admission that the job's salary is low...
*Takes a deep breath to calm down.
DeleteYou don't get it, do you? Let me explain it to you once again.
The job's salary is either FAIR or UNFAIR, not high or low.
Let's pick a figure, say a job pays S$8,000 a month. That would be a very high salary for a waitress or a cleaner, but that would be considered a low salary for a brain surgeon or a barrister. The figure in itself is meaningless until you consider what the job is, what kind of skills are required to do this job and then you can consider: okay, is S$8000 a fair/reasonable figure for the job. So S$8000 would be way too much for a waitress, but way too little for a top brain surgeon.
How much pay you command depends on the skills you have to offer - the more you have to offer, the more you will get paid. That is why the brain surgeon is paid so much more than the waitress. Are you suggesting that a waitress should be paid as much as a brain surgeon just because her pay is low?
In the case of the waitress, I say, she should be paid a fair wage to reflect what she can do for her employer.
It's not about whether the salary is high or low - those numbers are meaningless - you need to consider if the salary is generous, just fair or unfair, verging on exploitation.
Like seriously, are you guys that inexperienced when it comes to interpreting statistics? #faceplam
I get your point that wages should depend on what an employee contributes to the firm. But I sense that you're just playing around with words here. In your lexicon:
Delete"Fair" wage = high or average wage compared to job performance
"Unfair" wage = low wage compared to performance
In most people's language:
"High" or "average" wage = can sustain a decent standard of living in that city
"Low" wage = cannot sustain a decent living standard
I suspect you refuse to share the job details because you're afraid that Peter Leong may perceive it as a "low" wage (as defined above), and of course you don't want him to make such a judgment, preferring that he subscribes to your view on wages, that is "fair" vs "unfair".
However, there isn't only one way to categorize wages. The "high" vs "low" comparison maybe more appropriate depending on what Peter Leong had in mind when considering wages.
By the way, a quick glance at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics should show you that all of this has nothing to do with "interpreting statistics". #facepalm
I am glad you at least understand what I mean when I talk about a fair/unfair wage vs a high/low wage. Even for the same job, someone who does it extraordinarily well deserves a higher wage than someone who gives an average performance. I refer you to this story I wrote earlier about the most remarkable waitress I have ever encountered "Little Chilli": http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/facing-up-to-cheaper-foreign.html Long story, but the punchline is that as the most charming waitress who knew how to upsell to the customers and get them to spend a lot more money, she deserves a much higher wage then someone who merely brought food from the kitchen to the tables. So even amongst waitresses doing the same job in the same restaurant, they could be paid differently because of their job performance.
DeleteAnd then we start comparing waitresses to brain surgeons - is it fair that the brain surgeon is paid more than the waitress? Can the waitress do brain surgery at the hospital?
My refusal to indulge Peter Leong is because he refuses to acknowledge the difference between fair/unfair and an arbitrary high/low differentiation. There are some wages out there in Singapore for the most menial, unskilled tasks at the very bottom of the food chain and those do fall into the 'low wage' category by your definition and by my definition, still qualify as a fair wage based on the contribution to the company - that's why in the west, we have a minimum wage to ensure that people doing minimum wage jobs can at least put food on the table and not be exploited.
But what is fair? Is it for me or you or Peter Leong to decide what is fair? If you wanted to buy a product today, say you walk into a supermarket in Singapore and wanted to buy a 200g bar of chocolate - what is a fair price for that bar of chocolate? That price is determined by market forces - price is too high and the customers will not be willing to buy that chocolate. But the supermarket will want to at least make a profit, so it can never price it below cost price and it will need to price it at least a few cents above cost price to try to make a tiny profit. The price is ultimately determined by market forces in a free economy.
Now you can look at a price and say, "that's not a fair price" and the retailer is simply going to reply, "that's the price determined by market forces in a free economy, there are others who think it's a fair price and are happy to pay it." My point here is that it's not just your opinion (or Peter's opinion) that determines whether or not a price (or in this case, a wage rate) is high or low, it's not even Mr Tan's decision - it is in fact determined by market forces. Now someone can look at a number like S$8000 a month and argue that it is way too low if the individual is contributing a lot to the company and that's sheer exploitation for say, a top brain surgeon.
It would seem like you wouldn't care if a brain surgeon is exploited in this case because, "oh he can get by easily on $8,000" a month, but you would demand that someone with no experience and little skills to offer be paid in excess of $2500 a month just because ...? Where is the justification for a 'fair' wage then? How about being fair to employers to getting good value for money when it comes to getting good employees?
It almost seems that you guys are mistaking employers as parents, you're complaining, "why is she paid $8000 a month and I am paid only $1500 a month? Not fair, I also want as much as her." Yeah she is a doctor, you're a waiter - how is that unfair?
...Cos this ain't pocket money we're talking about here. Parents give you pocket money because you need to eat and starve when you're at school - it's an obligation on the parents part to give you that money (or at least send you to school with a packed lunch) - with employers, you have to earn your wage and justify to the company what you're worth. So let's start talking about what is a fair wage for what you're bringing to the company.
DeleteI now identify with what 回春 said about your "reading comprehension and capacity for self-absorption" at limpehft.blogspot.com/2014/06/cpf-can-government-protect-stupid.html
DeleteIf you read my comments above carefully, you should realise that I never implied that a brain surgeon should accept an unfair wage, nor did I imply that waiters should earn a wage as high as brain surgeons.
Like 回春, let me try to rephrase my point again:
Peter Leong (and anyone for that matter) is entitled to look at a job's wage and think, "that's too low; I'll look for a higher wage." It's not for you or me to demand that he views the wage as a "fair" or "unfair" one. There isn't only one way to categorize wages.
I notice that you like to give extreme comparisons like surgeon vs. waiter, or Bolton vs. Oxford in a previous blog post, to illustrate your point. However, such comparisons are rarely of practical relevance. If Peter is a waiter looking for a new job, he isn't going to consider being a surgeon, and vice versa if Peter is a surgeon.
A prospective employer might tell Peter something to the effect of "you can't get a higher wage than what I offer since it's fair given the skills you have". But Peter could retort, "I'll take my chances as I'm worth it!"
If you feel that such a response from Peter is delusional, then you're assuming that he's like a waiter trying to be a surgeon, which is quite unlikely as I said earlier. Even if Peter is a low-skilled worker, he can judge a job offer as paying too "low" and look for a higher pay. That's because not all low-skilled jobs are lowly paid e.g. sales has low barriers to entry but it's potentially highly paid.
Well you and 回春 like to accuse me of reading comprehension just because I don't like your point / I reject your point / I don't agree with your points / etc. Let me try to keep this civilized and stick to the topic.
DeleteWhether a wage is low or high is all relative and depends on the demands of the job (as explained previously).
Thus I could cut & paste any job ad and Peter could simply say "that's too low for that job" whilst another person could say, "that sounds reasonable for that job" whilst a third person could say, "that's rather generous for that kind of position" - so much of it depends on expectations and this is coloured by a person's personal experiences and how that package compares to what else is currently available. So if Peter's mind is already made up that whatever Mr Tan is offering is too low relative to the position (thus = "unfair") then why should I even bother soliciting the opinion of someone who has already reached his own conclusion on the matter?
Let's get real about the job market here - there's no such thing as a free lunch, there are no jobs out there where you get paid loads of money to do very little. Brain surgeons are paid a lot but then again, most people cannot do the job of a brain surgeon, thus that justifies their very high pay. As to whether or not Peter is a low-skilled worker or even if he is on the hunt for a new job, I don't know - he has not divulged that information and frankly, he didn't come here looking to apply for that job with Mr Tan. He came here to accuse Mr Tan of offering such low/unfair pay before evening looking at the figures and I have no desire to try to reason with anyone who has already made his mind up on the issue.
If an employer is offering a pay packet of S$2000 a month, you can say, "that's too low" - but what if the position is that of a cleaner or a waiter, rather than that of a senior manager? The employer has a range of positions to be filled in a company and not all positions will command a high salary - there will be a hierarchy where the positions at the top are more highly paid than those at the bottom of the food chain. You want a well paid job, then please apply for a position much higher up the hierarchy, it's really that simple.
回春 and I are NOT accusing you of comprehension problems simply because you don't agree with us. It's because in your reply to our comments, you're too eager to emphasize what you wrote in your blog post without first digesting what we commented. (Just like those people in online forums who replied to your comments without reading them carefully.) Before you get agitated with a reader's comment (when you took "a deep breath to calm down"), I urge you to consider what the reader is actually disagreeing about.
DeleteYes, I get it, you've said N times that whether a salary is fair or not depends on an employee's performance and skills required. In case it's not clear to you, let me say for the record that I agree with this principle. But my criticisms here have been focused on your reply to Peter Leong.
Now it's clearer why you had such a defensive attitude towards Peter. You think that Peter "came here to accuse Mr Tan of offering such low/unfair pay before evening looking at the figures".
If you read Peter's comments carefully, no such inference could be reasonably made. In the first place, how could Peter know that the pay is low or unfair when you didn't even reveal the job details? He merely asked you to post Mr Tan's job ad on your blog, without revealing his firm, and then "readers will tell you if he is paying well".
If a reader who sees the job ad complains that the pay is too low, then you've an opportunity to explain that it's a FAIR market wage given the skills required. However, you chose to hide the details, which makes me wonder whether you're admitting that the pay is too low or unfair.
Hi Limpeh,
DeleteWe need to take into account that Singapore have no 'minimum wages' scheme and there is readily available source of cheap oversea labour, who can afford to take a lower salary. With a greater supply than demand in the market, it is inevitable that it will drive down the market price of hiring a person for that position.
In other words, the market salary of that position have been driven so low that it is not sufficient for it to afford Singaporeans a good standard of living. So how can he attract Singaporeans?
*I'm not saying that your friend is offering sub-par wages, but implying that that market force have made it unattractive for Singaporeans who are thinking of living in Singapore for the rest of their lives.
Hi Seraphim, there is still something I just don't understand and it seems that you and I are totally on different wavelengths. It boils down to the phrase you used, "a good standard of living" - what is that anyway and is that a right or a privilege?
DeleteWe all want a good standard of living, we all want to be able to have loads of money in the bank, go out to nice restaurants, buy nice clothes and go on fancy holidays. But not all Singaporeans are stuck in dead-end, low-paid jobs that pay peanuts - there are Singaporeans who are lawyers, bankers, doctors, engineers and accountants and they are earning good money, they're not poor and they certainly enjoy a pretty good standard of living.
Should that be any surprise Of course not, we're talking about the world's 3rd richest country here, Singapore. Of course there are rich Singaporeans in Singapore and there are some pretty well paid jobs in Singapore.
So whilst the presence of a steady supply of foreign labour will indeed drive down wages in some sectors of the economy in Singapore, if you are genuinely well educated and highly skilled, then you would still be able to to command a decent salary in Singapore. How high a salary you command depends on how good your skills are, how rare your skills are and we go back to the waiter vs brain surgeon comparison.
So Seraphim, how can you talk about wages as if it is a monolithic entity - are we talking about the wages of a waiter or a brain surgeon? An unskilled waiter may be worried about cheap foreign competition but the brain surgeon probably isn't as concerned - the reason is simple: anyone can do an unskilled job like carrying plates of food from the kitchen to the tables, but very few of us can do brain surgery.
Solution: The more skilled you are, the less worried you will be. No it is not a level playing field, but didn't you get the memo that life is indeed unfair?
As for Puppet,
DeleteSigh, I refer you to Seraphim's comment in the same thread when s/he talked about "a good standard of living" as if it is a universal right for all Singaporeans to enjoy a standard of income which will entitle them to a nice condo, buy an expensive car, dine in fancy restaurants and take exotic holidays. It's like, yeah I get it, we all want a good life: but I expect to earn my good life and if I want a nice standard of living and if I want to be able to afford all these nice things in life, I have to earn it. So you can see my frustration when I have so many Singaporeans here talking about the cost of living and being able to afford a good standard of living in Singapore without paying heed to how one gets to earn that.
Ultimately, we're talking about the third richest country in the world, yet everyone seems hell bent on proving that Mr Tan is a nasty evil employer who is out to exploit workers despite the fact that he has expressed a desire to hire Singaporeans. Given how warped the arguments presented have been thus far, I refuse to play these ridiculous games where I present a figure and they reply, "oh no, on S$2000 or $2500 a month, it is not enough for me to do all these things that I wanna do, it is not enough for me to have a good standard of living in a city like Singapore." And I'll be like, "what the hell has it got to do with what kind of standard of living you want or what you think you deserve? It is what the company is willing to pay and if you think you deserve more, then that should be based on the value you add to the company, not the kind of lifestyle you wish to enjoy."
Hi limpeh,
DeleteI understand that the world was never fair to begin with and maybe I wasn't clear enough in my last post...
If there are other jobs that offer better wages without as much hard work, why would they go for it? It also didn't help that many Singaporeans lacked the survival instinct because they have never really been through hard times.
For example, LP only have a high school leaving certificate. He have the option to apply for a construction worker that pays 1k/month and another option of being a real estate agent that can potentially earn up to 10k++/month with a base pay of 800/month or a clerk that earn 1k/month. Which option do you think he will choose?
Another example is a doctor I know, but he went on to be a cashier after 1 year as an intern. Why? He states that the working hours and stress level is terrible as a doctor and working as a cashier actually gives him less stress and chances of promotion to become a manager at 1/2 the effort and stress level. (PS* I live in a place where there is minimum wages.)
Please also understand that your friend is not competing only in his/her market, he/she needs to take into account of other markets that competes for the workforce.
If there are better options, by all means go for it. May I refer you to part 2 here: http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/limpeh-on-starting-salaries-for-young.html where I talk about the issue of low wages and starting salaries.
DeleteLet it be known that I am looking for a job and if it counts for anything, I have a GPA that is at least 3.7 out of 4 barring some calculation error from a reputable overseas university. The only catch is I am disabled. So if there are any employers such as Mr Tan reading this, I can emphasise enough I AM LOOKING FOR A JOB.
ReplyDeleteAs for what type of a job I wish to have, I prefer the job to not have anything to do with numbers, money or excel because I'm not particularly good with numbers. As for anything else that is desk bound, I am willing to learn and give it a try...As for salary I'm looking for $2,500 but am willing to go for as low as $2,000.
Any takers? I'm serious. And if you're serious, reply here and we can work things out. While I understand that this is limpeh's blog and not the best medium to do so, I doubt the problem lies with me when I can't even land an interview for a HR assistant/ admin assistant job that needs only (any) diploma...that's how bad I perceive my situation to be. I may be wrong, but I'm guessing the employment agencies out there aren't completely right either.
Twenty-tree
Muchopunk, as much as I sympathize with your situation, I cringed when I read your sales pitch for a job. It sounded desperate, almost begging for sympathy. You should conduct yourself with more pride, please.
DeleteAnd here's the irony: you claim you're desperate, yet you are still stating conditions such as not having to deal with numbers, money or excel because you're not good with numbers. Good grief. Even the cashier auntie at the local NTUC supermarket is dealing with money and she doesn't exactly have a phD in maths from NUS. Yes there are things we aren't great at, but that's not what we highlight when we're asking for a job. We highlight and celebrate our STRENGTHS rather than bemoan our weaknesses. I have plenty of weaknesses that I can talk about and I know my limitations, there are things which I am simply not good at, but I would always choose to talk about the stuff I am very good at when asking for a job.
Seriously, you claim to be willing to try anything yet you already start stating conditions about money, numbers and excel? Talk about contradicting yourself within the same paragraph. A very poor start muchopunk, think about it. And this is tough love from uncle Limpeh.
Wow. That was quick.
DeleteYou see that's the thing I've never really understood. While I get that you think that I'm desperate or that I'm choosy or whatever it is that you are thinking, but I've always wondered, is it better to say that I'm okay with maths, and then apply for a cashier job as per your example then lose money every single day after reconciliation of accounts for the boss to realise that I really suck at maths to fire me. Which is better? Get myself a job that I know I obviously am not good at, get fired and then have to explain to the new employer why you got fired/resigned. Or know your weaknesses AND strengths, and go for the ones you probably think you have a pretty good shot at?
You might think that's desperation or under-selling myself but I can assure you after 10 years of failing elementary maths and an O-level certificate with 6 O-level passes and a fail in maths that guaranteed only a place in the ITE and no place else at 16, your view of the rules will change dramatically. And every subsequent year spent in various institutions that confirm your view that separate rules apply to you even outside of qualifications like maths/numbers is not going to help in building a positive attitude.
Does not help that you are constantly viewed and therefore treated as an outsider of any institution you may wish to join. It's almost like I HAVE to be able to prove myself over and above everything that is expected of anybody else. And sometimes I read this as I need to seem desperate enough for it and if this is what employers want, guess what I'm going to give them? Desperation. I do not enjoy this, given a choice, I rather not mention any of my so-called weaknesses and highlight my strengths as it were but I'm not sure employers in Singapore think the same way you do.
If you have such problems with me being direct and to the point even when I did use the word 'prefer', put in my situation, I'm really curious how would you sell yourself. This is a serious question. I'm really interested in knowing how does one sell oneself if that persons knows for a fact that if I don't state my perceived 'weaknesses' up-front, I'm opening myself up for a lot of future problems when the employer takes me for a ride and says the job is filled and/or I cannot be hired with no reasons given. As it is now, I can't even land an interview. You might offer the advice about not mentioning anything about my disability but see point above. It's like I'm constantly moving in circles and the best I get called is desperate even when I am trying so hard I can't try possibly any harder.
So yeah. Long story short. If you were me, how would you sell yourself without having to hide your disability at the point of hiring?
Twenty-tree
I have two ways to look at it.
DeleteApproach 1:
Say you have an area where you simply cannot do something - say you can't speak Mandarin to save your life - when looking for a job in Singapore, you simply avoid jobs where you need to interact with clients or colleagues in Mandarin. There are some jobs where Mandarin would be useful and advantageous and there are some jobs where you can get by with only English. You simply avoid putting yourself in a position where your inability to speak Mandarin will not be an issue by picking your jobs a bit more carefully and making the right choices when it comes to your career path. Heck, my sister's Mandarin sucks but it completely doesn't matter to her as she is in an English-only environment (she has plenty of Malay and Indian colleagues in her office).
Approach 2:
It's just math at the end of the day. So you're not great at it - guess what? Not everyone is naturally gifted with numbers yet we still get by in life. I admit, I'm not great with numbers and computers - I am not a natural when it comes to this aspect: but if my work requires me to be in this position, I would take the time, be extra careful, check and double check what I do to ensure that I do not make mistakes that would get me into trouble.
I have met people who have terrible attitudes when it comes to learning new stuff for work - like hello? When you're working for a company, of course there is a learning curve, of course you've gotta learn new stuff - you can't expect to waltz into a new job and hit the floor running with ease. It's always going to be difficult and you'll find learning new stuff challenging. Brace yourself for the new challenges, some will be harder than others, ask for help with your training if necessary but most of all, keep a positive attitude about the new tasks that you have to do without having this kind of defeatist attitude.
Despite not having a natural talent for maths or IT, I have found myself in roles where I had to deal with statistics and IT related matters before at work - did I just break down and cry? No, I struggled, I struggled like hell but I got the job done at the end of the day. I may have taken longer than someone who would have been naturally talented in these aspects, but at the end of the day, I'd rather keep my job and do it my way then for them to fire me and employ an IT-maths expert to do that same job.
What I see is a lack of a can-do attitude on your part. It's so pessimistic and defeatist from the beginning. And that's uncle Limpeh offering you some tough love again.
OK Muchopunk, as uncle has been working for a very long time, allow me to offer you a realistic take on this issue of your inability to deal with excel, numbers and money.
DeleteWhen you start any new job, there will be aspects of that job that you like and perform well, and there will be aspects of that job which you dislike and find challenging. Such is life - you will rarely find the perfect job without any challenges.
Have I encountered aspects of my job which I struggled with? Of course I have - but just because I struggled at it initially doesn't mean I kept screwing up. With a lot of effort, I made sure I became good at those aspects and I would do what it took to perform my job. Take IT for example, I'm not great with computers but in one job, I had to maintain a website and I took extra time to learn the tasks I had to do daily and checked and double checked every step I did meticulously. After a few months, I became very comfortable with the daily routine that I had to perform for that website.
Did I struggle with that website at first? You bet I did. But just because I struggled with it on my first day - does that mean I would struggle with it until I mess it up so bad that I get sacked? Hell no. I learned to become good at my job simply by working hard, paying attention, making sure I ask for help when necessary and I got to where I need to be in a few weeks.
It saddens me that you would take one look at a task and say, "it's impossible, I give up" and walk away. Perhaps it's because I am a gymnast, when I learn a new skill, I would spend months falling on my back, my face, my bum, my head, my knees etc before finally being able to land perfectly on my feet. Each time I fall on my face or bum, I would just pick myself up as I have enough faith in myself and my abilities to know that I will eventually be able to perform the skill perfectly in the future. I am not afraid of falling or failing by that aspect and I am glad sports has given me the experience to know that it is okay to make mistakes when in training because you learn from your mistakes.
Anyone can learn how to operate excel or deal with cash - like those gymnastics skills I train, it just takes practice to become confident and do it right. It doesn't just involve being good with numbers or maths, it involves getting to know a routine well enough to perform it to a high standard. Such is work. I'm sorry to learn that you are so pessimistic about your ability to learn something as easy as handling money or operating excel. Stop being your own worst enemy.
And once again, that's tough love from uncle Limpeh.
I appreciate your advice I really do and am not trying to be stubborn or defensive. I know you're trying to tell me I can't pick and choose things that I don't like. But I really don't think you have an objective understanding of just how bad I am at numbers. FYI, I did work as an accounts clerk doing AR/AP for close to 2 years full time. Didn't like it, still don't like it, don't think I would have survived that job if my older colleagues didn't constantly cover my ass for me. I'm not sure how much more than 2 years of practice I need to have with numbers, accounting or excel to say that I am pretty sure IF GIVEN A CHOICE i would steer clear of a job that require numeracy skills which any employer considers integral to the job.
DeleteLastly, I slept on it and thought about the wording/tone of my original 'job seeking' message. Maybe I'm blind and correct me if I'm wrong, I tried using the most emotion-neutral words that are still direct enough to convey my message....so where did you pick up on the negativity/pessimism and defeatist attitude? It's a serious question since all I (think I) did was to express my preference for anything else other than maths...which I assume is any potential employees right to express a preference; I didn't say I would walk say from a job if give one that depends heavily on numeracy skills so where did you get the feeling?!
I'm asking because I'm more worried about my inability to communicate properly more than my distaste for numbers so I would like to know if language played a part in your interpretation of my original message.
Twenty-tree
OK since you've asked, I'll reply. But I ask that you stop being so defensive if you're willing to take uncle Limpeh's good advice. I can't possibly talk any sense into you if you're so bloody defensive all the time.
DeleteFor what it's worth, I struggled with maths as a child. I hated it so much. I was bludgeoned through years of maths tuition as a child and suffered so much due to my inability to get my head around numbers. It got so bad during my secondary school days that I had to resort to self-harming just to get through maths tuition as there was no other way to get through the ordeal apart from inflicting physical pain on myself. I suffered sleepless nights because of my anxiety about maths exams - numbers were my weakness and I hated maths so much and I still do.
So you wanna talk about hatred for maths - you've met your match.
But guess what? I don't talk about it. It's my problem. I will deal with it. I know I am lucky to have other skills, things that I am good at. I choose to talk about those things - like my talent when it comes to sports or languages. That's more than enough to get me through life. I don't need to be good at everything, I can still suck at maths and you know what? My maths probably sucks far worse than you.
And I am a gatekeeper as well - if you haven't read any of my pieces of my role as a gatekeeper, then have a read here: http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/q-whats-worst-youve-encountered-as.html
You broke a rule.
You're not talking to your friend when you're talking to a gatekeeper for crying out aloud. Do you even understand what kind of role a gatekeeper is playing? Good grief. As a friend and a kind person willing to help, I would point out your mistake to you. But as a gatekeeper, you've just told me to shred your application and put you on a blacklist of people never to hire because of your bad attitude.
I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but here's the message I am getting as a gatekeeper. If you are going to be picky and fussy about tasks you don't like to do before I even offer you a job, what else are you going to reject and argue with me? "Muchopunk, can you deal with this customer today?" Oh I can't because (insert excuse). "Muchopunk, can you look at this report today?" Oh I can't because (insert excuse).
Gatekeepers like me can spot a person who gives excuses from a mile away. I've been through the army as well, 2 years 4 months of NS - and I have seen so many people who are great at getting out of tasks because they always have the perfect excuse. It's an art form in NS... "Sir I cannot do guard duty this weekend because (insert excuse)".
First you come up with an excuse, then you defend coming up with an excuse... and I'm just shaking my head here thinking, good grief, keep this attitude up and it's not your disability that will prevent you from getting a job, it'll be your rotten attitude. You're talking like a total spoilt brat who is arguing with your mother about whether or not you should clean your room or not, you're not using the kind of corporate language that an employer is looking for. We need people who have 'can-do' attitudes when it comes to challenges at work, not people who are great at giving excuses.;
First you claim you're not good at maths, then you get so defensive about being honest about it. Good grief. Sorry to say this but I would never ever give you a job as I'd be so afraid of what kind of rotten spoilt brat attitude you'll come up with at work when I ask you to do a task you don't like.
This is uncle Limpeh in tough-love mode. Stop with the bloody excuses already. We all have our problems, we will all deal with them in our own ways and we HIDE them from gatekeepers and we present our strengths instead. When we do get a job and find ourselves in a position where we have to do a task we are struggling with, then we ask for help and use our best can-do attitude to tackle the challenge ahead.
DeleteAnd for what it's worth: go talk to other working professionals and ask them if they have ever had difficult challenges in their line of work, ask them if they have ever had to learn difficult things that have taken them out of their comfort zones, ask them if they are ever challenged to do unfamiliar tasks and have had to learn something they are completely unfamiliar with.
DeleteGuess what? They all have at some point in time and such is the nature of working: sometimes you are just thrown in a situation and you have to learn how to cope and solve the problem at hand.
Now you can either say, "oh I give up, I can't do this," or you can try to solve the problem by being resourceful, asking for help and learning very quickly.
I want to be able to hire someone who will always choose the latter rather than just give me bullshit excuses and give up the moment s/he is challenged.
I will read that post when I get the time. I will re-look at my perspective to things and thanks for the candid advice,
DeleteTwenty-tree
No worries. I just want to point out to you that there is a huge difference between the way we talk to friends (and if you're talking to me as a friend, that's absolutely cool) and the way you talk to someone like a gatekeeper or a potentially employer (big difference...)
DeleteAlso, if conducting myself with more pride will help me land a job, I could be the most prideful bastard you will ever have to interview. So no, I really don't think it has got anything to do with me having some self-pride or a lot less desperation.
ReplyDeleteAs it is, without anti-discrimination laws and/or equal opportunities that is mandated like in England, employers have all the more reason to not employ me and have zero need to justify why. Apologies if my tone sounds harsh. But you aren't the first person to say that I'm either too desperate or too assertive or too whatever without having to consider where I come from or the situation that I'm placed in with little to no recourse when things go south. They just simply wash their hands of me like the failure is of my own doing entirely when very clearly that isn't the case.
Pride is good to have but when you know it can't earn you any money or put food on the table you know the value you place on it surely has to be reconsidered.
Twenty-tree
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFunny how so many think that companies should be always be able to hire people with "decent" salaries. This is the Singapore that has been experiencing a ridiculously low unemployment rate for many years. There is little spare labour but lots of labour intensive jobs in Singapore. What makes a company think that it can hire people in such a tight labour market with a "decent" salary? The flood gate era is over, magically appearing bodies are in decline. If you desperately need people, a "decent" salary is not going to cut it, it has to be a "high" salary. Of course there are going to examples of people that seem to be unemployable in any society. This is the normal distribution at work. Nobody owes anyone a job, similarly nobody owes any company labour.
ReplyDeleteWell Devil, you know the saying, "you pay peanuts you get monkeys". Also, if an employer has a good employee, the employer should treat that employee well so that the employee will not go looking for a better job elsewhere. Retaining quality staff is a big problem for many companies because you can spend a lot of money training up new people - it's just easier to spend the money to hold on to tried and tested members of staff rather than risk losing them to your competitors.
DeleteHi, I understand that to practice as a lawyer in the UK you do not necessarily have to graduate from a law school. They have the graduate diploma in law - a conversion course that allows non-law graduates to practise as a lawyer. So limpeh, I'm a local university student studying political science, and would like to ask you for your opinions on taking up this course (hopefully a law firm would be willing to sponsor for it) and practicing as either a barrister or solicitor in UK thereafter. Thanks a lot !
ReplyDeleteWhat you say is true about not needing a law degree to become a lawyer in the UK. But this also means that you will have a harder time proving to the law firms why they should take you on for pupilage while you try and clear the bar within a set period of time. My take on this is, try doing some paralegal work in the form of internships before deciding if law is really suitable for you/whether the graduate diploma is a worthy investment. Because being called to the bar itself means means that you would have to sign up for the BPTC course at one of the Inns of courts which in itself will cost you additional money. See more information here:http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/becoming-a-barrister/how-to-become-a-barrister/being-called-to-the-bar/
Deleteand here
http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/careers/becoming-a-solicitor/routes-to-qualifying/
I'm assuming you know the fundamental difference between choosing a career as a solicitor and being a barrister? If you don't, try googling. These 2 things are 2 different creatures and have very different nature of work.
Also, the more fundamental question is, how's your grades for political science? Of the cases where the big name law firms take up non-law graduates as pupils, these peeps are armed to the hilt with first class honours and an array of experience within their original field of work. It is VERY competitive if you are looking to go into commercial law sort of areas of law.
Lastly, you need to take into account your NS obligations if you're a guy. I do not know how this will factor in your Training contract and or pupilage but do note that since you are from outside the EU, work visas are considerably harder to get. So please do your research thoroughly.
Twenty-tree
It's a lot of money to do such a diploma and it would depend on so many things - what if you can't get a sponsor? What if you can't get work practicing law after you get that conversion diploma? I think you're best off speaking to someone working in law - personally, I would advice you to exercise caution and not rush into it.
DeleteAlso Clement I think one of the most important things for you to do before you make any decision is to ask yourself why would you like to become a lawyer. If it's for the glamour, there are comparatively 'easier' jobs that you can do for half the heartache. So please do make sure of your intentions before you jump at anything. I may sound like I'm nagging, but a law degree or anything related to law is close to worthless outside of the legal profession. The qualifications are 'non-transferable' so to speak and without considerable experience or savings, a career change to anything outside of law is close to impossible. I speak from my own experience and of others that fell out love with the legal profession, had zero working experience outside of a law degree and is now looking at becoming a teacher. Lastly, I'm curious. Why UK and not the graduate program at NUS/JD at SMU. These qualifications will get you a foot into the door called the Singapore bar. Is there any particular reason why you are choosing UK?
ReplyDeleteTwenty-tree
Actually, it's still a far fetch. I'm still serving NS. Just that I would like to make better use of my 2 years to plan for the future, reading up and learning a new language. Nonetheless, thank you very much for all your inputs Limpeh and Twenty-tree. I'm just exploring some possible career options. Don't get me wrong, I do love political science. After all, I chose that major simply out of pure interest and didn't had any career plan in mind...
ReplyDelete