MAS for Mid Career Professionals

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It's very sad that MAS is trying to do so many new things but is unwilling to hire additional staff. Instead, they simply dump it on the existing staff and ask them to handle it.

The management needs to understand that we are not the Bank of England. It cannot expect us to be producing cutting-edge work when we don't have the same amount of resources or expertise.

Worst is that many of the bosses do not even understand how difficult their requests are. Why don't you do this? Why don't you do that?

Yes, it is easy to make such requests. But have they considered operationally how it is supposed to be done? Whose responsibility is it? How should the work be divided? Is it better if we outsource this to a third party? Do our existing staff have enough resources to cope? Should we actually hire personnel who are experienced in this rather than asking our staff to handle something they have not done before?

In many cases, unfortunately, bosses are only capable of "big picture" ideas, which I believe any MAS officer is also capable of. It is not hard to dream. In terms of delivery though, this is where they completely fall short. There is a remarkable lack of awareness on constraints, believing that any constraint can somehow be solved. Or even if they are aware of the constraints, they do not want to think about it deeply, hoping that by delegating it to someone, that person can miraculously complete the task without any fuss.

Thus, what usually happens is that the person tasked with the additonal responsibilities:
1) Is already packed to the brim with existing work.
2) Has no idea about the additional responsibilities.
3) Being Singaporean, is too afraid to reject the new task.

He thus makes a half-hearted attempt trying to contact a few people who might know about the new task. If he is lucky, he gets a reply because other people are also busy with their own work. If he is unlucky, he gets no reply. But, he also does not want to follow-up because he is also busy and has to spend his time on his core responsibilities.

Thus, this issue just lingers on and on until the staff either leaves MAS or the boss is absorbed is some other new idea and forgets about the issue. After wasting everyone's time over months/years, it becomes apparent that this issue was not really important in the first place. This cycle then repeats itself with other issues.

The other major central banks are much more focused. When they want to do something, they are willing to commit the necessary resources to do it, even if there is no guarantee of success. They accept as a core principle that if you decide to do something, you put your best foot forward. MAS, on the other hand, loves to pussyfoot around issues and naively hopes that everything will somehow turn out well in the end. Quite sad in my opinion.

Very true and well said. Hoping the management wakes up one day. Indeed, no one will want to reject new task for the fear of being penalised in appraisal. Furthermore, with the high workload, mas shld look at reviewing salary package. Otherwise, moral will be down and eventually ppl leaves the organisation.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Very true and well said. Hoping the management wakes up one day. Indeed, no one will want to reject new task for the fear of being penalised in appraisal. Furthermore, with the high workload, mas shld look at reviewing salary package. Otherwise, moral will be down and eventually ppl leaves the organisation.

*morale will be down

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Very true and well said. Hoping the management wakes up one day. Indeed, no one will want to reject new task for the fear of being penalised in appraisal. Furthermore, with the high workload, mas shld look at reviewing salary package. Otherwise, moral will be down and eventually ppl leaves the organisation.

there will always be fresh ppl to come onboard

Originally Posted by Unregistered

there will always be fresh ppl to come onboard

exactly, considering MAS is considered top tier CS with scope to move to FI's there are a trainload of people waiting to take your position if you leave

Thinking of going to a bank alr. Mas is underpaid

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.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

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.

Well said! May I suggest that you reflect this in the upcoming employee satisfaction survey?

Do u know the month which Mas pays bonus and which is the earliest month one can resign?

[COVID-19]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Do u know the month which Mas pays bonus and which is the earliest month one can resign?

Bonus was paid on 9 April 2021.
To be on the safe side, i resigned only after getting the amount. Because have 3 months notice period.