ST Electronics

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Has anyone worked at ST Electronics (Training & Simulation Systems) as software engineer before?

Being proficient in C++ programming seems to be important there. How much C++ and mathematics do I need to know to do my job there?

I have business IT degree background, enough to do web applications but not much knowledge in physics or maths.

if you still think of advancement, go somewhere else. a start-up company or some small company doing applications is good. if you want to have a peaceful retirement, go ste.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Yes it might sound oversly harsh, if you have see how they work and the quality they delivered for govt, to be honest if it is not a GLC, it would have been backslash long ago. It is so comfort that people dont bother to do upgrade and rather just slack there because they will get promoted eventually. technology and engineering is not like how it was last time, you cannot keep putting innovation away. even a small setup company doing applications is much more of a beneficial exposure. and Yes, they offers decent salary, bonus and job security because they simply exist to minimise the unemployment rate. if people just want a good time and slacking retirement, they can go there. but looking at how the world progress, i can assure that this culture wont last long.

I don’t disagree with what you are saying about STE but that is not the main problem. Look at it in the context of an average caliber person. You cannot get into any of the top MNCs, so you are left with 3 choices - either join places like STE/NCS, join some small startup or local SME or go start you own business.

Go join a small SME might sound sexy as you get more autonomy to do supposedly innovative work, but from a personal financial perspective can it really be better that joining STE? Chances are the SME will fold up somewhere along the way, you get terminated whenever the times are tough, or you try to get somewhere but find out that you experience in SME isn’t worth anything.

Everyone has different needs, some people who are more ambitious, look to something beyond money and stability, look for individual fulfilment etc. is ok, I respect them for their drive. But what I am emphasizing is for most people (i.e the average man on the street), working in STE actually makes a lot of sense and it isn’t as bad or dumb as the way some people are putting across here.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think some of the commentators are being overly harsh on STE. Sure, they are pretty backward in culture and more into doing voluminous SOP work on time than really coming up with high quality and innovative solutions.

But then in reality the fact that someone needs to apply for a job in STE also means they didn't make the cut for the good jobs in SAP, google, IBM etc. Ideally we all want a good job in a good company, but sometimes reality is that we are just average and cannot make the cut to the top places.

STE offers decent salary, bonus and job security. It really isn't that bad compared to a lot of third party outsourcing outfits. Even another key competitor GLC NCS is much worse from all accounts.

Well, i always believe an avg person also can excel as long he/she do his/her part like going for upgrades or courses. What is unacceptable is that people use the word "avg" to label themselves and take advantage of the job that was given to them and also use it as a word to explain the poor job done but when it comes to promotion, suddenly they didn't see themselves as avg but the finest people.

Most glc are sinking**

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Well, i always believe an avg person also can excel as long he/she do his/her part like going for upgrades or courses. What is unacceptable is that people use the word "avg" to label themselves and take advantage of the job that was given to them and also use it as a word to explain the poor job done but when it comes to promotion, suddenly they didn't see themselves as avg but the finest people.

This hypocrisy happens everywhere. When there is work to be done, everyone gets out of the way or do just enough to get by. When it comes to claiming credits, everyone jostles to get in front.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I don’t disagree with what you are saying about STE but that is not the main problem. Look at it in the context of an average caliber person. You cannot get into any of the top MNCs, so you are left with 3 choices - either join places like STE/NCS, join some small startup or local SME or go start you own business.

Go join a small SME might sound sexy as you get more autonomy to do supposedly innovative work, but from a personal financial perspective can it really be better that joining STE? Chances are the SME will fold up somewhere along the way, you get terminated whenever the times are tough, or you try to get somewhere but find out that you experience in SME isn’t worth anything.

Everyone has different needs, some people who are more ambitious, look to something beyond money and stability, look for individual fulfilment etc. is ok, I respect them for their drive. But what I am emphasizing is for most people (i.e the average man on the street), working in STE actually makes a lot of sense and it isn’t as bad or dumb as the way some people are putting across here.

There are people to fill all market segments. People take the best option they can get.

• MNC/public sector - high end
• STE/NCS/GLC - mainstream
• SME - budget

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Well, i always believe an avg person also can excel as long he/she do his/her part like going for upgrades or courses. What is unacceptable is that people use the word "avg" to label themselves and take advantage of the job that was given to them and also use it as a word to explain the poor job done but when it comes to promotion, suddenly they didn't see themselves as avg but the finest people.

average by definition is average. if it were that easy that anyone can excel as long as he/she do his/her part, there will not be an average and the average will become higher and most end up average again. haha sounds strange i know.

i think regardless of mnc or sme or glc ppl want to siam work and cheong for credit is normal human behaviour lah. but many things are inborn, there is no shortage of hardworking ppl in the world, but end of day only small minority can make it big. u can blame iq, bad luck, connection or whatever, but this is fact of life.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Most glc are sinking**

last time glc exist is to create more jobs and to take on non public sector jobs so to generate revenues. now glc exist barely just to minimise unemployment rate because there are quite a handful people who couldnt move in to mnc, psd or other better places. if glc is able to maintain their standard, im sure they will become one of the country's biggest asset but they prefer to take in alot who couldnt make it and end up those people change the company culture into quite a sloggy environment who exist just for the sake of existing and the glc simply dont care. there is nothing wrong to take in different academic background people but the problem is they are giving out position titles so freely until a technician level type of people become an engineer but totally have no knowledge of a real engineer work and they still get promoted upwards to SE, APE, PE etc which is quite a ridiculous thing. that in turn make them feel that they dont have the need to upgrades and eventually make them at the losing end when working or discussing work with grad engineer or even the engineer from the west because they dont have the fundermental. i experience alot of this which finally i understood why sometime the cs side enginner or engineer from the west look down at us. we make a supposed-to-be professional job to a unprofessional one.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

last time glc exist is to create more jobs and to take on non public sector jobs so to generate revenues. now glc exist barely just to minimise unemployment rate because there are quite a handful people who couldnt move in to mnc, psd or other better places. if glc is able to maintain their standard, im sure they will become one of the country's biggest asset but they prefer to take in alot who couldnt make it and end up those people change the company culture into quite a sloggy environment who exist just for the sake of existing and the glc simply dont care. there is nothing wrong to take in different academic background people but the problem is they are giving out position titles so freely until a technician level type of people become an engineer but totally have no knowledge of a real engineer work and they still get promoted upwards to SE, APE, PE etc which is quite a ridiculous thing. that in turn make them feel that they dont have the need to upgrades and eventually make them at the losing end when working or discussing work with grad engineer or even the engineer from the west because they dont have the fundermental. i experience alot of this which finally i understood why sometime the cs side enginner or engineer from the west look down at us. we make a supposed-to-be professional job to a unprofessional one.

Well, this seems like a problem inherited from years or decades ago. I suppose you mean there are some very senior engineers or managers without a university degree. They are likely to be those hired 20 or 30 years ago? During those days, university graduates were rare, so many engineering companies hired diploma graduates and they were sufficient for the job.

Nowadays if you look at STE job ads, there are very little openings for diploma graduates. I don't even recall seeing many positions for ITE graduates.

And being a Asian company where seniority is tied to age (or employment period), it tends to promote those like first-come-first-serve basis in a assembly line style. Agree that long employment may not automatically mean more experienced, knowledgeable or skillful.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Well, this seems like a problem inherited from years or decades ago. I suppose you mean there are some very senior engineers or managers without a university degree. They are likely to be those hired 20 or 30 years ago? During those days, university graduates were rare, so many engineering companies hired diploma graduates and they were sufficient for the job.

Nowadays if you look at STE job ads, there are very little openings for diploma graduates. I don't even recall seeing many positions for ITE graduates.

And being a Asian company where seniority is tied to age (or employment period), it tends to promote those like first-come-first-serve basis in a assembly line style. Agree that long employment may not automatically mean more experienced, knowledgeable or skillful.

hmmm. to clarify, those hired 20 - 30 years ago is one group, which comfortably won't upgrade and they are the reason why people left. i have colleagues who got promoted to SE in 5-6 years times by just holding a ITE/ dip cert without knowledge. This are the group that are quite dangerous in a sense that all don't wanna upgrade and finds no purpose of doing so and not knowing that they themselves are just performing a technician job and not an engineering job. Job ads are job ads that look nice, now they are opening engineers position to just dip cert with so-called "experiences" which referring to the ex forces people. those people have a certain knowledge but just on their own system and not a general engineering knowledge. Hence the groups here are spilted by their bosses to 2 different group - one with degree and one doesnt and both pay doesnt differ much. which is simply like when you need to form a team, you cannot just pull and pluck in, you have to search those with the relevant qualifications and often they had difficulty doing so. I dont mean you dont have a degree then you are not good, what i mean is the old ones and those keep promoted (despite w/o qualifications) had built an environment letting the newcomers to think that upgrading is not needed and engineering job aren't hard and i can still keep promoted despite i lack the fundermental. Also, by doing so, they pulled down the pay for the those degree engineers , pulled down the quality of the company and pulled down the "engineer" title. Often, this is the reason why those engineer from the west are laughing at singaporean engineer because those people make a fool of themselves, using their so-called "experiences" to argue fundermental with engineers holding a phd. Furthermore, the west didnt know that not all engineers hold a degree.