Q: Big4 - Yearly salary increment

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It is really complete ********. especially for the current senior population that survived their crap ass 4-5k salary while gaslighting us to tell us they are 'competitive'

U are crazy a1 to am basically doing same thing. Just diff section lol. It just some older gen like us like to overrate thing to be high and mighty.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It’s a demotivating news for the seniors lol. i wonder if anyone is going to put in effort anymore

They will. No good exit oppo hahahahah. Poor dog.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

EDGE:
Graduates joining Deloitte Singapore as auditors will have a starting monthly salary of $4,100 from 1 September 2024. First-year hires joining the firm under its FasTrack programme – Deloitte’s accelerated audit career programme for accountancy graduates – will have a starting salary of $4,500.

The move is in support of the Accountancy Workforce Review Committee set up by the Ministry of Finance on May 10. It also stems from the government’s plans to strengthen the attractiveness of the accountancy sector and grow Singapore’s pool of skilled accounting professionals.

MOM:
For EPs expiring from 1 September 2024, in addition to meeting the EP qualifying salary, they will also need to pass COMPASS to get their pass renewed.


Is the move to increase graduates' salaries in support of the Accountancy Workforce Review Committee initiated by the Ministry of Finance genuine, or is it primarily motivated by compliance with the EP rules set by MOM?

Why does the salary increment effective date fall on 1 September 2024 and align with the MOM EP renewal date 1st September 2024?

I would appreciate insights from HR experts on this matter.

If it's the latter, I would find it very disgusting.

Of cos for mom ep lol. This is nothing new. Not first time ep revise. Young ppl tsk tsk.

ISCA has introduced an "Accelerated Pathway" to current batches of undergraduates who are currently studying in local universities.

Under this program sponsored by ISCA, current undergraduate from local universities can start tackling ISCA SCAQ papers early, completing two exam papers under ISCA sponsorship during their university years and then being exempted from two more exam papers upon starting work. This essentially means the current and future undergraduate batches only need to complete one Capstone paper after graduation or upon working.

The introduction of the "Accelerated Pathway" seems to contradict previous stringent rules as outlined in the Singapore Qualification Programme (SQP) introduced in 2013.

Before "Accelerated Pathway" and "Exemption" were introduced, candidates were required to work full-time under an Accredited Training Organisation (ATO) for three years to gain practical experience while SIMULTANEOUSLY studying for the 5-paper Singapore Chartered Accountant Qualification (SCAQ), commonly known as the "CPA exam", with no exemptions granted, regardless of whether they achieved First Class Honors in local universities.

People who have worked long enough within the industry would have observed ISCA's gradual relaxation of these stringent rules, starting with granting one exemption and then offering two exemptions and now introducing the "Accelerated Pathway",

Now, under the "Accelerated Pathway," this adjustment enables undergraduates to attempt two SCAQ papers during their university years. Upon graduation, some local uni grads will get exemptions for two more SCAQ papers, signalling a shift in ISCA's approach.

With so much concession, this show the level of desperation ISCA is currently facing due to the falling number of young people entering the industry.

Is this SCAQ still what we commonly know as a "CPA exam (Combo Work + 5 x CPA Exams)" with 2 exemptions and Accelerated Pathway?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

U are crazy a1 to am basically doing same thing. Just diff section lol. It just some older gen like us like to overrate thing to be high and mighty.

******** la a1 to am do same thing... what kind of **** jobs have you been doing?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

ISCA has introduced an "Accelerated Pathway" to current batches of undergraduates who are currently studying in local universities.

Under this program sponsored by ISCA, current undergraduate from local universities can start tackling ISCA SCAQ papers early, completing two exam papers under ISCA sponsorship during their university years and then being exempted from two more exam papers upon starting work. This essentially means the current and future undergraduate batches only need to complete one Capstone paper after graduation or upon working.

The introduction of the "Accelerated Pathway" seems to contradict previous stringent rules as outlined in the Singapore Qualification Programme (SQP) introduced in 2013.

Before "Accelerated Pathway" and "Exemption" were introduced, candidates were required to work full-time under an Accredited Training Organisation (ATO) for three years to gain practical experience while SIMULTANEOUSLY studying for the 5-paper Singapore Chartered Accountant Qualification (SCAQ), commonly known as the "CPA exam", with no exemptions granted, regardless of whether they achieved First Class Honors in local universities.

People who have worked long enough within the industry would have observed ISCA's gradual relaxation of these stringent rules, starting with granting one exemption and then offering two exemptions and now introducing the "Accelerated Pathway",

Now, under the "Accelerated Pathway," this adjustment enables undergraduates to attempt two SCAQ papers during their university years. Upon graduation, some local uni grads will get exemptions for two more SCAQ papers, signalling a shift in ISCA's approach.

With so much concession, this show the level of desperation ISCA is currently facing due to the falling number of young people entering the industry.

Is this SCAQ still what we commonly know as a "CPA exam (Combo Work + 5 x CPA Exams)" with 2 exemptions and Accelerated Pathway?

Its never a valuable or meaningful qualification in the past lol. Old gen we just work without taking this qualification. Company will still send us to get our cpe even without ca. Its only 2013 they intro sqp then ppl who still do accting will get it for free. 5 days workshop. Those not doing accting dgaf.

Ep qualifying salary is above 5k. Now they only reverse associate pay to 4k but no change to senior pay. So what’s the connection?????Associate salary still below ep qualifying

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Its never a valuable or meaningful qualification in the past lol. Old gen we just work without taking this qualification. Company will still send us to get our cpe even without ca. Its only 2013 they intro sqp then ppl who still do accting will get it for free. 5 days workshop. Those not doing accting dgaf.

If you think commercial accountants don't required ISCA SCAQ CA, let me quote this from The Accountancy Workforce Review Committee (AWRC) article:

"With accounting standards and business transactions becoming increasingly complex,
accountants in in-house finance and accounting functions of companies need to be well equipped to produce accurate and high-quality financial reports and deliver valuable
financial insights to the organisation. The SCAQ, and the access it offers into the
professional accountancy body ISCA and the wealth of professional development,
networking and other resources available, ensure that accountants have the
necessary professional development to meet these needs.

Regulators should emphasise to companies the importance of employing professionally qualified accountants in their key finance functions. This is particularly crucial in companies with high public interest such as listed companies, where accountants play a key role in assisting the company directors to discharge their fiduciary duties over their financial statements and protect the public interest."

Look at this paragraph suggested by some smart alec "Regulators should emphasise to companies the importance of employing professionally qualified accountants in their key finance functions. This is particularly crucial in companies with high public interest such as listed companies, where accountants play a key role in assisting the company directors to discharge their fiduciary duties over their financial statements and protect the public interest."

Seem like this person or committee is saying or implying if a person did not take SCAQ, the SGX Listed Companies' commercial accounting department should not hire that person.

The folks in commercial accounting or finance departments of listed companies don't bother much with the Singapore Chartered Accountant Qualification (SCAQ). Their thinking goes like this, "Why bother with CA Singapore? I'm just doing commercial accounting lah! I don't need that ISCA CA (Singapore) title or go through the hassle of getting SCAQ. Only auditors aiming to become PA care about CA."

Then this person is saying, "Okay, never mind, lor. I will tell ACRA, the regulator to mandate a law, that SGX listed companies must hire accountants who have ISCA CA membership to handle their accounts. Let's see if you all commercial accountants still think CA isn't necessary then!! In the future, you guys better have CA SG if you wanna touch listed company accounts."

Truly, this person who suggested such ideas can be quite the troublemaker, eh?

Is this person unbalanced? I guess he is Guy A below.

Imagine two individuals working in a Singapore Exchange (SGX) listed company. Guy A, who holds the designation of SCAQ CA and a degree from NTU, is responsible for overseeing 10 subsidiaries.

Meanwhile, Guy B, with only a degree from a private university, is also tasked with overseeing 10 subsidiaries.

Guy A, however, strongly believes that only individuals with the SCAQ CA qualification should handle the accounts of SGX listed companies.

Guy A feels a sense of imbalance, questioning how Guy B, with only a degree from a private university and lacking the SCAQ CA qualification, can manage accounting responsibilities for an SGX listed company.

In this context, Guy A equates being professionally qualified with holding the SCAQ CA designation.

Consequently, individuals like Guy A will advocate for regulators to stress the importance of employing professionally qualified accountants, particularly those with the SCAQ CA designation, in critical finance roles.

In essence, Guy A's perspective implies a division among accountants based on qualifications, fostering a potential environment of animosity where SCAQ CA holders may look down upon those without the qualification.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Of cos for mom ep lol. This is nothing new. Not first time ep revise. Young ppl tsk tsk.

Huh? But the EDGE news say this "move" is in support of the Accountancy Workforce Review Committee set up by the Ministry of Finance.

In this context, the "move" means increasing the salary for fresh graduate effective from 1st September 2024.

There are a lot of suggestions in Accountancy Workforce Review Committee that firms should increase salary for fresh graudate.

So how is the the salary increment connected or motivated by the "MOM's EP Renewal Date 1st September 2024"?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

If you think commercial accountants don't required ISCA SCAQ CA, let me quote this from The Accountancy Workforce Review Committee (AWRC) article:

"With accounting standards and business transactions becoming increasingly complex,
accountants in in-house finance and accounting functions of companies need to be well equipped to produce accurate and high-quality financial reports and deliver valuable
financial insights to the organisation. The SCAQ, and the access it offers into the
professional accountancy body ISCA and the wealth of professional development,
networking and other resources available, ensure that accountants have the
necessary professional development to meet these needs.

Regulators should emphasise to companies the importance of employing professionally qualified accountants in their key finance functions. This is particularly crucial in companies with high public interest such as listed companies, where accountants play a key role in assisting the company directors to discharge their fiduciary duties over their financial statements and protect the public interest."

Look at this paragraph suggested by some smart alec "Regulators should emphasise to companies the importance of employing professionally qualified accountants in their key finance functions. This is particularly crucial in companies with high public interest such as listed companies, where accountants play a key role in assisting the company directors to discharge their fiduciary duties over their financial statements and protect the public interest."

Seem like this person or committee is saying or implying if a person did not take SCAQ, the SGX Listed Companies' commercial accounting department should not hire that person.

The folks in commercial accounting or finance departments of listed companies don't bother much with the Singapore Chartered Accountant Qualification (SCAQ). Their thinking goes like this, "Why bother with CA Singapore? I'm just doing commercial accounting lah! I don't need that ISCA CA (Singapore) title or go through the hassle of getting SCAQ. Only auditors aiming to become PA care about CA."

Then this person is saying, "Okay, never mind, lor. I will tell ACRA, the regulator to mandate a law, that SGX listed companies must hire accountants who have ISCA CA membership to handle their accounts. Let's see if you all commercial accountants still think CA isn't necessary then!! In the future, you guys better have CA SG if you wanna touch listed company accounts."

Truly, this person who suggested such ideas can be quite the troublemaker, eh?

Is this person unbalanced? I guess he is Guy A below.

Imagine two individuals working in a Singapore Exchange (SGX) listed company. Guy A, who holds the designation of SCAQ CA and a degree from NTU, is responsible for overseeing 10 subsidiaries.

Meanwhile, Guy B, with only a degree from a private university, is also tasked with overseeing 10 subsidiaries.

Guy A, however, strongly believes that only individuals with the SCAQ CA qualification should handle the accounts of SGX listed companies.

Guy A feels a sense of imbalance, questioning how Guy B, with only a degree from a private university and lacking the SCAQ CA qualification, can manage accounting responsibilities for an SGX listed company.

In this context, Guy A equates being professionally qualified with holding the SCAQ CA designation.

Consequently, individuals like Guy A will advocate for regulators to stress the importance of employing professionally qualified accountants, particularly those with the SCAQ CA designation, in critical finance roles.

In essence, Guy A's perspective implies a division among accountants based on qualifications, fostering a potential environment of animosity where SCAQ CA holders may look down upon those without the qualification.

The fact that most CA members are your aunties/JHKs converting from acca via 5 days PAC doing GL entry, AR/AP already made this SCAQ a joke. Go ask every existing 5 days PAC members to retake the CA exams to renew their licence and see if they can pass.