Salary.sg Forums - View Single Post - MAS for Mid Career Professionals
View Single Post
  #487 (permalink)  
Old 26-09-2021, 05:49 PM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Recent comments on this thread seem to be leaning towards negative sentiment... Were the common issues (e.g. being overworked and underpaid, excessive additional projects/tasks) always present? Based on superficial look at the earlier comments, it seemed that it wasn't so bad in the past.
Personally, I feel the compensation is ok, but the workload is not.

Compared to seven years ago, officers are expected to work on at least 1.5x the amount of ongoing projects, some of which are only marginally related to their core jobscope.

As you can guess, many of these projects relate to developments in the financial industry like sustainability matters, cyber risk, corporate governance, etc.

Of course, it is important for officers to keep abrest of these matters. But it is far more important for MAS to ensure that it is dedicating enough resources and not dump the workolad on existing officers.

It is not that officers don't wish to take on challenges, but there are simply limits to how effectively an officer can handle so many ongoing projects at the same time, most of which are only tangentially-related to his/her core jobscope. The officers get worn out, and simple projects that can be easily completed get pushed back further and further.

The organization is aware that headcount is lacking (I hope), and they always cite budget constraints. While headcount has actually been increasing over the years, it has been at a glacial pace and the increase in workload has far outpaced the increase in headcount.

When you compare with other big central banks and regulators, I daresay that their workload is way more manageable, and this is because their countries do not have a problem dedicating resources where it is needed. Over here, the organization expects excellent performance but is unwilling to put its money where its mouth is in terms of staffing (how the organization actually allocates projects to staff can take up an entire separate post).

Staff turnover has actually not been very high. I hazard a guess that this is due to COVID-19, where people see the benefits of having stability in a job and where companies might be cautious in their hiring. However, as soon as there is a new normal in place, I get a sense that many staff would be wanting out at the first opportunity.

To its credit, the organization is aware of staff morale and mental health, and has several initiatives that address this. This is all well and good and ought to be promoted elsewhere. However, I would liken it to putting bandages over a gaping wound; it is not enough. You have to close the wound by acknowledging and tackling the problem at the source.
Reply With Quote